LONDON-L Archives

Archiver > LONDON > 2003-11 > 1068106752


From: "Roger Lovegrove" <>
Subject: Re: [Lon] Cant find
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 08:22:57 -0000
References: <001701c3a36d$51475d20$40b76351@oemcomputer> <002f01c3a388$aeaf2720$f6d3ae51@lovegrove> <013a01c3a3ff$576b65b0$7bbd2952@DDJT4L0J>


I earlier stated, about a WW1 death that

"My only slight reservation about this is that it means he would have been about
34 when he died, which is a touch older than I might have expected."

Rest assured that I do actually carry out a bit of research before making such
statements, even though I might not always give the details :-)

For anyone who is interested, I went into cwgc and carried out a search for WW1
deaths of anyone called "J.SMITH". There were, unsurpisingly, a couple of
thousand.

Looking at the first 20 screens (400 deaths), 181 of the records gave the age at
death. For those:-

-the majority were under 26;
-the average age was 28-29 years;
-25% were aged 34 or more, meaning the chances are 3:1 that anyone killed in WW1
would have been under 34.

I trust people can now see why I said 34 was a touch older than I might have
expected.

Incidentally, the youngest was 17, and the oldest was 66 (a Canadian private)!

The actual figures are

Age Number % at least that age
17 1 100%
18 6 99%
19 9 96%
20 19 91%
21 11 81%
22 9 75%
23 11 70%
24 11 64%
25 14 57%
26 8 50%
27 5 45%
28 7 43%
29 5 39%
30 8 36%
31 2 31%
32 5 30%
33 4 28%
34 5 25%
35 3 23%
36 4 21%
37 5 19%
38 6 16%
39 13%
40 1 13%
41 5 12%
42 1 9%
43 2 9%
44 3 8%
45 4 6%
46 1 4%
47-48 0
49 2 3%
50 -55 0
56 2 2%
57 1 1%
58-65 0
66 1 1%

HTH

Regards
Roger Lovegrove

Researching LOVEGROVEs in all places and at all times.
Please do visit the LOVEGROVE Information Centre on http://www.lovegrove.org.uk

This thread: