We do not have direct data about Christopher's DOB, but can make inferences based on other data.
Daughters ages:
- At the time of his death, Christopher Houston had two sons and four daughters.
Three of the daughters (Jean, Martha, and Margaret were married. If we assume they were at least 20 years of age at marriage, then they must have been born c1706 and earlier. This implies that Christopher was born prior to c1684.
Age of son Samuel:
- We believe that Samuel Houston was his eldest son:
- named executor of will,
- received the home plantation'
- was charged with the responsibility for his mother.
- Since Samuel was a married adult, the same logic as was applied to his daughters, applies to him, and he must have been born c1706 or earlier. Again, this implies Christopher was born prior to c1684.
Age of son Robert:
- Robert was also married at this time. Christopher identifies two grandsons (James and Christopher). Samuel is believed to have died without heirs, so these grandsons must be Robert's. Assuming these grandsons were born 2 years apart, the eldest could have been born no later than 1722, implying father Robert could have married no later than 1721. If he were 20 years of age at marriage, he would have been born about 1701. His elder brother, Samuel, then could have been born no later than 1699. This in turn implies that Christopher was born prior to c1679
DOB of youngest child:
- If we assume that all of the children were born 2 years apart, and excluding Ann who was unmarried at Christophers' death, then the youngest child of Christopher could have been born no later than 1706. On this basis, Samuel the eldest could have been born no later than 1696. That implies that Christopher was born no later than 1676.
Overall, the available data suggests that Christopher would probably have been born no later than c1676. Loosening up some of the assumptions (ie, a 2 year interval between children, and marriage at 20 years of age) could result in slightly later DOB, but on the whole, c1676 seems plausible. This would have made Samuel 50 years of age at his death. While not unreasonable, an assumption of somewhat greater age would also not be unreasonable. This suggests that he might have been born well before 1676, perhaps as early as 1666. While an even earlier DOB is also possible, it would be somewhat harder to justify. The c1676 DOB seems to be the most justifiable based on present data.