I have heard the same thing. So I don't discount it one way or another. And it's been a while since I shot anybody ;o) Kya I still miss my ex .... but my aim is getting better! Misterchris4686@aol.com wrote: In a message dated 11/05/2006 15:47:15 GMT Standard Time, litsehimmel@yahoo.com writes: John was obviously born either VERY premature, or it was a so-called 'shotgun' wedding. Another possibility, which did occur in those times, was that Nathaniel first wanted to be sure that his future wife could bear children. I haven't found any other children yet, but who knows. I have been told by someone who claims to know about these things that if, in past history, one was a MAN of property the said property could not pass to a female. It was up to the lady to 'prove' she was able to conceive a son and this is where betrothal/engagement originated. It was customary to give the lady two chances to produce a son and heir but if she failed she was discarded and the man found another. When he had 'success' he married the lady! With the benefit of the advancement of medical knowledge these actions were completely without foundation. As I said, I believe this to be true but don't shoot me if you know better! Chris --------------------------------- Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.