Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T15:53:49.746Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Income and Family Size in Three Eighteenth-Century Lancashire Parishes: A Reconstitution Study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2011

David J. Loschky  and
Donald F. Krier
David J. Loschky
Affiliation:
University of Missouri
Donald F. Krier
Affiliation:
Newton College of the Sacred Heart
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Since the time of Malthus and possibly earlier the prevailing theory of the birth rate has connected births to the’ mother's age at marriage, which in turn is related to current economic and social conditions. In this manner changes in the economy are tied to changes in the birth rate and thus, even more indirectly, to changes in the rate of growth of the population.

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Economic History , Volume 29 , Issue 3 , September 1969 , pp. 429 - 448
Copyright
Copyright © The Economic History Association 1969

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

We wish to express our appreciation to the Lancashire Parish Register Society, and in particular to the Honorary Treasurer, Robert Dickinson, who were so helpful in providing the information upon which this study is based.

1 Some work on this subject was done by Pearl, who was interested in the question of birth control measurement. Our examination will be similar to his.in many respects, although we use actual birth intervals rather than what we feel would be reasonable rates of reproduction. See Pearl, Raymond, The Natural History of Population (New York: Oxford University Press, 1939), in particular, pp. 153–59Google Scholar, although the entire book is devoted to the subject.

2 See, for example, Chambers, J. D., “The Vale of Trent, 1670–1800: A Regional Study of Economic Change,” Economic History Review, Suppl. 3, 1957.Google Scholar

3. We refer to the method of family reconstitution discussed by Wrigley, E. A., in Wrigley, E. A., ed., An Introduction to English Historical Demography (New York: Basic Books, 1966), chap. 4, pp. 96–159.Google Scholar

4 Habakkuk, H. J., “The Economic History of Modern Britain,” Journal of Economic History, XVIII (Dec. 1958), 486–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Heckscher, Eli F., “Swedish Population Trends Before the Industrial Revolution,” Economic History Review, SS, II (1950), 266–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5 See, for example, the models employed by both Heckscher, in “Swedish Population Trends,” and later by Habakkuk, in “The Economic History.”

6 For one example of the use of this model see Coale, Ansley J. and Hoover, Edgar M., Population Growth and Economic Development in Low-Income Countries: A Case Study of India's Prospects (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1958).Google Scholar

7 For one presentation of the logistic argument see Yule, G. U., “The Growth of Population and the Factors Which Control It,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, LXXXVIII (Jan. 1925), 1–88.Google Scholar The view that the birth rate falls with the growth of income is not stated that explicitly in Yule, but his analysis of population growth in the United Kingdom, the United States, and France suggests such. For over the periods considered there was a fall in the birth rate, and this occurred during periods when it would be impossible to assert a falling level of income. The same may be said for Pearl's projections of population for the United States.

8 This particular relationship does not appear to have received the attention in literature on English economic history that the others have, but for an example of a discussion directed partially toward this point, see Krause, J. T., “Some Implications of Recent Work in Historical Demography,” Comparative Studies in Society and History, I (Jan. 1959), 164–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

9 The technique of reconstitution is fully described by Wrigley, An Introduction to English Historical Demography.

10 Church of Claughton, Baptisms, Burials and Weddings, 1701–1813, Lancashire Parish Registers Society (hereafter cited as LPRS), vol. 59, 1922Google Scholar; Church oj Gressingham, Baptisms, 1676–1812, Burials, 1678–1812, Weddings, 1691–1812, LPRS, vol. 59, 1922; Parish Church of Over Kellet, Baptisms, Burials and Weddings, 1648–1812, LPRS, vol. 42, 1911.

11 These records of the following parishes and chapels were employed: Bentham, 1666–1812, vol. 69, 1931; Bolton-le-Sands, 1655–1736, vol. 42, 1911; Caton, 1585–1718, Hornby, 1742–1789, vol. 59, 1922; Halton, 1592–1723, Heysham, 1659–1811, vol. 44, 1912; Ingleton and Chapel le Dale, 1607–1812, vol. 71, 1933; Lancaster, 1599–1786, vols. 32, 1908, 57, 1920, and 88, 1948; Melling, 1636–1752, Tunstall, 1627–1812, vol. 40, 1911; Tatham Fells Church, 1745–1837, vol. 78, 1940; Thornton-In-Lonsdale, 1576–1812, vol. 67, 1931; Warton, 1568–1812, vol. 73, 1935; and Whittington, 1538–1764, vol. 3, 1899. The following other records were employed: Lancashire Marriage Bonds, 1648–1710, vol. 74; The Publication of Original Documents Relating to Lancashire and Cheshire (hereafter cited as RS), Lancashire Marriage Bonds, vol. 75, 1711–1722, vol. 80, 1723–1728, vol. 81,1729–1734, vol. 83, 1734–1738; Lancashire Wills Proved at Richmond, 1457–1680, vol 10, 1681–1748, vol. 13, 1748–1792, vol. 23, 1793–1812, vol. 66.

12 Loschky, David J., “The Usefulness of England's Eighteenth Century Parish Registers,” The Review of Economics and Statistics, XLIX (Nov. 1967), 471–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

13 No other historical studies of English population development during the eighteenth century or earlier have yet been undertaken which employ both occupation, or for that matter, income, and the result of reconstitutions. Some efforts have been made to relate occupation to age at marriage but there has been little systematic effort to interpret these figures in terms of income. See, for example, J. D. Chambers, “The Vale of Trent,” pp. 52–3. Consequently there has been no exploration of the types of problems connected with identifying different levels of income across a section of society or of means to circumvent them.

14 Mortality between income groups was probably not the same and it has been suggested that this could possibly account for the differences in observed family sizes, because a greater proportion of families in some occupational groups may have been broken before the wife was 45. But as we would expect those in the higher income groups to experience more favorable mortality patterns, as indeed the data presented by Cowgill suggest, the consequence of this would be to support further the view presented here, that the lower income groups had larger families. Cowgill, Ursala M., “Life and Death in the Sixteenth Century in the City of York,” Population Studies, XXI (July 1967), 60.Google Scholar We would mention at this point that the failure of Group I to conform to the pattern displayed by all other groups raises some question concerning. the homogeneity of this group. The fact that the occupations of some of these families were known, the point mentioned when we first discussed the composition of our groups above, does not explain this failure to conform, since we may suppose all did earn some income and hence we may view our lack of knowledge of the occupations of the remainder of this group as accidental. What is clear is that the nature and causes of being poor will require serious attention in further work. On the other hand the other groups appear to be sufficiently homogeneous for our purposes or those of a study similar to this one.