Medical history. Supplement最新文献_第7页

Plague today. 今天的瘟疫。

Medical history. Supplement Pub Date : 2008-01-01

Elisabeth Carniel

引用次数: 0

Epidemiology of the Black Death and successive waves of plague. 黑死病的流行病学和鼠疫的连续波。

Medical history. Supplement Pub Date : 2008-01-01 DOI: 10.1017/S0025727300072100

S. Cohn

{"title":"Epidemiology of the Black Death and successive waves of plague.","authors":"S. Cohn","doi":"10.1017/S0025727300072100","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025727300072100","url":null,"abstract":"Open any textbook on infectious diseases and its chapter on plague will describe three pandemics of bubonic plague. The first, the plague of Justinian, erupted in the Egyptian port city of Pelusium in the summer of ad 541 and quickly spread, devastating cities and countryside in and around Constantinople, Syria, Anatolia, Greece, Italy, Gaul, Iberia, and North Africa: “none of the lands bordering the Mediterranean escaped it”, and it reached as far east as Persia and as far north as Ireland in less than two years and spread through their hinterlands.1 Historians have counted eighteen waves of this plague through Europe and the Near East that endured until ad 750, if not longer.2 The second pandemic originated in India, China, or the steppes of Russia, touched the shores of western Europe (Messina) in the autumn of 1347, circumnavigated most of continental Europe in less than three years and eventually struck places as remote as Greenland. While the first lasted just over two centuries and the third a mere twenty-five years in pandemic form, this second wave returned periodically for nearly five hundred years in western Europe. Its last attack in Italy was at Noja (Noicattaro), near Bari, in 1815,3 but it persisted longer in eastern Europe and Russia. Its cycles, however, lengthened from a hit about every ten years for any locale during the latter half of the fourteenth century to absences of 120 years or more for major cities at least in Italy by the seventeenth century. Despite repeated claims in textbooks, the plague of Marseilles in 1720–1 was not this pandemic's European finale.4 In 1743, 48,000 perished from plague in Messina; in 1770–1 over 100,000 in Moscow; and in the Balkans, Egypt, Asia Minor and Russia this Black-Death-type of contagious plague may have persisted as late as 1879.5","PeriodicalId":74144,"journal":{"name":"Medical history. Supplement","volume":"27 1","pages":"74-100"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2008-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0025727300072100","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"57088950","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 112

The archaeology of "plague". “瘟疫”考古。

Medical history. Supplement Pub Date : 2008-01-01

Daniel Antoine

引用次数: 0

Universal and particular: the language of plague, 1348-1500. 通用与特殊:瘟疫的语言，1348-1500。

Medical history. Supplement Pub Date : 2008-01-01

Ann G Carmichael

引用次数: 0

Medieval and modern bubonic plague: some clinical continuities. 中世纪和现代黑死病:一些临床的连续性。

Medical history. Supplement Pub Date : 2008-01-01

Lars Walløe

引用次数: 0

2 The Language of Plague and its Regional Perspectives: The Case of Medieval Germany 鼠疫语言及其地域视角:以中世纪德国为例

Medical history. Supplement Pub Date : 2008-01-01 DOI: 10.1017/S0025727300072082

Kay Peter Jankrift

{"title":"2 The Language of Plague and its Regional Perspectives: The Case of Medieval Germany","authors":"Kay Peter Jankrift","doi":"10.1017/S0025727300072082","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025727300072082","url":null,"abstract":"“In the year of our Lord 1350 the greatest mortality of mankind, called the epidemia, ruled in the world so that the number of living men was insufficient to bury the others,” noted the chronicler Florence of Wevelinghoven in the middle of the fourteenth century.1 An eyewitness of the Black Death, he later became bishop of Munster in Westphalia (1364–78) and bishop of Utrecht (1378–93).2 The Westphalian cleric was only one among many to describe in these or in very similar words the unimaginable mortality caused by the Black Death. Contemporary records from all over Europe tell the same story: the disease appeared everywhere in the world and depopulated the cities, leaving too few survivors to bury the countless dead.3 It is this image of a “worldwide” pandemic of the Black Death, together with, to a lesser extent, descriptions of the subsequent outbreaks of plague by contemporaries, which has dominated the historian's view of medieval epidemics until today. But what one may call the language of plague, the language of the sources, comprises universal and particular aspects at the same time. As European society is not uniform (despite all attempts of the administration of the European Union) and has never been so in the past, one has to ask how far did the different geographical and cultural backgrounds of chroniclers and medical practitioners influence the language of plague? Are there any differences in the attitudes towards the disease and in the ways of dealing with medieval epidemics, even if the same words are used? Did an Italian really have exactly the same view of plague as a Spaniard, an Englishman or a German? What finally inspired me to ask these questions within the context of plague were several examples of such differences in sources of the period concerning another medical problem, the disease (or rather the diseases) contemporaries used to identify as leprosy.","PeriodicalId":74144,"journal":{"name":"Medical history. Supplement","volume":"1 1","pages":"53 - 58"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2008-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0025727300072082","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"57088529","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 3

Pestilential complexities: understanding medieval plague. 瘟疫的复杂性:理解中世纪瘟疫。

Medical history. Supplement Pub Date : 2008-01-01

Vivian Nutton

引用次数: 0

3 Medieval and Modern Bubonic Plague: Some Clinical Continuities 3中世纪和现代腺鼠疫:一些临床连续性

Medical history. Supplement Pub Date : 2008-01-01 DOI: 10.1017/S0025727300072094

L. Walløe

{"title":"3 Medieval and Modern Bubonic Plague: Some Clinical Continuities","authors":"L. Walløe","doi":"10.1017/S0025727300072094","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025727300072094","url":null,"abstract":"In his book The Black Death transformed,1 Samuel K Cohn claims that the epidemic disease described in western European historical sources from ad 1347 to the mid-seventeenth century under the names plague, pestis, pestilence, plagen and the like must have been a disease other than the modern plague that reached Hong Kong in May 1894 from other parts of China, and later spread first to India and then to all inhabited continents. Alexandre Yersin showed that the disease in Hong Kong was caused by a bacterium, later named Yersinia pestis. It was also Yersin who claimed that he had found not only the cause of plague in China, but also the cause of the medieval and early modern plague epidemics. Four years after the discovery of the bacillus, Paul-Louis Simond proposed the transmission route from the rat (Rattus rattus) via the flea (Xenopsylla cheopis) to humans, although the scientific community was not fully convinced until ten years later, since this hypothesis did not explain all observations. The problems with the hypothesis were forgotten, which is easy to understand when we remember that the doctors and epidemiologists who were working in India at that time were facing a worsening and very serious epidemic. The simple preventive message to public health workers and the public was: exterminate the rats. The identification of medieval plague as the same disease as modern plague was accepted within thirty years, first by medical scientists and later by historians. Cohn writes, “Without argument, historians and scientists have taken the epidemiology of the modern plague and imposed it on the past, ignoring, denying, even changing contemporary testimony, both narrative and quantitative, when it conflicts with notions of how modern bubonic plague should behave.”2 I agree to some extent with Cohn's criticism of how historians have imposed a modern understanding of plague epidemics in India on historical epidemics, and especially how historians have invented large populations of rats in the medieval towns and countryside of northern Europe without any support from contemporary historical sources or archaeology.3 However, I strongly disagree with his main point, which is that the medieval and modern plague epidemics must have involved different diseases in medical and bacteriological terms. Thus, I argue that Yersinia pestis is the cause of both medieval bubonic plague and modern bubonic plague, and that the symptoms, signs, pathology and pathophysiology are very similar. On the other hand, the two series may have differed in speed of transmission, population mortality and some other epidemiological characteristics because of differences in climate, housing conditions, the availability and population density of flea species and other possible insect vectors, and the availability of susceptible mammals other than rats. Cohn's main arguments are as follows: There is a lack of evidence of involvement of rats and fleas (Xenopsylla cheopis) in late-","PeriodicalId":74144,"journal":{"name":"Medical history. Supplement","volume":"1 1","pages":"59 - 73"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2008-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0025727300072094","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"57088938","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 31

1 Universal and Particular: The Language of Plague, 1348–1500 1普遍与特殊:瘟疫的语言，1348-1500

Medical history. Supplement Pub Date : 2008-01-01 DOI: 10.1017/S0025727300072070

A. Carmichael

{"title":"1 Universal and Particular: The Language of Plague, 1348–1500","authors":"A. Carmichael","doi":"10.1017/S0025727300072070","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025727300072070","url":null,"abstract":"What disease or diseases caused the recurrent, demographically punishing epidemics that Europeans called plague? During the last twenty years a once prevalent historical consensus about causes and consequences of European plagues has dissolved, prompting new archival research as well as novel technological and interdisciplinary approaches to material evidence. The core debates about the history of plague are not, however, limited to scholars of medieval and early modern Europe. Molecular biologists over the last decade have determined that the organism that causes plague today, Yersinia pestis, is a relatively recent emergent pathogen descended from a significantly less lethal gastro-intestinal parasite, Yersinia pseudotuberculosis. Furthermore, fifty years ago microbiologists accepted a model of three different “biovars”—biochemically different variants—of Yersinia pestis, which were tidily aligned to three historical pandemic waves: antiqua, mediaevalis, and orientalis. That synthesis, too, is seriously challenged. There are instead at least eight Yersinia pestis strains and four biovars, and all have emerged within the last 5000 to 20,000 years.1 This organism remains a likely perpetrator of the great plagues in Europe because all Yersinia pestis biovars can be extraordinarily lethal in human bodies. Most medievalists, including those who doubt that the Black Death and subsequent plagues could have been caused by Yersinia pestis, make a modern assumption that the Black Death indeed had some unique microbial cause. No one yet has argued in a sustained fashion that the plague was a “perfect storm” of many different epidemic infectious diseases, but one could.2 Nor has a radical scepticism emerged—for example, that the causes of each and every local or regional epidemic called peste/pestilentia by contemporaries need to be investigated separately, unrelated to other local contexts—but that, too, might be possible. If we would be truly rigorous, we cannot assume that a “plague” in one place was due to the same specific microbial cause as a pestilence in another locality, even during this worst of all recorded pandemics. There needs to be evidence for such a claim. During the High Middle Ages Europe was thickly settled, but profoundly rural; great cities were exceptional, and regional markets were not well integrated.3 In the early modern centuries, market centres were far better connected: a significant epidemiological difference. Scholars, nevertheless, analyse individually later medieval and early modern pestilences, accepting local differences and local historical contexts. Nor do most maintain that, given one location, all the sizeable pestilences over these later centuries were necessarily due to the same cause. Historians simply do not accept that “plague” (peste) had or has one universal translation applicable over both time and space—except when we consider the Black Death. In other words, some of the doubts expressed in recent years","PeriodicalId":74144,"journal":{"name":"Medical history. Supplement","volume":"1 1","pages":"17 - 52"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2008-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0025727300072070","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"57088496","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 17

The language of plague and its regional perspectives: the case of medieval Germany. 鼠疫语言及其地域视角:以中世纪德国为例。

Medical history. Supplement Pub Date : 2008-01-01

Kay Peter Jankrift

引用次数: 0