Bye the bye...thanks David for the response to my query about "which Andrew?".......In the ANCESTOR DATABASE someone gives the children for ANDDREW CALDWELL & MARTHA as being 4 children: ALEXANDER, ANDREW, DAVID AND JOHN...in your lengthy article REV. DAVID CALDWELL'S SCOTTISH PARENTS AND YOUTH posted 3/8/02 you mention on PG.2..second paragraph..."They also did not note that when his second son was baptized in 1735 in Glascow...."
MY COMMENT: this leads me to conclude there was a 10 year difference between David and the second son?? Now if ANDREW WAS A MERE 12/14 WHEN HE MARRIED, AND WITH NO BIRTH CONTROL, WOULDN'T IT BE LIKELY THERE WERE OTHER CHILDREN MORE QUICKLY THAN 10 YEARS? also, using same logic, wouldn't that family have more than 4 children??? Most families were quite large and they married quite young giving them a good headstart...have I missed the names of their other children??

Again, from that same quote on PG2...it seems to indicate that a second son was born in GLASCOW....is that SCOTLAND?
DOES THAT MEAN THEY RETURNED TO SCOTLAND T HAVE THIS CHILD?
OR IS IT GLASCOW PA (IS THERE A GLASCOW, pa?)...

PG.3 paragraph 4 "I have my own conjecture...." How did you surmise that ANDREW MARRIED MARTHA AT AGE 12?

PG.7 Last paragraph.."In 1725,DAVID had not yet acquired title to the farm land...." MY QUESTION: Is this a typo error? DAVID son of ANDREW, had just been born in 1725 so how could he acquire title to land? OR did you mean 1735 when DAVID would have been 10 years old and title to land passed to him at that young age??

PG10 second or third paragraph..."He has often been confused with another Andrew Caldwell who married Ann Stewart and was born in 1692or 93...."

MY COMMENT: I have indeed seen lineages which say ANDREW MARRIED MARTHA ____unk_____ AND ANDREW MARRIED MARTHA ANN STEWART AND THEN ANDREW MARRIED ANN STEWART. Has MARTHA (a completely separate person) been grafted onto the name ANN STEWART adding even more confusion to the situation?

NOW BACK TO THE MSG # 437...you state that JOHN was born in 1736 to ANDREW AND MARTHA..there he is listed as a 4th child yet if DAVID IS THE FIRST IN 1725 AND HIS NEXT SIBLING IS BORN 10 YEARS LATER (APPROXIMATELY 1735/36 THEN WOULDN'T THAT BE A SECOND SON NOT A FOURTH CHILD?

Maybe this confusion is that I do not have a CLEAR PICTURE of just WHO THE CHILDREN OF ANDREW AND MARTHA ARE???

I do not want to drive everyone crazy with these questions and comments...when reading your article, which I thoroughly enjoyed, I made notes of anything which I did not understand!

Thanks for your patience with me concerning these matters!

Barbara