• PetDinosaurs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    23
    ·
    13 days ago

    You’re joking though. Right? Or are you thinking about wealthy people? The ones who might be written about?

    I come from several generations of “prom night” conceptions and “shot gun weddings”.

    • dfyx@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      49
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      13 days ago

      Read the page I linked. It specifically lists sources that specifically talk about peasants in medieval Europe who on average married later than nobility.

      Prom night conceptions and shotgun weddings are a phenomenon of the 20th and 21st century and would have been considered absolutely scandalous for most of history.

      • GreyEyedGhost@piefed.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        13 days ago

        Yeah, when we’re talking about a 12000 year span and your references don’t go past the last thousand, it isn’t very representative. Relevant, certainly, but do you think that had much bearing in ancient Egypt? And that only gets us halfway through the time span we’re talking about.

      • gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        13 days ago

        uhm, actually the age of marriage basically exclusively depended on the real circumstances. in the roman empire, it was much lower, because rome was eternally at war, which consumed a whole lot of soldiers. that would not have been possible if women hadn’t had a lot of children, for which you’d have to start early.

        the christian religion increased the minimum marriage age from 12 (!!) to 15 in the 3rd century CE (late roman empire), because rome stopped being a war-based country and there was simply no need for that many soldiers anymore.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriageable_age


        also the same link explains that the average age of first childbirth was significantly lower for american settlers than for european peasants in the early modern age; again the reasoning is that the american settlers were a highly expansive population (roughly a doubling of population every 20 years!! in the time period 1650 - 1880).

        • arrow74@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          12 days ago

          Well Rome is difficult, what you said is more true for the Republican era, after that Rome didn’t need to “produce” soldiers they simply offered Roman citizenship and benefits. They were largely able to reintroduce recruit from Provences. The promise of good pay, war spoils, and land also helped.

          As for marrigeable ages, your sources mostly pull from written documents. Roman society was aggressively patriarchal so daughters were often used as a way to broker alliances or an increase in social status. There is also the payment of dowry that incentives men to marry off their daughters as soon as possible

    • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      13 days ago

      You can’t just look at the age of the mother when she has her first daughter. You also have to consider her age at the time of her last daughter. Even if she has her “prom night” daughter at 18, if she later has another daughter at 36, we’re looking at an average age of 27.

      • arrow74@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        12 days ago

        Plus talking about the deep past you have to consider infant mortality rates as well. If someone has 10 kids, but only the ones they had after 29 survived then that changes the math.