tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post4710307074645607870..comments2023-10-14T03:58:59.333-06:00Comments on The Tao of D&D: BuggiesAlexis Smolenskhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-10076526057773690692015-09-14T22:53:47.215-06:002015-09-14T22:53:47.215-06:00I certainly stand corrected, Wandrille. I was qui...I certainly stand corrected, Wandrille. I was quite wrong about that.Alexis Smolenskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-32580776792471577642015-09-14T15:56:06.901-06:002015-09-14T15:56:06.901-06:00Very interesting article, quite inspiring. If not ...Very interesting article, quite inspiring. If not about disease, then about death in general.<br /><br />Also a very interesting source linked.<br />Although, I read it carefully and re-did the computation and I found that the number that are given in the figure that you reproduced on your blog aren't "death per thousand per year" but actually "death per thousand per 5 years".<br /><br />I base this table 2 in the linked source where detailed number concerning the monks are given with expectations of life at age 20 and 25 are given. Doing the simulations, similar expectations of life could only be achieved considering "death per thousand per 5 years".<br />This is also congruent with figure 1 when one can see that annual death per thousand per year is most often found between 30 nd 40.<br /><br />I will gladly give the computation details along with the excel document to back it.<br /><br /><br />So when you consider these number of 165 and 224 death per thousand for a fellow your age, this must be modified if you want the actual "per year" rate.<br />By my calculations, that gives between 36 and 50 deaths per thousand per year.<br /><br /><br />These numbers are actually comparable with data about the US in 1901<br />(http://www.lifetable.de/data/MPIDR/USAE03019011901CU1.pdf<br />(third page, column 4)) where the number of death per thousand per year for individuals of age 50 is 25.53 (from 70% to 50% the late medieval number)<br /><br />I will definitely crunch more of these numbers in the upcoming days. <br />Thanks again for always providing such thought material. <br /><br />Rob Munrohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10092570070263437683noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-64015664220884436662015-07-06T22:20:28.482-06:002015-07-06T22:20:28.482-06:00Yes, I admit I was seeking to highlight the worst ...Yes, I admit I was seeking to highlight the worst possible death scenario from the article; I also admit I couldn't follow his logic for his 9-year rolling average. Meh.<br /><br />I wouldn't be so sure things got better after the Middle Ages. It's been established for several decades now that the filthy Pythonesque view of Medieval life doesn't hold water - it is more likely that the cities grew more problematic with the Baroque rebuilding of cities to ensure full access to the military, since the less organic structure of the city left much of the population without direct access to fresh water and compressed them into arbitrary boroughs . . . a problem that was made worse with the Industrial Revolution. I draw your attention to Lewis Mumford's early, extensive work on the subject, that served to change opinions about dirty medieval cities and later supposedly clean enlightenment cities even as the movies ignored that work.Alexis Smolenskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-15179828649262830192015-07-06T21:25:02.455-06:002015-07-06T21:25:02.455-06:00The linked article is very interesting!
I would ...The linked article is very interesting! <br /><br />I would point out that in your summary, you don't compare the crude death rate for Canada, Afghanistan, and Sierra Leone with the crude death rate cited in the article, which was, on average, around thirty.<br /><br />Still way, way, higher, but not nearly an order of magnitude higher.<br /><br />It's also perhaps worth noting that 1340-1500 was very likely a period with a high death rate compared to the periods before and after, so early modern and early/high medieval probably weren't that bad.Charles Ahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00941603544547428940noreply@blogger.com