Wealth, health and frailty in industrial-era London

Abstract

Background: Socioeconomic status is a powerful predictor of mortality in living populations, as status affects exposure or access to a variety of factors that impact health and survival, such as diet, healthcare, infectious disease and pollution.

Aim: This study examines the effect of socioeconomic status on mortality and survival in London during a period spanning the early 18th through mid-19th centuries. During this period, London experienced rapid industrialization and heightened class distinctions. This study examines whether low-socioeconomic status was associated with reduced survival at a time when the distinctions between social strata were peaking.

Subjects and methods: The samples for this study are drawn from three skeletal assemblages in London that represent lower and higher social strata. The upper socioeconomic status sample (n = 394) is from Chelsea Old Church and St Bride’s Fleet Street (crypt assemblage). The low socioeconomic status sample (n = 474) is from St. Bride’s Lower Churchyard (also known as St Bride’s Farringdon Street). The effect of status on mortality and survival is assessed using hazard analysis and Kaplan–Meier analysis.

Results: The results reveal elevated mortality and reduced survival for lower socioeconomic status children, but no strong effect of status on adult mortality or survival.

Conclusion: These results might indicate strong selective mortality operating during childhood or the effects of migration in the industrial-era population of London.

• Hazard analysis
• industrialization
• paleodemography
• socioeconomic status
• survival and mortality differentials

Acknowledgements

The authors thank St Bride’s Church for providing access to the skeletal assemblages used in this study. We also thank Tania Kausmally for her work on recording the osteological data from St Bride’s Lower Churchyard. We thank Eric Jones and three anonymous reviewers for their comments on an earlier draft of this paper.

Declaration of interest

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.