Talk:Life in the Renaissance: Difference between revisions
From Cunnan
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
m (Reverted edits by 198.203.102.254 (Talk); changed back to last version by Kittybriton) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
They only lived to be about 100-150 years old |
They only lived to be about 100-150 years old |
||
*I would love to know who produced the above assertion! I can't cite a reference for this, as it was a TV programme reporting a research project, and my memory is terribly flaky (plus never thought I would need it) but lifespans during [[period]] were capable of rivalling contemporary. However, the ''average'' was shorter, once infant mortality, accidents and violent deaths are factored in.--[[User: |
*I would love to know who produced the above assertion! I can't cite a reference for this, as it was a TV programme reporting a research project, and my memory is terribly flaky (plus never thought I would need it) but lifespans during [[period]] were capable of rivalling contemporary. However, the ''average'' was shorter, once infant mortality, accidents and violent deaths are factored in.--[[User:Kittybriton|Kittybriton]] 02:02, 2 May 2007 (EST) |
||
Latest revision as of 18:32, 20 May 2007
They only lived to be about 100-150 years old
- I would love to know who produced the above assertion! I can't cite a reference for this, as it was a TV programme reporting a research project, and my memory is terribly flaky (plus never thought I would need it) but lifespans during period were capable of rivalling contemporary. However, the average was shorter, once infant mortality, accidents and violent deaths are factored in.--Kittybriton 02:02, 2 May 2007 (EST)
