English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

4 answers

The records on that subject are far from complete and sketchy. However, it appears from what info is available now, they're life span was the same as everyone else. The only difference would have been that they carried the physical characteristics of a life time of labor, just as a lumberjack - for example - would. That means arthritis, joint problems, things like that. The slaves weren't malnourished, and weren't denied health care, as primitive as it was then. Slaves were major financial investments, and plantation owners wanted to protect those investments.

2007-08-29 15:41:16 · answer #1 · answered by Derail 7 · 1 0

Depends where they were. Field hands in the West Indies and Brazil did not fare as well as those in the American South.
For the person who listed a life expectancy of 35 years for female slaves in the 1700s, the overall life expectancy of people in general - white, black, or whatever pigment - was in that same range. Also, life expectancy from birth varies a great
deal from life expectancy after age 5 or age ten since childhood mortality was so high from infectious diseases. And, unlike today when women on average outlive men, the women of the 1700s did not live as long as men because so many died in childbirth - roughly one in five women having babies died soon after delivery in ~ 1650.

2007-08-29 17:49:06 · answer #2 · answered by Spreedog 7 · 2 0

Average life expectancy of a female slave in the 1700s was 35 years

2007-08-29 15:42:06 · answer #3 · answered by Michael G 4 · 0 0

How Long Did Slaves Live

2017-02-27 03:47:26 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers