Unusual causes of death

Although the legacy of the plague dominates much of the discussion around death records from early European history, there are many interesting casualty recordings from the same era which can inform us about the lives of the people who inhabited this time frame. By becoming accustomed with the the ways these individuals perished, we can also subsequently become more familiar with the way they lived. Within the annual death records of the 17th and 18th centuries of London lie a number of unusual causes of death that give us a look into the lives of the inhabitant of the parishes surrounding the largest city of Britain. Within this blog post I have included a few, which although are out of the ordinary for the population, are altogether indicative of the conditions with which Londoners survived. Suffocated with charcoal – 1703. Choked with a piece of Meat – 1704. Died by cutting off a leg – 1705 Stifled in a house of office – 1705. Shot in a mutiny – 1707. Press’d to death in a crowd – 1725

After consulting with the professor responsible for overseeing my internship the ones that stuck out to me the most were “stifled in a house of office” and “shot in a mutiny.” Since a house of office can often refer to a toilet or a necessary, it is likely that this cause of death describes either a sewage cleaner who suffocated in the line of duty or a infant who was disposed of in an outhouse. Both of these scenarios provide an insight into the hardships of everyday Londoner’s lives. If it does in fact describe a sewage cleaner, it shows the brutality of those who are trying to earn a living at the risk of their own expense. Yet in the case of an infant who was disposed of in such a gruesome way, this cause of death demonstrates the length that a parent would go through in order to prevent their child from experiencing the same reality that they have been forced to undergo.

With the casualty described as “shot in a mutiny,” this cause of death sticks out to me in particular because of its differentiation from other causes such as “shot” or “murdered.” To those who were recording the causes of death, the fact that this took place in the context of a mutiny mattered enough to warrant its own classification, most likely in order to highlight to the public that murders related to mutiny had another level of deprivation associated with them above simple crimes of passion or revenge.