HISTARCH Archives

HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY

HISTARCH@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Peter Northover <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 18 Apr 1997 09:14:36 +0100
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (26 lines)
Dear Homer,
I cannot answer for the USA because I am the wrong side of the Atlantic
but it might be more interesting to turn your question into two
questions: a) the average age at death and b) the average age at death
after removing the effects of infant and childhood mortality. Researching
my own family history in a rather remote and not very prosperous part of
rural England I found that the last person directly related to me to live
to be 100 died at 101 in 1793. Often if people survived a few epidemics in
early life they often lived to 70+, especially the women even after about
10 children and a child bearing life extending to their mid-40s. Even
within the last hundred years or so two aunts, having survived diphtheria
and TB in childhood both died at 97 with very little illness in adulthood.
I am sure there are US government statistical publications that deal with
this; there certainly are form the ONS in the UK.
 
Peter Northover
Materials Science-based Archaeology Group,
Department of Materials, University of Oxford
 
On Thu, 17 Apr 1997, Homer Thiel wrote:
 
> Another health-related question: Any suggestions on where to find the average
ag
> e at death of US citizens for the period between 1880 and 1910?
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2