¹ Wrigley, E. A. and Schofield, R. S., The Population History of England, 1541–1871: A Reconstruction (Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1981).Google Scholar

² Several papers presented at the All-University of California Economic History Conference on British Demographic History, Asilomar, California, March 1982, addressed the issue of the robustness of these measures to the Wrigley-Schofield estimation procedure. See, for example, Lindert, Peter H., “English Living Standards, Population Growth and Wrigley-Schofield,” Journal of Interdisciplinary History, forthcoming.Google Scholar

³ Wrigley and Schofield, Population History, p. 419.Google Scholar

⁴ The Wrigley-Schofield wage series is based upon wage data for building craftsmen published in Brown, E. H. Phelps and Hopkins, Sheila V., “Seven Centuries of Building Wages,” Economica, n.s., 22 (08 1955), 195“206.The price data are from Brown, E. H. PhelpsandHopkins, Sheila V.–Seven Centuries of the Prices of Consumables, compared with Builders' Wage“ “On a Family of Lag Distributions,” Econometrica, 28 (04 1960), 393–406. By the criterion of minimizing the standard error of the estimate, a second-order distribution was found to be superior to alternative specifications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁵ Wrigley and Schofield, population History, pp 417–19.The lag lengths were 50, 65, and 40years. A centered moving average was used to damp out the price effects of exceptional harvests. The lag length were reevaluted by Wrigley and Schofield using an alternative real wage series see footnote 13.Google Scholar

⁶ The model was developed bySolow, Robert, “On a family of Lag Distribution,” Econometrica, 28 04 1960 393–406.By the criterion of minimizing the standard error of the estimate a second-order distribution was found to be superior to alternative specifications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁷ Note that an implicit assumption of this model is that the measurable effects on fertility of increases and decreases in real wages are of equal magnitude.Google Scholar

⁸ Wrigley and Schofield, Population Hisrory, p. 418, 411. On the basis of a 25-year moving average Wrigley and Schofield also identified 1743 as the peak of real wages. See also p. 639. An examination of the 11-year moving average of their real wage index does not unambiguously point to 1750 as the upper turning point; one could also cite 1735 as the year in which the peak was achieved.Google Scholar

⁹ In all estimations, F_t was represented by an annual series calculated by interpolating linearly between the data points of the Wrigley-Schofield quinquennial gross reproduction rate series given in Wrigley and Schofield, Population History, Table A3.1.Google Scholar

¹⁰ In this and subsequent references, “upper bound” refers to the upper bound of a one-tailed 95 percent confidence interval of the average lag length, L. The year in which the statistical effect of real wages on fertility is at its maximum is less than the number of years reported here as the “average lag length.” For example, when λ equals 0.887, the maximum weight, w_i, occurs at a lag of seven years.Google Scholar

¹¹ The Phelps Brown-Hopkins real wage index was published in Brown, Phelps and Hopkins, “Prices of Consumables,” Appendix B, pp. 311–14Google Scholar

¹² For a complete discussion of the derviation of the Wrigley-schofield real wage index, see Wrigley and Schofield,population History,Appendix 9, pp. 638–41.Google Scholar

¹³ Gilboy, ElizabethThe Cost of Living and Real Wages in Eighteenth-Century England,” Review of Economic Statistics, 18 (08 1936), p. 139.CrossRefGoogle ScholarGilboy's Lancashire series was used to construct a composite national index of real wages in Wrigley and Schofield, Population History, pp. 431–33. As expected, the estimated average lag length was less than 50 years when computed by Wrigley and Schofield using this composite real wage index; respectively, 40, 35, and 45 years elapsed between changes in the composite real wage series and changes in fertility. Here again, however, the Wrigley-Schofield analysis involved only a comparison of the turning points of the two series.Google Scholar

¹⁴ The wage data are from Gilboy, Elizabeth, Wages in Eighteenth-Century England (Cambridge, 1934), Appendix II. The price data are from Gilboy, “Cost of Living,” p. 137. Gilboy asserted (p. 136) that whereas there was significant regional divergence in nominal wage behaviour, this was not the case with prices. Though additional real wage series are available, the regional differences are adequately represented for the present purposes by the Gilboy data.Google Scholar