I wonder.

[bronze_ribbons]

In today's New York Times:

Ms. Farge suggests a reason: "In the 18th century, a man and woman lived together for a maximum of three or four years because of wars, epidemics, death during childbirth and so on. Life was a succession of funerals and remarriages. In fact, until today, couples have never had to live together for a long time."

Comments

[jamoche]

Looks like someone may have made the same error regarding the relationship between "average" and "maximum" as the people who look at life expectancy figures without realising they're skewed by high infant mortality rates. In a time where the LE at birth might've been 30, someone who made it to 10 might then expect to live beyond 50.

I'd guess 15 is more likely, going off the fact that the historical list of wedding anniversary presents have entries for 1-15 before starting to jump by 5s. Still, it's obvious that as lifespans go up, time spent in a marriage goes up, so the author has a point.