Assessing Residence Patters of the Elderly in 18th Century Icelandic Censuses

1. Assessing ResidencePattersof theElderlyin 18th CenturyIcelandicCensuses Ólöf Garðarsdóttir, University of Iceland Twouniquecensues. Iceland 1703 and 1729 Share of thepoor in 1703 and 1729 • According to the 1703 census, no less than 13.5% of the population of Iceland belonged to the group of paupers. This proportion is much higher than in the subsequent censuses. Considering the bad climatic and economic conditions preceding the census-taking of 1703, one can expect the proportion of the poor to be elevated at this time. It must, however, be stressed that the objective of the 1703-census was to assess the share of the poor. This fact is likely to have resulted in an overestimation of the number of the poor. With all likelihood, local authorities, responsible for poor relief provision, tended to exaggerate its amplitude in the expectation that the royal authorities would intervene in some way or another. • In contrast to the late 17th century and the first years of the 18th century, the period of the late 1720s has been described as favourable one with good climatic conditions and good fishing catches. It is important to note that after a period of high mortality, land became available and the possibilities of establishing a household improved. It is thus not surprising that the share of paupers was considerably lower in the 1729 census than was the case for the 1703 census. • An comparison of the age specific distribution of paupers in 1703 and 1729 reveals notable differences. 1703 is marked by a high share of paupers in young ages whereas the share of children and youth in 1729 is negligible. The favourable conditions of the 1720 had obvious had an obvious impact on the situation of Throughout northwesternEurope the 1690s and the first years of the 18th century were characterized by harvest failures and high food prices. In the case of Iceland, this was a period of extremely harsh living conditions, with a shortage of hay for the livestock and poor fish catches. This caused severe subsistence crises with increased mortality rates. Iceland was part of the Danish Kingdom at the time and in the first years of the 18th century Danish authorities decided to send two officials to Iceland to carry out a census. The main objective of the census was to assess the number of paupers and vagrants. The census was carried out in 1703 and is unique in the way that it includes the entire population of a country at such early date. Because its objective was to analyze the situation of the poor, information on the most vulnerable individuals in the population is fairly detailed. The census thus offers an ideal opportunity to analyze the situation of the poor in this small island in the North Atlantic. At the time the population numbered only 50,000 and the vast majority of the inhabitants derived their livelihood from animal farming. The 1703 census was not the only census completed in Iceland during the 18th century. In 1729 another census was carried out in three counties. The motives for this Paupersby sex and age. Iceland 1703 Paupersbyage. Iceland 1729 • children and youth. Parents were more likely to be able to care for a large number of offspring, and young adults were more likely to be able to enter service than would be the case under more unfavourable conditions when they risked becoming dependent upon poor relief. • In both regimes, theelderlyriskedtobecomedependentuponpoorrelief. Theshare of paupers in theagegroups 60 to 79 wasconsiderablyhigher in 1703 than in 1729 whereastheshare of paupersamongtheveryold (80 years and older) wasequal in thetwocensuses. census were ideas put forward by Danish authorities to transport a group of Icelanders to Greenland. The motive was to start a new settlement of Nordic people in Greenland. Those plans were never put into force but resulted in a census in the south-western part of the country, the area that was seen as a recruitment base for potential residents for Greenland. Icelandduringthe 18th century. An extremecase of theWestEuropeanmarriage pattern Vulnerability in oldage. Householdposition of theelderly in 1703 and 1729 never-married is thus somewhat overrated. Despite this flaw, information from the census pointes towards low nuptialityrates in the early 18thcentury Iceland. Analysis on age-specific headship rate strongly indicates that the proportion of never-married was high. In the analysis we have lumped together heads and spouses. Headship rate was very low especially amongst women (explained by low sex ratio). A high proportion of never-married had important impact upon the situation in old age. As early as the 1960s John Hajnal (1965) showed that 18th century Iceland (together with Ireland) presented an extreme case of the West European marriage pattern. Thus, age at marriage was high and the share of never married higher than in most other European societies. This regime entailed a high proportion of life-long servants. Hajnal used data from the 1703-census to make his point which is a bit controversial as the census only implicitly gives information on marital status. The proportion of During the pre-transitional period a relatively large proportion of the elderly in Iceland occupied an inferior household position as servant or pauper. An important explanation is the fact that nuptiality rate was low (and thus proportion of never married high). An other important factor is the sex ratio (measured as the number of men per 1,000 women) was lower than in other European countries. Previous studies on the position of the elderly in Iceland have applied the Laslett’sand Wall’s hypothesis on Nuclear hardship and argued that the high share of never married in the group of the elderly constituted an extreme case of nuclear hardship where a large number of elderly were in the position of pauper and were subject to a circulation from household to household. An analysis of the household position of the elderly in the censuses 1703 and 1729 reveal huge sex and age-specific differences. Men were considerably more likely to head their own household than women whereas women were more likely to occupy the position of pauper or servant in old age. There were though considerable differences between 1703 and 1729. In 1703 almost half of all women 75 years and older were in the position of pauper. The same was true for less than a third of their counterparts in 1729. It is furthermore noteworthy that the likelihood to reside within the household of an offspring increased between 1703 and 1729. Head(spouse)shiprateby sex and age 1703 Householdposition of theelderly in 1729 Householdposition of theelderly in 1703 Men 60-74 years Women 60-74 years Men 60-74 years Women 60-74 years Women 75 years and older Women 75 years and older Men 75 years and older Men 75 years and older