You must log in or # to comment.
I found a blog with a bunch of the definitions
https://www.neatorama.com/2022/03/09/Leading-Causes-of-Deaths-in-London-1632/
Thanks. I have so many questions about some of these. Cut of the stone, king’s evil, Planet, rising of the lights, teeth… I’m mostly curious what king’s evil is in this context. Gonna go look Edit: per the link it’s scrofula.
Thank you!
Made away themselves.
Ah British dancing around the point terms.
“Unalive” is the current dance. Euphemism isn’t new.
Just trying to avoid the YouTube censors
“My teeth are killing me” meant something pretty different back then.
“Teeth” actually meant “a child who’s still teething.” As with “chrisomes and infants,” so many little ones died that often they were categorized by age rather than a specific cause. Probably the only reason to specify “overlaid, and starved at nurse” would be to blame and punish the wet-nurse.
So aggravating to not be able to sort by columns
“Killed by several accidents.”
lol.
Hah! Gonna take more’n ONE accident to kill me, you bastards!!!
Kill’d
Kil’d
Kil’d to death 💀
deleted by creator
And 10 at that!
Goddamn wolves, targeting cancer patients!
The term I grew up with for botfly larva was wolves. Cancer was often diagnosed when the tumors erupted through the skin. The crab.
So, probably a bad death.
beware!
tf is King’s Evil?
Mycobacterial cervical lymphadenitis
I’m gonna call it the other thing
Spelling “Lunatic” as “Lunatique” now. Shout out to the poor folks that just died in the street and starved. Surprised it’s only 6.
Most that would die in the street would have an underlying condition, like ague or bleeding or even old age, since most people that starve would try to do something about it.
If you’re sick you might not be able to. If you find a job or charity successfully you’ve averted the death. If you tried to steal and fail you’ll get on the executed list, or if you got wounded but got away, you’ll be on the bleeding list, or if you succeed then you dont die on the street.
I imagine those six would have the “died of unknown causes” phrase attached to them in modern times.
I didn’t even think of that. Thank you for the info!
You guys are all laughing about ‘planet,’ but I’ll have you know my uncle died of a cerebral hemorrhage when Neptune hit him on the back of the head. And we all thought it was just a glancing blow, but two days later, he dropped dead right in the middle of the supermarket.
You won’t laugh so hard when it happens to someone you care about.
Imagine being proudly offed by Pluto and then they make it not a planet any more.
And so they have to change it to “celestial body” in the obituary
I would want “lump of star shit” in my obit.
Over-laid sounds like a good way to go.
Death by snu-snu!
I know right? Especially when it’s so good you starve to death. And she’s a nurse too
Better than King’s Evil.
Don’t know why they felt the need to have it and executions separately
Only 7 murders? The population of London was apparently about 400,000 back then so that’s less than half the murder rate of present-day New York City (which is considered a relatively safe city). I don’t think that can be right…
1632 London: 7 / 400,000 = 17.5 murders per million people
2023 New York: 312 / 8,258,000 = 37.8 murders per million people
a relatively safe city […] 37.8 murders per million
Ignoring that in 1632 it might’ve been easier for murder to go undetected, here are the numbers of present day London. It’s about 13.1 mpm, even lower than in 1632, about a third of present day New York.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/862984/murders-in-london/
America is not really a shining example when it comes to those things…
New York’s murder rate (and the overall murder rate in the USA) is shaped by a history of race relations which is quite different from London’s. A white person in New York is much less likely (and conversely a black or Hispanic person is much more likely) to be murdered than the overall murder rate for the city might lead someone to think.
Oh, well, carry on then.
Username checks out.
Yeah, exactly. You seem to arbitrarily place higher value on white people’s lives…
I’m not making a value judgement. I’m explaining why New York City’s murder rate is so much higher than London’s. It’s because NYC has a population of white and Asian people who are as safe as Europeans and another, de facto segregated population of black and Hispanic people who are much less safe.
I presume that a big part of the reason why things are the way they are is that society places a higher value on white people’s lives, but I’m not doing that here. Explaining isn’t the same as justifying.
Why bring it up at all then? The topic was New York being unsafe, you come rushing it explaining it’s because of the brown people.
Welp. Even though at this point I’m leaning towards “very clumsy with words” rather than “disgusting racist”, I don’t really have much interest in talking to you further.
It’s a lot harder to murder somebody when you actually have to stab them or beat their head in with something.
present-day New York City (which is considered a relatively safe city).
Relative to USA. It would easily be one of the most violent cities in Europe.
It’s for the greater good!
I’m especially dumbfounded as I thought that before there was an important police force and a mature legal system, murders were far more frequent than after.
At the same time, it’s possible I’m imagining 1632 London to be more primitive than it really was.
Chrisomes : died while under a month old.
Not sure, but I’m guessing part of the reason to specify the difference between “infants” and “Chrisomes” (baptized babies) might be to say where they’d be buried/where their souls would go.
“And in other news, the death figures were released today. Once again, the leading cause of death is: being a baby. Over the last year, 2,268 infants died naturally of babyness.”
Spawnkill
oh, cool - RFKs suggested DSM just dropped!
I saw this list on hidden killers of the Tudor home (even though this list is post-Tudor era). The specifically spoke about the ‘teeth’ part.
Basically what that mean was that a variety of tooth decay and oral issues pertaining to the teeth. This was an era that first saw a large consumption of sugar (which as you know LOVES to fuck with teeth) by wealthier people and coupled with a nonexistent oral hygiene practice and dentistry. Basically people’s teeth would decay and cause gum disease or simply a shitload of pain that even the painful teeth pulling couldn’t fully fix.
One thing that you must remember is that prior to widespread sugar availability most people’s teeth were remarkably fine throughout life as people’s diets didn’t contain enough crap that will mess your teeth up. Of course this isn’t to say that it was perfect. Braces would have been a good thing to have for many people and a simple toothbrush with half decent toothpaste would have been a very welcomed thing.
RFK jr will do his damndest to ensure bad teeth becoming a leading cause of death. Right behind measles, flu, polio and other communicable diseases.
This was an era that first saw a large consumption of sugar (which as you know LOVES to fuck with teeth)
Hey, don’t blame sugar! It doesn’t do anything itself. It’s the bacteria eating the sugar and shitting on your teeth that damage them.
Yeah, it’s bacteria shit on your teeth. Brush your teeth, kids.
Apparently teeth means children who haven’t gone through teething, according to contemporary resources
Yeah, these days we’d say “childhood ailments”. Or “death by antivaxx” as a lot of those ailments have a childhood shot associated with them these days.
So the documentary lied to me?
I’d take a more pragmatic approach in that what you’re saying is totally valid and may not contradict what I am saying either.
People don’t understand that dental disease can lead to heart attacks/life threatening conditions
I learned that years ago. It was quite the eye opener.
That one guy that died of Sciatica 😣
Imagine the guy unlucky enough to have died from cancer AND wolf.
