Religion and Public Doctrine in Modern England, Vol. 3: Accommodations
Religion and Public Doctrine in Modern England, Vol. 3: Accommodations
复制标题
现代英国的宗教与公共教义，卷。
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2002
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
William Gibson
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
William Gibson
Kobcrt Woods的Magistcial Demography of Viclorian England und Wules在许多方面都是对19世纪英国人口史最新研究的综合，但大部分研究都是由Woods自己和合作进行的。伍兹是利物浦大学的约翰兰金地理学教授，他为这个棘手的话题带来了跨学科的方法，强调了kcy人口指标的地理差异。在1801年到1901年之间，英格兰和威尔士的人口从不到900万增加到超过3200万。在同一时期，总生育率（即女性在生殖一生中可能生育的孩子数量）从约5.5个孩子下降到约3.5个孩子，出生时预期寿命从约40岁增加到约50岁。在这本令人印象深刻的书中，伍兹几乎回答了这些事实所产生的问题。在讨论了这一过渡时期人口研究的主要理论之后，他批判性地评估了他的主要统计来源，这些来源被谨慎地接受。主要的人口研究如下。首先是马尔萨斯预防性检查，即晚婚和出生率下降减缓了人口增长。接下来，伍兹考虑了家庭限制。是什么导致了婚姻生育率的长期下降？伍兹提出了一些证据来帮助处理一些旧的理论，并提出仍然没有确切的结论，尽管它不是受经济发展的影响，不是一个阶级领导的现象，也与“避孕革命”无关。然而，公众舆论的变化，教育革命，儿童死亡率的下降和维多利亚社会后期的世俗化都是潜在的原因。以下四章集中讨论死亡率。在成人中，死亡率受职业的影响，但环境因素在职业一级也起着明显的作用。在下一章中，伍兹考虑了儿童死亡率的下降。最后一章的死亡率涵盖了死亡的“地点和原因”。伍兹确信，尽管旨在对抗传染病的公共卫生措施有助于死亡率的下降，但这些疾病的死亡率下降并不像早期作者所认为的那样显著。伍兹提出了关于城市化对英格兰人口结构的影响的新结论。伍兹得出结论，20世纪中期城市死亡率上升的时间和程度比之前的计算要晚，也不那么重要，直到19世纪70年代，城市和农村地区之间的死亡率差距才缩小。在得出结论之前，伍兹花了一些篇幅与其他国家进行了比较，并提供了一份有用的人口制度要素清单。最后一章，伍兹说，是致力于服从，因为仍然有这么多的问题，在我们的历史人口的英国的理解没有答案。我们知道，世纪后期生育率的短期增长刺激了人口增长，我们知道这是由婚姻的变化引起的，但我们不知道为什么婚姻的变化会发生，为什么它们会发生，或者为什么它只是一个短期的发生。我们不知道为什么，或者确切地说，婚姻生育率从世纪中期开始下降，等等，伍兹以可敬的谨慎态度重新提出了他早期的许多结论。伍兹的著作并不适合人口学新手;他较早、较短的著作《19世纪世纪的英国人口》（Population of Britain in the Nineteenth Century，1995）将被证明是更容易但挑战性更小的作品;然而，《维多利亚时代的英格兰与威尔士的人口学》（Demography qf Victorian England und Wules）将值得仔细阅读。我们只能遗憾第12页上“性感”这个词被误用了。
Kobcrt Woods’s magistcrial Demography of Viclorian England und Wules is in many respects a synthesis of recent research of English population history in the nineteenth century, but much of the research has been undertaken by Woods himself and in collaboration. Woods, the John Rankin Professor of Geography at the University of Liverpool, brings an interdisciplinary approach to this difficult topic, emphasizing the geographic variations in kcy demographic indicators. Hetween 1801 and 1901 the population of England and Wales rose from just under nine million to over thirty-two million. During the same period, the total fertility rate, the number of children a woman might expect to have in her reproductive lifetime, fell from around 5.5 children to around 3.5, and life expectancy at birth increased from around forty to about fifty. In this impressive volume, Woods comes close to answering the questions created hy those facts. After discussing the main theorics informing demographic research of that transitional period, he critically evaluates his main statistical sources, which are cautiously accepted. The main demographic research follows. Firs1 up, the Malthusian preventive check, where population growth was slowed by later marriage and a consequent decrease in births. Next, Woods considers family limitation. What caused the secular decline in marital fertility? Woods presents evidence to assist in disposing ofa number of old theories and suggests that there are still no firm conclusions, though it was not influenced by economic development, not a class-led phenomenon, and not related to the “contraceptive revolution.” However, changes in public opinion, the education revolution, a decline in childhood mortality and the secularization of late Victorian society were all potential causes. The following four chapters concentrate on mortality. Among adults mortality was affected by occupation, but environmental factors also played a discernible role at the occupational level. In the next chapter Woods considcrs the decline of childhood mortality. The final mortality chapter covers “places and causes” of death. With conviction, Woods argues that although public health measures designed to combat infectious diseases contributed to the fall in mortality, the decline in deaths from those diseases was not as significant as earlier writers on the subject have suggested. Woods presents new conclusions about the consequences of urbanization on the demographic regime in England. The timing and extent of the mid-century increase in urban mortality was, Woods concludes, later and less significant than has previously been calculated, and only from the 1870s did the mortality gap between urban and rural areas contract. Before reaching his conclusions, Woods spends some pages on comparisons with other countries and provides a useful list of elements encountered in demographic regimes. The concluding chapter, Woods says, is devoted to ignorance-because there remain so many unanswered questions in our understanding of the historical demography of Britain. We know that a short-term increase in fertility in the late eighteenth century instigated the population growth, and we know that this was caused by changes in nuptiality, but we don’t know why the changes in nuptiality occurred, why they occurred when they did, or why it was only a short-term occurrence. We do not know why, or with certainty how, marital fertility decreased from mid century, and so on. Woods re-presents many of his earlier conclusions with honorable caution. Woods’s writing is not for the demographic neophyte; his earlier and shorter work, Population of Britain in the Nineteenth Century (1995) will prove easier but less-challenging fare; however, Demography qf Victorian England und Wules will repay careful reading. One can only regret the unfortunate misuse of the word “erogenous” on page 12.