–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Employment patterns are extremely valuable to historians
transition from agricultural work into other employment can identify large scale of economic
change
King calculated British family income in order to advise the government of future Tax revenue
classified family based on status and thereby providing cross status for Britain and Wales
Coluquhuin did the same in the early 1800s
King might have done this because he wanted to show how this could have been depleted
England’s wealth when they went to war with France and 1688
by the end of the 17th century the tables demonstrated very different various in Britain
Masse grouped these tables into four categories
these tables demonstrated quantitative accuracy
perish records did not give accurate information
Lindert wanted to collect all of this information from registers and convert it into social tables
Lindert’s figures demonstrated a shift away from agriculture and into manufacturing
therefore this made England more industrial rich
kussmauul - a marriage record could also tell a lot about status e.g. late marriages could tell
couples were farming because of the harvest
Kausmaul’s methods demonstrated that she could tell a lot about men’s work but not women’s
Numbers slowly indicated that marriages were shifting into nonseasonal times which meant
there was a shift from agricultural work
Using Kausmaul’s analysis, did women marry based off of whether or not they were going to have a
seasonal or nonseasonal marriage? Was the farming and agricultural way of life kind of decision-maker
in a woman’s future?