838 iiEPORT— 1900. 



3. Foundation and Birth-rate, viewed from the historico-statisticalstandpoint. 

 By Marcus Rubin, Director of the Royal Danish Bureau of Statistics. 



As is well known, it has become more common than formerly for historians to 

 seek the help of statistics to support, as far as may be, with observations of groups, 

 those scattered records which frequently give misleading results. A not un- 

 important part of the investigations undertaken, and of the tracts, &c., published by 

 the author outside his official reports, have been concerned with historico-statis- 

 tical investigations. One of the earliest of them— published in 1882 — was con- 

 cerned with the question of the number of the inhabitants of Copenhagen in the 

 seventeenth century, an inquiry based on the records of baptisms in the church 

 registers for that century. The paper offers an extension of the discussions of 

 principle to which that inquiry gave rise. 



The chief question to be answered is the following: As.sumingthat the number 

 of baptisms at some period in the past can be a.scertained for a town or a country, 

 how can its population be deduced from that number ? As a rule the registers 

 give information only of baptisms, not of still-births. In general, at any rate in 

 Denmark, children were baptised as soon as possible after birth, so that the 

 numbers not baptised may rather be compared with the still-born of later times. 

 Given the number of baptisms at some period in the past, this number must first 

 be subjected to an addition before it can be compared with the record of births of 

 recent times (living births and still-births). At the beginning of the present cen- 

 tury the still-births were some 8 per cent, of those born alive. Thus to find the 

 number of births of the earlier times at least 8 per cent, must be added to the 

 number of baptisms. Having obtained this datiun, what multiplier will yield the 

 total of the population.^ This is dependent on whether people in former times 

 married earlier than now ; further, on whether marriages were more fruitful ; 

 and, finally, on whether the number of illegitimate births was greater. 



It is quite clear that if, in comparison with the population, more children were 

 born in preceding centuries than nowadays, the multiplier must be made less than 

 would serve now to deduce population from births, and vice versa. Unfortunately, 

 the old Danish church registers contain no record of the ages at marriage, but one 

 may assume that people married earlier than at present, because such a course was 

 in agreement with the needs and wishes of the time, whether considered from the 

 point of view of State, of Church, or of public opinion. 



I have secured information on this point from the records of a census of Den- 

 mark in the year 1787, which exist in the Danish Statistical Bureau, but have not 

 been published hitherto. This census proves the following both for town and 

 country : — In former times the well-to-do and independent section of the population 

 mari'ied earlier than now, while the masses married later. This is a consequence 

 of the fact that the labouring classes were not then free as now, but boarded in 

 their master's house, and for this and other cognate reasons were obliged to delay 

 marriage ; whereas nowadays they need not wait ; indeed they often find advan- 

 tage in marrying young. The more well-to-do, on the other hand, married as 

 soon as they could, since in old days people did not take our modern views in 

 social matters, but regarded it as both the right and the duty of men (and of 

 women) to marry as soon as law and custom made it possible. But, further, not 

 merely did all marry as soon as they might, but they married as often as might be, 

 i.e., tbere were fewer widows and widowers than in our time, since none who 

 could marry remained unmarried. To sum up, on the average the age of marriage 

 was higher than in our time, because the masses were compelled to postpone 

 marriage, but in spite of this the number of marriages was greater, partly because 

 the well-to-do married earlier than now, partly because the masses married, almost 

 without exception, as soon as they could, and, further, partly because the widowed 

 remarried in far greater proportion than now. The statistical proof of the fact is 

 given in the paper, where it is also shown that precisely the opposite happens 

 nowadays to that which occurred formerly. Now the well-to-do marry late, the 

 masses early.' 



Although, on the average, marriages were later than now, yet the number 



' See Table I. 



