Cradlesnatching

[nudge67]

I recently heard on the radio something about a study being done into socially acceptable age gaps between spouses in western culture. The researchers came up with this formula:

Halve the age of the eldest spouse, then add seven. The marriage is socially acceptable if the age of the younger spouse is equal to, or above, the resulting number.

Example: I married at 27. 27 divided by two is 13.5. Adding seven makes 20.5. My wife was 21 when we married, so it fits within the formula.

Are there any cradlesnatchers in your family tree?

[Nick29]

I don't think people had the luxury of that formula in preceding generations.   With so much death around (especially amongst women in childbirth), "marriages of convenience" were quite common.  People often appeared to marry again with undue haste, but for men the priority was to find a mother for their children, so they could carry on the duties of bread-winner, and widowed women needed a home and a regular household income.  This seems to be quite cold, but that's often the way it was.

However, you also come across some people who do not fit the above category.  In my tree, my dad's Aunt Eliza married at the age of 38 to a man of 20.  However, the poor woman was widowed within 4 years when her husband developed a TB infection.

[Kevinshouse]

My 2 x g grandad William was married to a woman called Martha who died, he was a farmer and on the 1851 census was a widower with farm servants living with him, however on the 1861 census he had a housekeeper Martha and her sister Ruth living with them and two very young children, one called William.  William and Martha were having children together although unmarried ,the third child Herbert was my g grandfather.  William eventually married Martha when she was pregnant with their 7th child. William was 34years older than Martha! William as well as owing land and farming was a constable of the parish.  I have lots of information about William and Martha, and know that William was older than Marthas father.  I suppose she married for security and he was probably very happy to have a young woman with whom he could have children.
Kind regards Susan

[BumbleB]

Oh yes 

When Thomas Archbell married Catherine Croslan in 1767 he was a widower (actually twice) aged 60 and upwards, whilst Catherine was 25 and upwards, and a spinster.  However, I believe he may have been older than 60 - the only baptism I can find for a Thomas Archbell is in 1699, and his burial in 1774 doesn't give any age at all to confirm or refute this theory. Catherine was baptised 1742, so her age is probably correct.  It didn't stop them having a son, born 1769.     Following Thomas's death Catherine went on to have two more children, and was excommunicated as a result in 1782 

BumbleB

[Hazel17]

I think I have just discovered in my tree a widow aged 53-54 marrying a man aged 27-28 in 1849. She had no children that she was still supporting. They are both being a bit elusive on censuses so hard to pin down to see if I am right. If I am right he appears to have left her and married a woman closer to his age. But whether he was a widow or not at marriage  I'm yet to find out.

I have plenty of younger women marrying older men for practical reasons but I can't think to explain this one!

[Redroger]

My grandparents were 68+ and 35 on his second and her first marriage in 1894. Fortunately for me.

[cathyaus]

While searching the 1911 Census for my husband's grandmother, I found her as an 18 year single domestic servant. She is living in the household of a  Publican who is 61 years old & his newly married (under 1 year) wife who is 24 years old   

Cathy

[deeiluka]

My ggg-grandfather Craddock married a third time in 1847. He was then aged 66 and his third wife was just 21 years of age!   

They proceded to have three more children......he already had children by his two earlier wives.....and of course he passed away leaving her a young widow. 


Dee   
                       

[patrexjax]

Hi all, My Father was 47 when he married my Mom-to-be who was age 20.     On the marriage license he listed his age as 35! Pat