View Message

I just did a bit of Googling to find out more info on this, and apparently there are some pretty serious doubts as to the authenticity of the story. No record of ANY of the supposed 69/87 descendants, and it also stretches credibility to the breaking point that 1. Anyone would have ONLY multiple births. 2. That anybody in those days could have multiple sets of multiples without fertility drugs and 3. That in those days of very high infant mortality, only two of these 69 children would not survive infancy, especially given that they were all multiples, including quadruplets who would necessarily have been very small and probably premature and this was supposed to be a family of peasants.
Also, two different women married to the same man, and each having a huge number of children with NO singletons among them? Please..

---

I think, therefore I judge.

This message was edited 9/11/2015, 8:21 AM