City of the Plague: Victorian Liverpool’s Response to Epidemic

Q3 Arts and Humanities
M. Riley
{"title":"City of the Plague: Victorian Liverpool’s Response to Epidemic","authors":"M. Riley","doi":"10.3828/transactions.171.8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nConscious of its reputation as Britain’s unhealthiest town, the Corporation of Liverpool, in the mid-nineteenth century, developed a long-term strategy to combat the factors that allowed disease to flourish. Typhus, which periodically reached epidemic proportions, had been an underlying factor behind much public health reform, yet by the 1860s, it tended to be viewed with some degree of inevitability. The re-emergence of cholera in 1866 after a gap of twelve years triggered more urgent and immediate interventions. Perceived as a potentially catastrophic ‘alien’ invader, its outbreak in Liverpool was traceable to European emigrants in transit. Just as Irish immigrants had been scapegoated for importing typhus, the ‘Germans’ were identified as a source of dirt, degradation and disease. Despite the alarm generated by cholera, its sporadic incidence was a disincentive to the building of a permanent infrastructure with sufficient capacity to cope. Isolation hospitals, quarantine facilities, and nursing care needed to be constructed, commandeered, or conjured up on an ad hoc basis, bringing into focus the practical role of parochial authorities in the health of the town.","PeriodicalId":35557,"journal":{"name":"Transactions Historic Society of Lancashire and Cheshire","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transactions Historic Society of Lancashire and Cheshire","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3828/transactions.171.8","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

Conscious of its reputation as Britain’s unhealthiest town, the Corporation of Liverpool, in the mid-nineteenth century, developed a long-term strategy to combat the factors that allowed disease to flourish. Typhus, which periodically reached epidemic proportions, had been an underlying factor behind much public health reform, yet by the 1860s, it tended to be viewed with some degree of inevitability. The re-emergence of cholera in 1866 after a gap of twelve years triggered more urgent and immediate interventions. Perceived as a potentially catastrophic ‘alien’ invader, its outbreak in Liverpool was traceable to European emigrants in transit. Just as Irish immigrants had been scapegoated for importing typhus, the ‘Germans’ were identified as a source of dirt, degradation and disease. Despite the alarm generated by cholera, its sporadic incidence was a disincentive to the building of a permanent infrastructure with sufficient capacity to cope. Isolation hospitals, quarantine facilities, and nursing care needed to be constructed, commandeered, or conjured up on an ad hoc basis, bringing into focus the practical role of parochial authorities in the health of the town.
瘟疫之城:维多利亚时代的利物浦对流行病的反应
意识到自己被誉为英国最不健康的城市,利物浦公司在19世纪中期制定了一项长期战略,以对抗疾病滋生的因素。伤寒周期性地达到流行病的程度,是许多公共卫生改革背后的一个潜在因素,但到了19世纪60年代,人们往往认为它在某种程度上是不可避免的。1866年霍乱在时隔12年后再次出现,引发了更紧迫和立即的干预措施。它被认为是一种潜在的灾难性“外来”入侵者,在利物浦爆发的疫情可以追溯到过境的欧洲移民。正如爱尔兰移民因输入斑疹伤寒而成为替罪羊一样,“德国人”也被认为是污垢、退化和疾病的来源。尽管霍乱引起了恐慌,但其零星发生阻碍了建设具有足够应对能力的永久性基础设施。隔离医院、隔离设施和护理需要临时建造、征用或改造,使人们关注教区当局在城镇健康方面的实际作用。
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
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
×
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