Overall, an interesting discussion. What's getting lost here, or glossed over to a large extent, is the varying definitions of what constituted literacy at various times through the ages. Nowadays, we have a modern definition, largely based on the good-old 3Rs that I fondly remember from my childhood. Those were the days before sociologists were invented and started mucking around with society! [Personal Opinion] Before schooling became mandatory, people relied on ad hoc learning, probably by wrote, from well meaning ministers. This is when people learnt to write their names by copying someone else. The fact that a person could write their name doesn't, to my mind, mean that they were literate. Schooling then became mandatory up until the age of 12 (I think) and it is from then that we start defining literacy in more rigorous terms. But again, can you really say that kids were literate as we understand it today? On 25 Jul 2014 19:00, Nivard Ovington via wrote: > My great grandmother could clearly write in rural Buckinghamshire in > 1870 when she produced a sampler at age ten Not to decry her achievements, but this could have been copied from something else. -- Regards, Mike Fry Johannesburg

Sorry about that, clicked the wrong button. I was going to say:- Out in the country areas even in 1891 young boys were classified as general, farm or agricultural labourers. Bob ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Fry" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, July 25, 2014 8:15 PM Subject: Re: [NFK] Literacy of the population 1841 > Overall, an interesting discussion. What's getting lost here, or glossed > over to a large extent, is the varying definitions of what constituted > literacy at various times through the ages. > > Nowadays, we have a modern definition, largely based on the good-old 3Rs > that I fondly remember from my childhood. Those were the days before > sociologists were invented and started mucking around with society! > [Personal Opinion] > > Before schooling became mandatory, people relied on ad hoc learning, > probably by wrote, from well meaning ministers. This is when people learnt > to write their names by copying someone else. The fact that a person could > write their name doesn't, to my mind, mean that they were literate. > > Schooling then became mandatory up until the age of 12 (I think) and it is > from then that we start defining literacy in more rigorous terms. But > again, can you really say that kids were literate as we understand it > today? > > On 25 Jul 2014 19:00, Nivard Ovington via wrote: > >> My great grandmother could clearly write in rural Buckinghamshire in >> 1870 when she produced a sampler at age ten > > Not to decry her achievements, but this could have been copied from > something else. > > -- > Regards, > Mike Fry > Johannesburg > >