To ask if any of you have a grandparent who was born under Queen Victoria's reign?

[QueenArseClangers]

I know it sounds daft but not long ago I realised that my maternal grandmother was actually born when in Victorian times. During the last years albeit, but this has really blown my mind.
I'm only in my thirties!

Just goes to show that living memory is longer for others than we think.

My paternal GP's were born in 1897 and 1898. Maternal ones in 1902 and 1900, so 3 out of 4 were Victorians. I knew them all well. I'm mid 50's.

Slightly off piste, but one of my husband's ancestors was born in 1811 in the reign of George III and died in 1904 aged 93 in the reign of Edward VII. What changes she must have seen - the whole of the industrial revolution, from candlelight to electricity and the early motor cars. The change must have been just as momentous as that from the end of Victoria's reign till now.

I think my paternal grandfather was born in Victorian times, just, but he is the only one. I think the others are all early 1900s but after 1901.

I'm another in their 30s whose grandparents were all born in the 1890s. I don't think it''s that unusual.

My mother's mother was born in 1898, had my mother (her 8th child) in 1942 when she was 44. And my mother had me in 1979 when she was 37.

My Grandfather was born in 1883. He didn't get married until 1928 and my Mum was born 1932. His wife was born in 1900. I'm in my 50's.

Two of my maternal grandmother's 6 siblings were born in the Victorian era(1898 and 1900) , she was the 4th born in 1908.

For some reason I happen to have the maternal family tree on my kitchen Table! Her parents were born in 1870 and 1873.

Not me, and I am mid 40s.

My eldest would have been my paternal GDad, and he was born in 1909. Only one grandparent left now, she was born in 1925.

Not quite Victorian, but I've just turned 32 and my mum's father was born in 1909.

About 10 years ago I saw from the 1911 census his mother would have been almost 50 when he was born. It turned out he'd been adopted, a fascinating story which I researched over a few years. I found his birth mother had had 2 more children - using various records I traced them and now am in touch with a lovely half cousin of my mum who lives in Canada.

My grandfather was born in 1897

All others born in Edwardian times

Dh's great-grandmother was born in 1873 and died in 1973. He knew her well. I've discovered a lot about her through family tree research and she had an extraordinarily eventful life, including probable bigamy (!) and the mysterious disappearance of her first husband.

We've got photos of her as a delicate-looking young slip of a thing in the 1890's but boy oh boy, appearances were deceptive

My maternal grandfather was born in 1871 and his wife, my maternal grandmother in 1873.

Another one in their 30s (just) with Victorian grandparents. I'm 39.

A key difference is that often it's the grandfathers who were Victorian. Men as we know (lucky buggers) can have kids at any time.

I expect Ron Wood, Mick Jagger, Paul Weller and all the other ageing rockstars' grandchildren will also be agog at their granddads having been born centuries beforehand. Perhaps we should add newsreaders to that (looks at Jeremy Paxman).

In my case, I had one grandfather born in 1898 and another in 1900.

There will be more and more 'stretched' generations to come with people having kids later. It's a bit of a shame in a way as it does mean, unless there are lots of siblings to be had, less family 'around'. I only had one grandparent alive growing up.

Conversely - there are already 5 generations alive in my husband's family. A result of many people having kids at 16/17. I envy them, in a way.

My paternal grandparents were born in 1893 and 1898 and my maternal grandfather was born in 1894. My maternal grandmother was younger, born in 1905.

Both my grandfathers served in WWI.

I've not long done my family tree on ancestry and find it fascinating. Especially how the families moved about and eventually came to settle where I live now.

In the not too distant future, people will be agog at having close family members who were born in the 1900s....

Nope. One of my great grandparents was though. Just - born in 1900

Paternal grandparents were Edwardian - 1903 & 1908. Maternal GPs were 1920s. My mother was born to young parents, my father to older ones - Granny was well into her 30s by the time he was born.

I'm 51. My paternal Grandparents were born in 1897 and 1899. My maternal Grandfather was born in 1900. Looks odd seeing it written down.

Although my teenager is quite chuffed with herself, having lived in 2 decades, 2 centuries, and 2 millennium at such a young age
There'll come a time once we've all passe, that that will become a little boast (her sibling not having been born until 2001)

All of my grandparents were Victorians, all born in the 19th century.

I'm 32 this year, all four of my grandparents are/were born during the reign of George V.

My maternal great grandmother was born in 1903 and she was the only great grandparent I knew. I don't know much about my other great grandparents but most probably all born in Victorian times.

Nope. My maternal grandparents were born in 1913 and 1923. My paternal grandparents were born in 1921 and 1926.

I'm 39.

I'm 35. All mine were born 1916-1929.

My DC on the other hand win oldest grandparents in their classes. Their great grandma (my grandma) and their grandma (MIL) were born in the same year!

My youngest sibling is 32, and our GF was born in 1885, GM 1899. Other side were Edwardians.
We never met the Victorian ones though, they died before any of us were born.

All my grandparents were born pre-1900. Don't know if they count as Victorian because they were born in the then Russian empire. Nicolavian?