According to historical studies of the mid-19th century Industrial Revolution, what was approximately the average life expectancy of a factory worker in Manchester?

Introduction / Context:
The Industrial Revolution in Britain brought rapid industrial growth but also terrible working and living conditions for factory workers, especially in industrial towns like Manchester. Historians often cite shocking statistics about life expectancy to illustrate just how unhealthy and dangerous these environments were. One such statistic concerns the average life span of workers in Manchester in the mid nineteenth century, which was significantly lower than that of people in non industrial areas.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• The question asks for the approximate average life expectancy of a factory worker in Manchester during the mid nineteenth century.
• The options range from very low (17 years) to relatively high (62 years).
• We must recall which figure is quoted in standard history texts to highlight the grim realities of industrial urban life.

Concept / Approach:
Scholars of the Industrial Revolution point out that industrial towns had high levels of pollution, overcrowding, disease and workplace accidents. As a result, the life expectancy there was shockingly low, particularly for workers. The often quoted figure is around 17 years for the average life span of a Manchester worker at that time. Numbers like 55 or 62 years would be more typical of much healthier conditions and later periods, not of mid nineteenth century factory towns.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Standard school and college level histories of the Industrial Revolution, including many NCERT style texts, repeat the statistic that the average life expectancy of a worker in Manchester could be as low as 17 years. They contrast this with higher life spans of rural populations, emphasising the human cost of early industrialisation. This alignment across multiple sources confirms that 17 years is the correct figure for this question.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• 30 years: Although low, it does not match the specific statistic widely quoted for Manchester workers.
• 45 years: This is closer to life expectancy in healthier regions and later periods, not for mid nineteenth century factory slums.
• 55 years: This figure would be relatively high even for many twentieth century populations and is inconsistent with the described conditions.
• 62 years: Such a high average life span is unrealistic for workers living under the harsh industrial conditions of nineteenth century Manchester.

Common Pitfalls:
Students sometimes choose a slightly higher number like 30 years because 17 seems 'too low' to be believable. However, the whole point of including this statistic in history books is to show how extreme and unhealthy industrialisation could be for the working class. Trusting the dramatic nature of the example, and recognising that it is widely taught, helps you remember that 17 years is the correct answer.

Final Answer:
Correct answer: 17 years.