The Justinian Plague in Literary Sources

Q3 Arts and Humanities
P. Bystrický
{"title":"The Justinian Plague in Literary Sources","authors":"P. Bystrický","doi":"10.31577/forhist.2023.17.1.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BYSTRICKÝ, Peter. The Justinian Plague in literary sources. The study looks into and compares three main contemporary sources describing the first pandemic in 542, also known as the Plague of Justinian—the secular historian Procopius and two church historians, John of Ephesus and Evagrius. The bubonic plague epidemic spreading from Egypt was the most destructive scourge of the Byzantine Empire during the reign of Emperor Justinian I. It had immense direct effects on demography, the economy, craft and agricultural production, construction work and foreign policy too, as large cities and coastal trade centres, including the capital where perhaps up to half of the population was lost to the disease, were the most afflicted. Although Procopius, John of Ephesus and Evagrius all came from different backgrounds and lived under different circumstances, their records and memories complement one another, helping to create a vivid and well-rounded image of the times. Procopius was measured and even impersonal, imitating Thucydides, and while he attempted to describe the symptoms, course of the disease and life in Constantinople as eaccurately as possible, the moralising John of Ephesus aimed to leave a warning for future generations and so was focused more on the emotional dimension of the tragedy he witnessed in the provinces he had passed through. Evagrius, who himself contracted the plague as a child and later lost his wife, relatives and some of his servants to it, left a brief account, but also precise and to the point. The sudden and unexpected arrival of the bubonic plague, its short incubation period, high fatality rate with no regard for gender, age or origin, as well as the lack of effective treatments and the impossibility determining the origin and/or causes of the disease, deeply shook the whole society, leaving scars on the human psyche and behaviour. A whole spectrum of feelings that are not completely unknown to us after our own experience with the recent pandemic—the initial hysteria and panic were replaced by fear for ourselves and our loved ones and the fear that funeral rites and burials would not be conducted—along with uncertainty, despair, mistrust, doubt, resignation, frustration and apathy can be identified in the work of these three authors, in their testimonies, experiences, varying examples and stories. The authors recorded not only ruthlessness, indifference, selfish-ness, a refusal to help or the desire to enrich oneself from the tragedy, but also left evidence of fellowship, cooperation and a selflessness among people.","PeriodicalId":37228,"journal":{"name":"Forum Historiae","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forum Historiae","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31577/forhist.2023.17.1.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BYSTRICKÝ, Peter. The Justinian Plague in literary sources. The study looks into and compares three main contemporary sources describing the first pandemic in 542, also known as the Plague of Justinian—the secular historian Procopius and two church historians, John of Ephesus and Evagrius. The bubonic plague epidemic spreading from Egypt was the most destructive scourge of the Byzantine Empire during the reign of Emperor Justinian I. It had immense direct effects on demography, the economy, craft and agricultural production, construction work and foreign policy too, as large cities and coastal trade centres, including the capital where perhaps up to half of the population was lost to the disease, were the most afflicted. Although Procopius, John of Ephesus and Evagrius all came from different backgrounds and lived under different circumstances, their records and memories complement one another, helping to create a vivid and well-rounded image of the times. Procopius was measured and even impersonal, imitating Thucydides, and while he attempted to describe the symptoms, course of the disease and life in Constantinople as eaccurately as possible, the moralising John of Ephesus aimed to leave a warning for future generations and so was focused more on the emotional dimension of the tragedy he witnessed in the provinces he had passed through. Evagrius, who himself contracted the plague as a child and later lost his wife, relatives and some of his servants to it, left a brief account, but also precise and to the point. The sudden and unexpected arrival of the bubonic plague, its short incubation period, high fatality rate with no regard for gender, age or origin, as well as the lack of effective treatments and the impossibility determining the origin and/or causes of the disease, deeply shook the whole society, leaving scars on the human psyche and behaviour. A whole spectrum of feelings that are not completely unknown to us after our own experience with the recent pandemic—the initial hysteria and panic were replaced by fear for ourselves and our loved ones and the fear that funeral rites and burials would not be conducted—along with uncertainty, despair, mistrust, doubt, resignation, frustration and apathy can be identified in the work of these three authors, in their testimonies, experiences, varying examples and stories. The authors recorded not only ruthlessness, indifference, selfish-ness, a refusal to help or the desire to enrich oneself from the tragedy, but also left evidence of fellowship, cooperation and a selflessness among people.
文学渊源中的查士丁尼瘟疫
彼得,再见。文学资料中的查士丁尼瘟疫。这项研究调查并比较了描述542年第一次疫情的三个主要当代来源,也被称为查士丁尼瘟疫——世俗历史学家普罗科皮乌斯和两位教会历史学家,以弗所的约翰和埃瓦格里乌斯。从埃及传播的黑死病疫情是查士丁尼一世统治期间拜占庭帝国最具破坏性的灾难。它对人口、经济、工艺和农业生产、建筑工作和外交政策也产生了巨大的直接影响,因为大城市和沿海贸易中心,包括首都在内,那里可能有多达一半的人口死于这种疾病,受灾最为严重。尽管普罗科皮乌斯、以弗所的约翰和埃瓦格里乌斯都来自不同的背景,生活在不同的环境中,但他们的记录和记忆是相辅相成的,有助于塑造一个生动而全面的时代形象。普罗科皮乌斯是有分寸的,甚至是没有人情味的,模仿修昔底德,虽然他试图尽可能准确地描述君士坦丁堡的症状、疾病过程和生活,但道德说教的以弗所的约翰旨在给后代留下警告,因此他更关注他在所经过的省份目睹的悲剧的情感层面。埃瓦格里乌斯本人在小时候就感染了瘟疫,后来失去了妻子、亲戚和一些仆人,他留下了简短的叙述,但也很准确,切中要害。黑死病突如其来,潜伏期短,死亡率高,不分性别、年龄或起源,缺乏有效的治疗方法,无法确定疾病的起源和/或原因,深深震撼了整个社会,给人类的心理和行为留下了创伤。在经历了最近的疫情之后,我们并非完全不知道的一系列感受——最初的歇斯底里和恐慌被对我们自己和亲人的恐惧所取代,以及对葬礼和葬礼无法举行的恐惧——以及不确定性、绝望、不信任、怀疑、辞职,沮丧和冷漠可以在这三位作者的作品中,在他们的证词、经历、不同的例子和故事中找到。作者不仅记录了无情、冷漠、自私、拒绝帮助或从悲剧中致富的愿望,还留下了人们之间友谊、合作和无私的证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Forum Historiae
Forum Historiae Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
审稿时长
17 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信