Hmmm … interesting.
Some numbers about London’s population:
1801 — 959,300 (at the time, Europe’s largest city)
1831 — 1,655,000 (most populous city in the world)
1851 — 2,363,000
1891 — 5,572,012
1901 — 6,506,954
1911 — 7,160,525
1921 — 7,386,848 (soon to be overtaken by New York City as most populous city in the world)
1931 — 8,110,480
1939 — 8,615,245 (population peak)
1951 — 8,196,978
1961 — 7,992,616
1971 — 7,452,520
1981 — 6,805,000
1991 — 6,829,300
2001 — 7,172,091
2003 — 7,387,900
With London’s population peaking in 1939 (and assuming that most homes built in the 19th century are still standing), it makes sense that many (most?) homes in London are more than 100 years old. (I’m assuming that “Underneath London” means that you live in London.)
But, I think it’s obvious that most of the world’s homes were built in the past 100 years, given the increase in the world’s population (and the fact that some homes have been torn down.)
Sorry for what appears to be a hijack of my own thread, but I’m trying to understand why someone would like old things, given that I do not. I get it that’s it’s a personal preference or taste, but it seems to be different from saying that I like cherries but you prefer strawberries. There seems to be some connection with a sense of history, but I’m still not clear what it is. Also, there’s a connection with old-time craftmanship, which I get, sort of.
FWIW, my father was born in a house that was built about 500 years ago, but the house is now empty. In fact, the entire old area of the town has been abandoned and new homes were built after WWII. (BTW, the old family home was one of the ugliest houses I’ve ever seen, even taking into account that it was abandoned. It’s still standing, though …)
Anyway, it’s obvious that many posters like old things. I’m surprised, though, that there haven’t been more (any?) comments from posters who don’t like old things.