شنبه ۰۷ مهر ۰۳ | ۱۰:۱۰ ۹ بازديد
plague,
most particularly his chapter 6 on metropolitan plague.14
The rest of the article is as follows. Section I outlines the parish records that we
use and compares our estimates of deaths with those of early London Bills. Section
II looks at the social geography of London, showing how geographical segregation
of the affluent increased between the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centu-
ries. Section III imputes missing parish records to estimate total mortality in
case do we observe crises beginning in the eastern, river parishes and spreading
later to other areas, which would be expected, were plague an occasional, exotic
import.
It is well known that the last recorded case of plague in the London Bills occurs
in 1679, leading to a debate on the causes of its sudden disappearance. 11 However,
these discussions ignore a basic diagnostic fact: before the late nineteenth century
it was considered difficult, even for professional pathologists, to distinguish iso-
lated adult cases of plague from typhus, which should make us cautious of claims
that plague suddenly disappeared from England after 1665. In fact, a sudden
disappearance of plague is not apparent in our data on burial seasonality. While
rural England experienced a v-shaped pattern of seasonal mortality, with deaths
peaking near the start of each year and reaching a minimum in early summer,
London deaths before 1665 show a strong peak in the late autumn, even in years
with few reported plague deaths. After the supposed disappearance of plague in
1679, we would expect the seasonal pattern of London mortality to start to display
the same late winter maximum as the rest of England. Instead we find a strong, but
gradually diminishing, late autumn peak in the more affluent central parishes until
the early 1700s, and in the surrounding extra-mural and out-parishes until the end
of the 1720s.
Looking at natural increase, the popular impression is of London as an undif-
ferentiated demographic sink where deaths considerably exceeded births.
However, we find that natural increase varied widely across the city in the early
seventeenth century, with the wealthier central parishes experiencing a positive
natural increase outside plague years, the surrounding poorer parishes suffering an
average deficit of 10 per cent, but with average deficits of 30 per cent occurring in
the out-parishes. In other words, the spatial cross-section of London mortality is
strongly Malthusian, with wealthier households replacing themselves (outside
plague years, to which affluent areas became less vulnerable through time) while
poor districts suffered a marked excess of deaths over births even between major
plagues.
While parish registers rarely give ages, around a half of parishes record that the of those who died in
London in this period. This large sample allows us to estimate total births and
deaths in different parts of the city in each year; to track when and where major
plagues started, their weekly spread, and their overall lethality; to examine the
seasonal pattern of mortality; and to look at the impact of living standards on
births and deaths.
We find in particular that the plagues of 1563, 1603, 1625, and 1665 were all of
roughly equal relative magnitude, with burials running at 5.5 to 6 times the average
level in the previous five years. Assuming a normal mortality rate of around
3.0–3.5 per cent, this implies that one-fifth of the city’s population died each time,
within the space of a few months.While the relative size of major plagues remained
fairly constant, their spatial impact changed markedly. In 1563, mortality was fairly
equal across parishes within the walls and surrounding extra-mural parishes, but
by 1665 mortality in the central intra-mural parishes was considerably lower than
elsewhere, reflecting the marked increase that we find in the concentration of
wealthy households in these areas.
Next we consider the weekly spread of crisis mortality in plague years, taking a
surveillance approach of the sort used in epidemiology to detect disease outbreaks
in real time. For the period 1560–1665, we find that deaths above the crisis
threshold accounted for about one-fifth of total mortality: large plague epidemics
were devastating but infrequent, and most Londoners died of other causes. While
major plagues recur throughout our period, the frequency and deadliness of
smaller crises falls markedly after 1590.
Considering the spread of crisis mortality, in all major plague outbreaks anoma-
lous rises in mortality occur first in the poor northern suburbs although, in two
cases, 1603 and 1625, these rises coinc
deceased was the ‘son of’ or ‘daughter of’ a householder, allowing us to conclude
that the death is of a young person. Deaths of children, so defined, account for 40
to 50 per cent of recorded deaths in our sample. The ratio of child deaths to
baptisms gives an approximate estimate of the risk of dying as a child, and this
varies from a little under a half in richer parishes to two-thirds in outer suburbs.
Although there are several notable studies of London population for the London
Bills period after 1665,12 detailed studies for our period at the level of parishes are
few. These include those by Hollingsworth and Hollingsworth, Finlay, and
Boulton, although notable recent contributions include those by Razzell and
Spence and by Newton.13 HoLondon from 1560 to 1665, focusing in particular on the relative magnitude of
major plagues in different parts of the city; while section IV uses weekly burials in
the parishes in our sample to track the spread of plague epidemics from 1563 to
1665. Section V looks at deaths of children, and section VI looks at the seasonality
of deaths in different parts of the city. Section VII imputes the number of births
and estimates the rate of natural increase in different parts of London, while
section VIII looks at the strength of the positive check in different parts of the city.
I: London parish records
This article uses records of roughly 930,000 burials and 630,000 baptisms to
reconstruct the spatial and temporal patterns of birth and death in London from
1560 to 1665. We define London as the area covered by the Bills of Mortality in
1660: the 97 parishes within the walls; the 16 parishes outside the wall
most particularly his chapter 6 on metropolitan plague.14
The rest of the article is as follows. Section I outlines the parish records that we
use and compares our estimates of deaths with those of early London Bills. Section
II looks at the social geography of London, showing how geographical segregation
of the affluent increased between the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centu-
ries. Section III imputes missing parish records to estimate total mortality in
case do we observe crises beginning in the eastern, river parishes and spreading
later to other areas, which would be expected, were plague an occasional, exotic
import.
It is well known that the last recorded case of plague in the London Bills occurs
in 1679, leading to a debate on the causes of its sudden disappearance. 11 However,
these discussions ignore a basic diagnostic fact: before the late nineteenth century
it was considered difficult, even for professional pathologists, to distinguish iso-
lated adult cases of plague from typhus, which should make us cautious of claims
that plague suddenly disappeared from England after 1665. In fact, a sudden
disappearance of plague is not apparent in our data on burial seasonality. While
rural England experienced a v-shaped pattern of seasonal mortality, with deaths
peaking near the start of each year and reaching a minimum in early summer,
London deaths before 1665 show a strong peak in the late autumn, even in years
with few reported plague deaths. After the supposed disappearance of plague in
1679, we would expect the seasonal pattern of London mortality to start to display
the same late winter maximum as the rest of England. Instead we find a strong, but
gradually diminishing, late autumn peak in the more affluent central parishes until
the early 1700s, and in the surrounding extra-mural and out-parishes until the end
of the 1720s.
Looking at natural increase, the popular impression is of London as an undif-
ferentiated demographic sink where deaths considerably exceeded births.
However, we find that natural increase varied widely across the city in the early
seventeenth century, with the wealthier central parishes experiencing a positive
natural increase outside plague years, the surrounding poorer parishes suffering an
average deficit of 10 per cent, but with average deficits of 30 per cent occurring in
the out-parishes. In other words, the spatial cross-section of London mortality is
strongly Malthusian, with wealthier households replacing themselves (outside
plague years, to which affluent areas became less vulnerable through time) while
poor districts suffered a marked excess of deaths over births even between major
plagues.
While parish registers rarely give ages, around a half of parishes record that the of those who died in
London in this period. This large sample allows us to estimate total births and
deaths in different parts of the city in each year; to track when and where major
plagues started, their weekly spread, and their overall lethality; to examine the
seasonal pattern of mortality; and to look at the impact of living standards on
births and deaths.
We find in particular that the plagues of 1563, 1603, 1625, and 1665 were all of
roughly equal relative magnitude, with burials running at 5.5 to 6 times the average
level in the previous five years. Assuming a normal mortality rate of around
3.0–3.5 per cent, this implies that one-fifth of the city’s population died each time,
within the space of a few months.While the relative size of major plagues remained
fairly constant, their spatial impact changed markedly. In 1563, mortality was fairly
equal across parishes within the walls and surrounding extra-mural parishes, but
by 1665 mortality in the central intra-mural parishes was considerably lower than
elsewhere, reflecting the marked increase that we find in the concentration of
wealthy households in these areas.
Next we consider the weekly spread of crisis mortality in plague years, taking a
surveillance approach of the sort used in epidemiology to detect disease outbreaks
in real time. For the period 1560–1665, we find that deaths above the crisis
threshold accounted for about one-fifth of total mortality: large plague epidemics
were devastating but infrequent, and most Londoners died of other causes. While
major plagues recur throughout our period, the frequency and deadliness of
smaller crises falls markedly after 1590.
Considering the spread of crisis mortality, in all major plague outbreaks anoma-
lous rises in mortality occur first in the poor northern suburbs although, in two
cases, 1603 and 1625, these rises coinc
deceased was the ‘son of’ or ‘daughter of’ a householder, allowing us to conclude
that the death is of a young person. Deaths of children, so defined, account for 40
to 50 per cent of recorded deaths in our sample. The ratio of child deaths to
baptisms gives an approximate estimate of the risk of dying as a child, and this
varies from a little under a half in richer parishes to two-thirds in outer suburbs.
Although there are several notable studies of London population for the London
Bills period after 1665,12 detailed studies for our period at the level of parishes are
few. These include those by Hollingsworth and Hollingsworth, Finlay, and
Boulton, although notable recent contributions include those by Razzell and
Spence and by Newton.13 HoLondon from 1560 to 1665, focusing in particular on the relative magnitude of
major plagues in different parts of the city; while section IV uses weekly burials in
the parishes in our sample to track the spread of plague epidemics from 1563 to
1665. Section V looks at deaths of children, and section VI looks at the seasonality
of deaths in different parts of the city. Section VII imputes the number of births
and estimates the rate of natural increase in different parts of London, while
section VIII looks at the strength of the positive check in different parts of the city.
I: London parish records
This article uses records of roughly 930,000 burials and 630,000 baptisms to
reconstruct the spatial and temporal patterns of birth and death in London from
1560 to 1665. We define London as the area covered by the Bills of Mortality in
1660: the 97 parishes within the walls; the 16 parishes outside the wall
dfs3434