They didn't all die young!

[jeeb]

I wonder how many of us have given up searching for a burial because we believe our ancestors who lived for three score years and ten (70) had survived until a ripe old age? It is generally accepted that pre 20th century that one in five children never reached their fifth birthday and consumption, cholera, fevers & childbirth etc took a high percentage of those under 40. The fact that age at death is rarely recorded in burial registers pre 1813 can often be a stumbling block when searching for that elusive missing ancestor. I have actually heard people say 'no one lived that long'. I thought it may be worth passing on this information that I found in the parish register of Hasfield in Gloucestershire where several ages at death are recorded throughout the 18th century. This was a small rural parish with the usual child and young adult deaths and on average about 5 burials a year. However for those who think 'they all died young' read the following burial ages:-

John Price Rector 9 Sept 1727 age 95
Sarah Taylor wid. 8 Apr 1760 age 107
Alice Poytris wid. 6 Sept 1776 age 92
Ann Bayly 14 March 1791 age 94
Thomas Stevens 29 Nov 1797 age 94
John Tompkins 15 Oct 1805 age 96
Widow Clarke 15 Dec 1807 age 96

Jeremy

[Waitabit]

Thanks Jeremy, a reminder we can all use.

[Guy Etchells]

Yes, the danger times were the first few years of life and childbirth for women with first few years and military service years for men.
This of course was augmented by dangers involving occupation and at times location.
If a person survived their childhood there was a good chance they lived into old age.

Similarly our ancestors were not all small people, archeology show us many graves contained remains of people as tall and sometimes taller than we are today.
Don't confuse low doorways with small people.
Cheers
Guy

[susan-y]

Interseting, Jeeb.

They didn't all die young!

They still don't! Recently the mother of someone we know, passed away. She was 110!

Sue

[lizone]

If you are researching in the Bradford area, John James fascinating book ‘Continuation and additions to the History of Bradford’ (published 1868 and which can be found online) has a list of over one hundred named nonagenarians who died in the 1840s, 1850s and 1860s including one man, Michael Craighton who allegedly had ‘children under the age of twelve’ when he died aged 95 years in 1859.

A note in the Bramham parish records shows that John Spirit of Bramham was buried on 07 Feb 1832 aged 92 years and that ‘he saw the rebels in 1745’. Only just!

Liz

[junedye64]

I searched for a couple of years for my G Grandmothers death. She was born in 1835 and was surprised she reached the 1901 census.
I thought she must have died in the next 10 years but no. I eventually found her death in 1927 age 92.

So don't give up.

June

[David Annis]

There is also a life span pattern that often can been seen in familys.
Some have a long life that runs through generations and others have short lives.
Recently I research a family that rarely got above 45 years old on both the paternal and the maternal sides of the family through the generations.
In another reasearch there was a steady stream of grandparents living well into their 80s.
I'm sure it is a lot to do with family genes and what type of work they were employed in.
Its also does not follow that working in a rural location extends a life span. Agricultural workers worked from very early to very late during daylight hours, six days a week.
There was no stoping for rain, frost, sleet or snow. If you did not work you did not get paid. If you were ill you did not get paid and if you retired there was no pension.
On the other hand, town and village familys were often a tight knit group who would look after their aged relations, who were a good source for child minding and other light dutys. Also very handy if a little unexpected gift of an iligitimate baby was arriving and the mother sent off to live with grannies, aunts and uncles.
Cheers
Dave.