True, but the number of people living in the late 20th century and beyond is a significant fraction of all the humans who have ever lived, and records from before a few centuries ago are sparse, so it’s hard to say that that if the maximum(ish) age is 115, we could expect to have records of someone achieving that before the 20th century.
On the other hand, I don’t have evidence against this; I just don’t know.
Well, there is the legend of Old Tom Parr from Shropshire, who was said to have died age 152 in 1635. When asked by King Charles I what was the most notable thing he had done that other men had not, he replied that it was doing public penance in the church porch for adultery, at age 100.
Modern historians speculate that he was confused by the public with his grandfather, of the same name, and based on the autopsy results that he may only have been around 70.
We do have such records actually (19th century newspaper articles about such-and-such dying an extreme age for example), it’s just they’re considered unreliable.
Here’s a thing from the BBC talking about how the difference between life expectancy between modern and ancient people isn’t that different once you survive the childhood, etc. Esp. if you were well off.
It gives some data from Pliny the Elder: “… consul M Valerius Corvinos (100 years), Cicero’s wife Terentia (103), a woman named Clodia (115 – and who had 15 children along the way), and the actress Lucceia who performed on stage at 100 years old.”
So if you hung out in the right crowds in days of yore you’d know of a person or two who lived to 100. OTOH, if you were a laborer in a mine, not so much.
Margaret Ann Neve was the first female supercentenarian and the first person believed to have lived in three centuries (18th - 20th)
Your link says she was “the first proven individual whose life spanned three centuries”.
It’s almost certain she was not actually the first person ever to have done this - but documentation for anyone before her is lacking.
At one time there was the trope that people from the Caucus area were particularly long-lived. Eventually, this was considered bunk (i.e. needed to be debunked). Pravda at the time made hard currency off of running these human interest stories. It was suggested that when this first came to light, in the 1960’s, we were seeing men who dodged the draft by assuming their father’s identity during WWI.
The problem is that as you grow older, there are more choices for things that do you in. Modern medicine and good nutrition help us to escape some of them, but not all. As my parents generation approach this cliff, it is my observation that the problem seems to be that senior citizens are usually healthy and active until something hits them hard, then they begin to fail rapidly - one failure takes out other systems. Medicine can sometimes stop the first few filures and add years to life.
The flaw with the “one year after 105” is that I suspect by 110 it’s then only 6 months or less… and diminishes. It doesn’t stay 1 year - statistics and history, IIRC, say that at 121 the expectancy is zero years.
Actually, people have looked at the records of all the people who have lived to 105 in the past century or so and it indeed appears that after 105, the expected additional period of time that a person will live is one year on average. It does not appear to go down, for instance, to six months at 110 or whatever. That doesn’t necessarily mean this is absolutely and definitively true. It could be that with a much larger sample we will find out that it’s not true. In any case, there is no evidence there is an absolute limit to the human lifespan. Again, the fact that no one has yet (apparently) lived beyond 122 just shows that we have a very small sample. 105 billion people over all time so far is a very small sample for saying anything about the human lifespan beyond the age of 105. The number of people over all time so far who have lived to 105 is no more than a few thousand. If the one-additional-year-on-average-for-each-year-after-105 rule is really true, then having just one person ever live to 122 is just about what the rule predicts.