23/06/2026
We often hear grown-ups explaining to children that 'They didn't live as long in those days – everyone was dead by 40', but what is the truth of that? In Shakespeare, Falstaff is on the long side of 70, and this gentleman painted by Rembrandt, looks like he’s over 80 (and so is King Lear); there was also far higher infant mortality than we have today – you were quite lucky if you got to your seventh birthday – and that will bring down the mean average but, even so, the first English monarch to live past the age of seventy five was George II, who died in 1760. None of this really seems to clarify the real question, which is ‘How long could you expect to live in the times of The Clink?’ so we asked our wiser neighbours.
Recalling Sense and Sensibility, Auntie Frances cited a wealthy couple that discuss an annuity to help a widowed relative, but decide against it because she may live another 15 years as ‘she is stout and healthy, and hardly 40’ - clearly indicating that 60 was old, even for gentlefolk - and that was at the end of the Eighteenth Century. (They at least resolve to be neighbourly, which is cheaper than the annuity).
Uncle Tony scratched his head and recalled a survey of grave records indicating that, if we take out infant mortality and death from trauma, and illnesses which we don't die from these days (and war of course, because war casualties have decreased greatly) the average life expectancy in the Seventeenth Century was pretty close to that of the 1950s. ‘A bit less than now’, he said, ‘But more than during the worst years of the Industrial Revolution – bad housing, no sanitation, long hours and poor nutrition – that’s what you need to be dead by 40!’
Follow us on Instagram