limited, it was only natural that cases of
extreme old age were of huge interest.
Publications such as Kirby’s Wonderful and
Eccentric Museum (1820) reported amazing
stories such as that of the midwife Mrs Mills
of Jamaica, said to have died in 1805 “aged 118;
she was followed to her grave by 295 of her
children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren,
and great-great-grandchildren ... she retained
her senses to the last, and followed her
business to within two days of her death”.
Among the more fabulous tales of
centenarians trotted out for the credulous
public were those of Henry Jenkins, “Old
Parr” and the Countess of Desmond. The
Countess, from Ireland, reputedly died in
1612 at the immense age of 145. “Old” Thomas
Parr, from Winnington, Shropshire, allegedly
died aged 152 in 1635. To cap them all, the
Yorkshire fraudster Henry Jenkins, who
claimed to have delivered arrows for theKing’s army at the Battle of Flodden Field
in 1513, died in 1670 at the supposed (and
incredible) age of 169 at Bolton-on-Swale
(the locals were sufficiently impressed to erect
an obelisk in 1743 dedicated to him).
Like today’s “fake news”, these incredible
tales were repeated in print until they
acquired a life of their own. This was partly
because it was extremely difficult for people
to check claims of great longevity, with
civil registration not being introduced until- Although births, weddings and burials
were recorded in parish registers, these were
sometimes lost over time or had become
illegible with age.
Monumental inscriptions on tombstones
could not be relied upon, either. The relatives
who erected the monument would naturally
have depended on the age given them by the
deceased. Sometimes, the stonemason simply
made an error with the inscription. And at
Beverley Minster, the gravestone of a person
aged 44 years was reportedly altered by some
hoaxer to 414 years. It was not until the late
19th century that some of the more lurid
cases of longevity were finally discredited by
researchers.
Even the bills of mortality (especially
those published in London) were an
uncertain guide to the true numbers of
centenarians. However, a more scientific
approach was gradually adopted by
physicians such as Dr John Haygarth of
Chester, who published some papers on
deaths in the city during the early 1770s. He
recorded that in 1775, five people over 90 years
old had died, plus another citizen aged 106
years. So it was not impossible for a person to
reach a great age.
However, some of the more extravagant
ages reported in the public journals must be
taken with a pinch of salt. Ages may have
been exaggerated, or genuinely mistaken, by
very elderly people or their relatives. People
sometimes had vivid “recollections” of events
that pre-dated their birth but were, in fact,
much talked of during their early childhood.
A case in point may be that of Jane
Forrester of Abbey Laddercost [Lanercost]
Cumberland, “now in the 138th year of her
age”. According to the Public Advertiser of
March 9, 1768: “When Cromwell besieged
the city of Carlisle, 1646, she can remember
that a horse’s head sold for 2s 6d [for food]
Above, John Haygarth, who studied mortality
in the town of Chester (Wellcome Collection).
Right, London Bridge before 1757, painted by
Samuel Scott (The Fishmongers’ Company)