Malthus was wrong, and had long been wrong, for his own back yard. But not for the reason usually claimed (especially by economists), Progress with a capital P.

Malthus was wrong, and had long been wrong, for his own back yard. But not for the reason usually claimed (especially by economists), Progress with a capital P. For a different reason entirely: culture. There is a thing called "The [West|North] European Marriage Pattern"[1] that was well established in the 1500s, centuries before Malthus was born. In this pattern marriage was delayed for both men and women until they were deemed able to bring up children - by themselves, and in the eyes of their local community. There is a closely related phenomenon sometimes called the North European Household or nuclear household in the same area. Although households often incorporated young adult female relatives and/or unrelated females as servants, the "core" households tended to be one or two generations only--parents and children (if any). Those parents whose children grew up and left had only their servants, if any, as well as themselves from then on. East of this line, households tended to be multigenerational and/or sibling-parallel. In West/North Europe, part of being deemed able to bring up children was being able to form your own household, independent of your parents and siblings. In this way fertility was regulated. In good times, it was easier to form a household; in bad, it happened later or not at all. So fewer children were born. Populations were not driven to starvation in the way that Malthus claimed. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_European_marriage_pattern https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_European_marriage_patt... 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hajnal_line https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hajnal_line