Black Death vs Bubonic Plague

[lazserus]

Between 1347 and 1350 a pandemic swept across Europe killing nearly two thirds of the continent's population. In merely three years Europe's population was nearly decimated. The pandemic's title is well known and bookmarks a page in history that shows humans how fragile we are, and how easily we can be wiped out. The title is none other than the Black Death. In just three years Europe's population was almost destroyed, but most history teachers fail to mention that Asia (China in particular) suffered the same fate and same loss of life. In under a decade a large majority of half the world was dead.

Bubonic plague is the modern name given to the Black Death, yet research newly enlightened shows that the two were not the same. Bubonic plague is not only some rare pestilence that challenged humanity in the early middle ages, but still quite active today. Bubonic plague is spread through parasites, particularly fleas. In history we see a common trend, which is the presence of rats. A lot of cases of bubonic plague outbreaks can start with the discovery of large quantities of dead rats. When associating Black Death with bubonic plague in history there are mostly probabilities and possibilities, but nothing concrete. We have to deduce in order to find the answers.

The outbreak of the Black Death in Europe points to one battle, the siege of Caffa. The Italians and Genovese and Mongols fought over control of a valuable trading city called Caffa. In 1346 the Mongols wanted to take control of Caffa and laid siege on the city. During such a siege the Mongols would catapult diseased cadavers into Caffa. Though the actual siege was unsuccessful for the Mongols, the Genovese survivors fled the city west spreading the sickness. Records imply that Genovese traders ported at Messina and were either dead or infected. When thinking bubonic historians would naturally assume there were rats on the docking vessels. The rats and their fleas caused the spread of the illness. The puzzle has ambiguous edges, thus more than a single piece fits.

There are several reasons Black Death and bubonic plague don't fit together. The weakest link, yet strongest evidence lies within the theory of transmission by rat. There is no question that rats spread bubonic plague. That fact alone supports the theory that Black Death was not bubonic. Rats, the primary carriers of bubonic plague, could not reasonably spread a disease like Black Death.

Black Death, though majority of recorded symptoms match bubonic symptoms, was spread too quickly to be bubonic. Aside from rats not straying far from their nests, the Black Death was spread across the continent via roads and riverways, geographical barriers that would restrict rodents.

Granted much more information on this subject is on hand, I'd like for you all to mull it over and discuss. No point in starting and closing a thread in the same stroke.

[Smoke]

thats pretty cool history of the 2 but that is so creepy catapulting the diseased bodies into the towns, can you imagine oh god... it gives me chills.

Its just like primitive biological warfare.

awsome post laz, I really mean it ha ha

but how did the disease come about? and the mongols must have been dealing with it for a while to know of its effects.

Where did it originate does any one know?

[jinxz]

A few things I've heard about the bubonic plague...

It can spread to the lungs where it becomes pneumonic plague, which is transmittable directly from person to person. Sort of like the new bird flu; we can only catch it from birds right now, but it's possible it can mutate and start spreading solely in the human population.

Also, bubonic plague germs attack the white blood cells and lymph nodes, just like HIV. And amazingly, just like HIV, it entered the white blood cells through the same protein gate in the cell membranes. Some people have mutated genes that make the proteins that control this gate. If they have one of these mutant genes, they're resistant to both bubonic plague and HIV. If they have two of these mutant genes, their protein gates are impermeable to the viruses, rendering them IMMUNE to bubonic plague and HIV. A significant minority of the European and Asian descended population on Earth today have one or more of these mutant genes (because their ancestors survived and had offspring - Thank You, Natural Selection!). This is one more reason the AIDS epidemic has been especially harsh in Africa (the other major one being the lack of prophylactics) - their ancestors did not get selected on the basis of immunity or resistance to bubonic plague.

[Smoke]

thisstuff is so interenting, jinxz i dont want to sound like an ass or anything but do you have any proof of these gateways things that make certain people resistant to hiv and the plague and new age bird flu ect.

im quite interested in this.

[jinxz]

Yeah, I should have thought somebody would want some proof of this. It's something I learned years ago from Nova so I didn't look anything up about it before I posted.

Here's a really brief piece backing up what I said. (http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf119/sf119p05.htm) It seems I should ammend my earlier comment - the Asian population with this resistance/immunity are a very small minority.

[lazserus]

Yeah, I should have thought somebody would want some proof of this. It's something I learned years ago from Nova so I didn't look anything up about it before I posted.

Here's a really brief piece backing up what I said. (http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf119/sf119p05.htm) It seems I should ammend my earlier comment - the Asian population with this resistance/immunity are a very small minority.
I saw the information and it was pretty silly. You and I are both historians, J-dawg, but I don't think I can follow this. Though, some of the questions can be answered.

Yersinia Pestis is the name of the bacterium that is associated with bubonic plague. However, bubonic is a version strictly associated with spreading via rodents, pneumonic plague when spread by inhaling bacteria, and finally septicemic plague when transferred through physical contact. Mortality rates decrease in respects to modes of transmission, believe it or not. Therefore, bubonic (rodent spread) plague has a much higher mortality rate than any other classification as far as history is concerned.

Though I won't refute jinxz's data, I will refute associated period of infection. All recent data points away from bubonic plague during the Black Death pandemic. During that period rats were common-place and thus lazy historians laid blame on them.

Bubonic plague symptoms, though nearly identical with half a dozen other diseases, could not have reasonably spread as quickly and vastly being carried by rodents. Black Death was spread through roads and riverways where rodents could not traverse and humans frequently did. Modern research and studies in rodents sucseptible to contracting bubonic plague tell us it would be impossible for them to spread the pestilence over a large area, especially in so short of time.

As far was where Black Death originated is open to conjecture. All fingers point to Asia as the haven, but no one knows the actual source or start.

[evilwill]

From what I remember of the Black Death from my Year 9 history days, this all sounds right.

I remember coming across information about the Black Death being broken into several strains, one of them airborne as jinxz mentioned.

When you do think about it, it does some quite unlikely that rats could spread such a disease all over Europe so quickly.

It's been years since I've done any research on this but my little theory was that the rats were the initial spreaders of the plague and once it got into the water supply (and possibly the air itself) it could very easily infect the population of a city. Then it would be easy enough for people themselves to spread the plague around.

I know very little about the nature of the disease itself, but would it be possible for someone to solely be a carrier? I ask this because I figure once someone contracted the plague they weren't about to be running off anywhere as it was commonly known how infectious the plague was and the symptomns themselves would have prevented long distance travel.

[Perfectionist]

So the people that survived the Black Death had some kind of immunity ..... does that mean that disease can wipe out a huge proportion of humanity but there will always be a few people who will survive and re-populate the earth ??

[lycanox]

Yep, Offcource there has to be enough people alive to prevent inbreeding.

[The Space Pope]

http://infectioncontrol.ucsfmedicalcenter.org/Bioterrorism_Info_/Plague_Exposure_Guidelines/plague_exposure_guidelines.html

Scroll down to Treatment/Outcome. If untreated, pneumonic plague is highly fatal. It also spreads easily person to person. It may or may not have been the Black Death, but I think that it would be capable of that kind of spread rate and mass destruction. Also septicemic is not transferred by touch. It is an infection of the blood itself, as opposed to the lymph nodes like with bubonic. Septicemic plague will only be spread by contact with blood, I'm fairly sure.

[donniedarko]

With regard to the CCR5-delta32 mutation, here is a link to the news article published in Nature (can't link the actual journal article/many of you would find the actual article a bit difficult to read).

http://www.nature.com/news/2005/050307/full/050307-15.html

This is another paper refuting the claim that the Black Death was the leading cause of the increase in CCR5-delta32 frequency.

http://qjmed.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/99/8/497

Suffice it to say however, that CCR5 is indeed the portal to the cell for HIV and there a numerous documented cases of people with mutations in one or both of the CCR5 alleles having increased resistance (to near immunity) to HIV.

[uki]

but most history teachers fail to mention..no kidding.



The puzzle has ambiguous edges, thus more than a single piece fits.probably because it was a combination of many circumstances and haphazards.



Aside from rats not straying far from their nests, the Black Death was spread across the continent via roads and riverways, geographical barriers that would restrict rodents.a list of likely scenarios; infected people and bodies that were unaware of having the disease, perhaps delayed symptoms in resilient people with a heartier than average immune system. rats had nests near river docks and in merchant wharehouses; unknowing caravans shipped via land and sea contained whole nests of rats who were living in imports and exports... crates, boxes, within ship walls, etc. with the rivers being a primary mode of transportaion, the disease would spread very swiftly. the process would continue in every town for the most part, with the infection arriving unknowingly, contaminating the local rat population, and so forth... of course there are many other possibilities... but for the rats, this is most likely what has given popularity to the spread of any disease that can be transmitted by rodents during that specific time period in society.

[uki]

thisstuff is so interenting, jinxz i dont want to sound like an ass or anything but do you have any proof of these gateways things that make certain people resistant to hiv and the plague and new age bird flu ect.
when a human body is subjectated to certain frequencies of light and energy, the genetic material fires up previously junk DNA. people who seem to have certain abilities beyond the average human is do to having more DNA strands operating than the average double helix strand as in most people. DNA is like an operating code for the mind and body. when it does not have the proper protiens and molecules combined with the right frequencies of information(light), it will remain dormant and an undesired genetic disorder will surface, kind of like a computer virus. the more DNA strands(up to 12) that are turned on, the more properly functioning human one's body will be... hence the ability to resist bubonic plague and HIV.

[TC]

Yup, it was the fleas on the rats that were the primary, the rat just got the bad rep.




( I just happen to like rats....)

[Protostar]

My question is if it takes months for your body to produce the antibodies to fight hiv viral infection, <which is how you prove that you have it> how can anyone be resistant or near resistant to it?
Hell, you wouldn't know you have the virus until these antibodies appear. So,
how can there be proof that someone is resistant or not? You either have it or you
don't.

I have often wondered if there is a possibility that the medevil warming period
was some how responsible for the spread of both of these illnesses.
as our earth warmed up it released all kinds of things into the atmosphere and could have some how helped it spread or mutate.
It sounds far-fetched sure but even species today are mutating in strange ways...

Oddly enough, the journal of nature just published a report that the earth, in the last 3 months, had a mean temperature higher than any consecutive 3 months
for the last 500 yrs. http://www.nature.com/news/2006/061204/full/061204-2.html

[donniedarko]

when a human body is subjectated to certain frequencies of light and energy, the genetic material fires up previously junk DNA. people who seem to have certain abilities beyond the average human is do to having more DNA strands operating than the average double helix strand as in most people. DNA is like an operating code for the mind and body. when it does not have the proper protiens and molecules combined with the right frequencies of information(light), it will remain dormant and an undesired genetic disorder will surface, kind of like a computer virus. the more DNA strands(up to 12) that are turned on, the more properly functioning human one's body will be... hence the ability to resist bubonic plague and HIV.

LMFAO!!! I can't believe I missed this. Uki, where do you get this stuff?! You couldn't be more wrong if you tried.

[TC]

when a human body is subjectated to certain frequencies of light and energy, the genetic material fires up previously junk DNA. people who seem to have certain abilities beyond the average human is do to having more DNA strands operating than the average double helix strand as in most people. DNA is like an operating code for the mind and body. when it does not have the proper protiens and molecules combined with the right frequencies of information(light), it will remain dormant and an undesired genetic disorder will surface, kind of like a computer virus. the more DNA strands(up to 12) that are turned on, the more properly functioning human one's body will be... hence the ability to resist bubonic plague and HIV.


Friends, is junk DNA giving you that heavy feeling? Weeell have we got a deal for you.

DR. Uki's patented DNA energizer! simply place this wonder of science "Light Frequency modulator" up the ol poop chute, and turn that useless DNA into super human ability! Why wait, our operators are standing by.

*Not sold in stores or shops / vaseline and batteries not included.

[uki]

*Not sold in stores or shops / vaseline and batteries not included.perhaps you are a fan of keeping it on the down low yo?!?!? your sense of humour clearly shows the parallels of being someone who saw the den of the pen.

[B.NyeTheUruk-Hai]

LMFAO!!! I can't believe I missed this. Uki, where do you get this stuff?! You couldn't be more wrong if you tried. I'm with DD here. Where the hell do you get this stuff from, uki?


when a human body is subjectated to certain frequencies of light and energy Which frequencies of light? What types of energy?


the genetic material fires up previously junk DNA Obviously, this has been observed. Can you link to an experiment whereby such a process was observed?


DNA is like an operating code for the mind and body. Wrong. DNA is simply a blueprint that tells the cell how to make proteins. That's IT...


hence the ability to resist bubonic plague and HIV. Obviously, an experiment was done to confirm this claim, otherwise you wouldn't post it as fact now would you, uki? Please link to this experiment...


Friends, is junk DNA giving you that heavy feeling? Weeell have we got a deal for you.

DR. Uki's patented DNA energizer! simply place this wonder of science "Light Frequency modulator" up the ol poop chute, and turn that useless DNA into super human ability! Why wait, our operators are standing by.

*Not sold in stores or shops / vaseline and batteries not included. HAHAHAHAHAAA!!! Nice!

[MCR Freak]

I thought the Black death killed one third of it's population? :nerdo: :confused:

[Apollo]

This is what I remember of pathophysiology class, with references to the good ol' notebook:

Background: The plague has been responsible for at least 3 great pandemics and multiple epidemics in history. The first spread occurred from the Middle East to the Mediterranean basin during the fifth and sixth centuries A.D., killing approximately 50% of the population in these areas. The second pandemic afflicted Europe between the 8th and 14th centuries, destroying nearly 40% of the population. The third pandemic started in approximately 1855 in China, and, although it has been mostly controlled, it is still ongoing.

Pathogen: Yersinia pestis
Facultative anaerobic, intracellular, gram-negative bacillus.

Vector: Most commonly Xenopsylla cheopis (Rat flea).
Rodents resistant to the infection form an enzootic stage that ensures the long-term survival of the bacillus. Occasionally, the infected animals are not resistant to the disease and die. This is known as an epizootic stage and ensures the spread of the organism to new territory. A sylvatic stage occurs when humans are infected from wild animals.

Transmission: Bacillus proliferates in the flea's esophagus, preventing food entry into the stomach. To overcome starvation, the flea begins a blood-sucking rampage. Between its attempts to swallow, the distended bacillus-packed esophagus recoils, depositing the bacillus into the victim's skin.

Three forms of the plague exist: bubonic plague, pneumonic plague, and septicemic plague.

Bubonic Plague: Involves the pathognomonic “bubo” and is caused by deposition of the bacillus in the skin by the bite of an infected vector. The bacillus invades nearby lymphoid tissue, producing the famous bubo, an inflamed, necrotic, and hemorrhagic lymph node. These would most often be observed in the inguinal region. Spread occurs along the lymphatic channels toward the thoracic duct, with eventual seeding of the vasculature. Bacteremia and septicemia ensue. The bacillus potentially seeds every organ, including the lungs, liver, spleen, kidneys, and rarely even the meninges.

Pneumonic plague results from direct inhalation of the bacillus, which occurs from close contact of infected hosts or from aerosolized bacteria such as may occur if used as a biological weapon. A severe and rapidly progressive multilobar bronchopneumonia ensues with subsequent bacteremia and septicemia.

Primary septicemic plague Occurs when the bacillus is deposited in the vasculature, bypassing the lymphatics. Early dissemination with sepsis occurs but without the formation of a bubo. This usually is observed in bites to the oral, tonsillar, and pharyngeal area and is believed to occur because of the vascularity of the tissue and short lymphatic distance to the thoracic duct. This type is the most likely candidate for many of the Genovese mentioned in the above reference.

Treatment: A simple antibiotic regimen (Gentamicin, Chloromycetin, Doxycycline, Ciprofloxacin, Tetracycline, Co-trimoxizole) - is successful in approximately 85-99% of afflicted. Hospitalization and quarantine mandatory. All in contact must also be notified, screened, and monitored for 1-6 days from onset of symptoms in initial vehicle.

The plague was often referred to as the Black Death because of the extreme cyanotic (blue) appearance of the corpses that had been affected. Therefore, I would not say that the two could be viewed as two separate afflictions.

[Rynotek]

Well a new-age crusty chick, more or less the modern equivilent, tried to convince me that because of a fear of witches at the time, cats would be killed and therefore the rat population grew considerably allowing the plague to dig its heels in, this is a load of tosh i know, as it takes a good sized Jack russell to give a rat a run for its money, but i though it was a interesting spin on the whole thing.

Refering to the HIV imunity, here is an articule in nature re: same.
http://www.nature.com/news/2005/050307/full/050307-15.html

chow

[The Fallen]

I personally believe that the plagues spread by rat fleas were the Goddess smiting down the overly Christian european continent. Hear me out before you start a flame war.

Black cats have long been considered unlucky by christians, as witches in disguise, familiars, demons, etc. As such it was a common custom to kill black cats upon sight for fear that they were one of the aforementioned evil forces - it was seen as a christian duty to the world, and still is to some, (I talked to someone once who still kills black cats each chance they get - I so would have beat their ass had there not been cops nearby). The spread of this practice resulted in millions of cats being killed across Christendom - not just black ones, but even partly black ones, or not black at all.

Now, what happens when a predator is removed from a foodchain? The population of the former foodsource grows - in this case, rats. Rats spreading disease carrying fleas.

On to the Goddess part - cats are avatars of the Goddess, as evidenced in the Egyptian reverence for cats and the Goddess Bast. This was another reason black cats were considered unlucky and evil. So the Goddess took personal offense at this and smote the world.

Im curious what others have to say to this.

[The Wicked Priest]

I personally believe that the plagues spread by rat fleas were the Goddess smiting down the overly Christian european continent. Hear me out before you start a flame war.

Black cats have long been considered unlucky by christians, as witches in disguise, familiars, demons, etc. As such it was a common custom to kill black cats upon sight for fear that they were one of the aforementioned evil forces - it was seen as a christian duty to the world, and still is to some, (I talked to someone once who still kills black cats each chance they get - I so would have beat their ass had there not been cops nearby). The spread of this practice resulted in millions of cats being killed across Christendom - not just black ones, but even partly black ones, or not black at all.

Now, what happens when a predator is removed from a foodchain? The population of the former foodsource grows - in this case, rats. Rats spreading disease carrying fleas.

On to the Goddess part - cats are avatars of the Goddess, as evidenced in the Egyptian reverence for cats and the Goddess Bast. This was another reason black cats were considered unlucky and evil. So the Goddess took personal offense at this and smote the world.

Im curious what others have to say to this.

This is very true... except the church didn't deem them unlucky, they deemed them agents of the devil. And not just cats either... wolves, snakes, foxes, chickens and white cocks. To make matters worse, the church licensed doctors to kill cats and dogs in time of plague, thinking that this would halt infection.

[The Fallen]

This is very true... except the church didn't deem them unlucky, they deemed them agents of the devil. And not just cats either... wolves, snakes, foxes, chickens and white cocks. To make matters worse, the church licensed doctors to kill cats and dogs in time of plague, thinking that this would halt infection.

My use of the term unlucky was a bleed-in to the modern religion-free superstition of black cats being unlucky.

As to the other animals you point out, there are interesting coincidences:

Wolves - with their ears and dog-like shape, the similarity to a jackal, the depiction of Anubis, one prominent God seen as a particular aspect of the Horned God, (in this case the horns being seen in the large, upright ears).

Snakes - The most common water-bound avatar of the Goddess is a seasnake.

Foxes - again, similar to the wolf thing.

There was something else for the other two, but I am too tired to remember.

***goes to bed***

[phedrereine]

There are several reasons Black Death and bubonic plague don't fit together. The weakest link, yet strongest evidence lies within the theory of transmission by rat. There is no question that rats spread bubonic plague. That fact alone supports the theory that Black Death was not bubonic. Rats, the primary carriers of bubonic plague, could not reasonably spread a disease like Black Death.

No, I believe this is wrong.

First of all, you have to remember that this was the first thrust of bubonic plague to hit Europe. The populace would have had very low levels of immunity, having never been exposed to it before. You can see examples of this throughout history, such as how Native Americans were almost decimated by diseases brought over by Europeans, like small pox and tuberculosis and even tamer diseases that Europeans had long weathered and from which had obtained a certain level of protection by means of natural selction. But the Native Americans had no such previous exposure, which spelled their doom.

Second, by 1347 Europe was already vulnerable and unstable as a result of the Little Ice Age, which had begun around 1300, bringing harsher winters, reducing livestock and seriously weakening the harvests of wheat, oat and barley on which Europe had heavily depended throughout the Medieval Warming Period. Suddenly there was an overabundant population and not enough food to feed it, which brought the Great Famine in 1315, the worst in European history, killing 10% of the population. Those who were fortunate enough to scrape by did so with malnutrition which led to weakened immune systems. It did not help either France or England that the Hundred Years War had begun around 1337 and the first battle, the Battle of Crecy, happened in 1346. So not only were prices for grains and supplies skyrocketing, along with landowners demanding higher rent from their tenants, but Edward III and Philip VI were also draining finances for warfare. Europe, especially Northwestern Europe, which would be hit hardest by the plague, was teetering to the edge of its limits.

China was also taking the toll as a result of famine and war. From 1271 until 1368 they were forced to sumbit to Mongol rule and so suffered from upset trading and farming. Sixty million people died from famine alone. When the plague hit in the 1330's, a third of the population was ultimately wiped out.

Third, you admitted yourself that fleas carrying Yersinia pestis are the culprits. The black rats were merely the vehicle. Well, fleas don't just confine themselves to rats, you know. Once the rats died, the fleas could jump to dogs or cats or humans. And from there, human to human. And on it goes. Besides that, there is no better agent to spread disease than rats. I think you're underestimating the numbers of rats in cities and big towns in the fourteenth century. Have you been to a big city in this day and age? Yeah, there are still a lot of rats. Luckily we're not walking in our sewers, or we would see just how many rats there are. Now imagine an overpopulated Medieval city that has lost all of the knowledge and concern for hygiene that the Greeks and Romans once had, in which everyone is living in close, cramped quarters, where your neighbor's urine and feces are literally tossed out the window (look out below!), where excrement is often found in drinking wells, and where the poor hardly bathe, and when they do, it's often in rivers like the Thames and the Seine, which were veritable sesspools. I mean, there were mud puddles of excrement on the street. In other words, it was a non-stop party for rats. If there's a creature that loves to feed on excrement, it's the rat, and how easy for them to bring their ticks and fleas into human contact.

It's no mystery that cities were hit hardest, and the country was largely spared. Those who were wealthy enough could flee to the country, but the poor had no such luck. They were trapped in those close, dirty quarters, sometimes ten people to a room, walking in rat-infested streets, who had never been exposed to such a disease, who were already struggling to survive in deplorable social and economic conditions and who had very poor health to begin with... No, of course it's no wonder that bubonic plage spread like wildfire! I'm frankly surprised more people didn't die. It's amazing. And notice, those who were able to stay away from heavily-populated areas and maintain a certain level of cleanliness in secluded areas (country houses of the rich, for example, or certain monasteries that had purifying tanks and running water) mostly survived. In 1348, The Plantagenets isolated themselves at Windsor, I believe it was, from the Plague and survived (except the Princess Joan, who died on her wedding night just a few days after arriving at Bordeaux). Those who could maintain hygiene and isolation, who did not allow people in or out of their sanctuary, and thus kept carriers of fleas away, survived. Most people could not do that successfully. So of course it ran rampant.

Fourth, and this is no surprise, it has been found that rats' blood is capable of holding large amounts of Yersinia pestis.

Fifth, this bacteria has been found in the DNA of the teeth of Black Death victims. And the symptoms that were recorded fit the bill. The pus-filled buboes, fever, aching joints, dying within 4-8 days? That sure sounds like bubonic plague to me. What the hell else could it be? Besides, the blood-filled sputum and coughing would be pneumonic plague, which is caused by an advanced infection resulting from bubonic plague. It is recorded that those who coughed blood always died.

Sixth, this makes complete sense in how and why the plague tapered off. So many people died, mostly in urbanized areas, so that the cities themselves were not so crowded and filth-ridden. This meant less fodder for rats, and so they declined, as well. Not to mention the fact that those who survived were better able to withstand a plague the next time it came around, and they were also healthier, because there was more food available per individual, not to mention less peasants; this was the beginning of the collapse of serfdom throughout Europe. By the eighteenth century, plague epidemics waned and ended, most likely because of the increasingly improved sewage systems in cities and better hygienic levels overall.

So, yes, of course rats could easily spread the Black Death. This is not a lazy assumption on the part of historians. This is incredibly reasonable.

[I Believe]

They are one in the same...

[Spectrum]

Speaking of the Black Death there is an opinion it was done by human means, apparently in Turkey there was this gypsy population, the usual reasons given for marginalising them, anyway apparently in the ME at the time they were less susceptible to the infection, but the sultan decided one fine day to deport them, guess where to,.... (yes Europe)
Probably the first case of bio warfare! the rats were probably aboard the ship as well, the clue is that the Turks were very bureaucratic and the archive on events surrounding this period are sketchy, but valid clues remain.

[lycanox]

Interesting, the Jews were also deported towards ghettos at that time.
They were even forced to wear a yellow mark to be recognizable.

The Jewish traditions happen to have a positive effect on local hygiene. Which gave Jews a better chance than the more filthy living christians. And such advantages are just what people needed to accuse the Jews of witchcraft.

[phedrereine]

The Jewish traditions happen to have a positive effect on local hygiene. Which gave Jews a better chance than the more filthy living christians. And such advantages are just what people needed to accuse the Jews of witchcraft.

This is very true. It would be so interesting to look at the records at this time, to see the number of Jewish deaths versus Christian deaths. You would see many more Christian deaths from plague, and many accounts of Jews being tortured and burned alive.

The Christian beliefs at the time were woefully misguided in averting the plague. Some people thought sweet, herbal smells would ward it off. Others thought awful smells would do the trick, and covered themselves in excrement (the worst thing they could do). The Flagellants traveled from town to town, increasing their chance of exposure and spreading the plague to the towns themselves. Nobles swallowed jewels and precious stones. I remember reading about a bishop who kept bonfires burning night and day in his study in the hope that it would ward off the "miasmas" that caused the plague. He did not escape it. People were told to wash their hands and feet, but not their body, as that would open the pores to the poisonous vapors in the air. Then, of course, medieval doctors practiced bleeding, which did nothing but weaken the victim. I don't think most Christians realized that simple hygiene was the best answer; they were too focused on superstitions and penitence.

Meanwhile, the Jews refused to drink from city wells as this violated kosher laws; they drank from country springs. And it actually only increased the Jews' survival rate when suspicious cities closed their doors to them. Zurich was the first, and persecution was widespread throughout Germany and Switzerland. Instead of believing in the notion that a black cloud caused the Black Death, many Christians began instead pointing the finger of blame either at the Church, their own sins, or the Jews --- and the Jews were, as always, the easiest target of all.

[medicvet]

fascinating thread...sorry I didn't read it sooner. Isn't it ironic how many of the worlds ills have been laid upon the Joooooos, when if the same practices of the Jews were adhered to, many more would have survived. Proving once again, that ignorance isn't bliss..it's fatal.

[rdhdangel]

The Christian beliefs at the time were woefully misguided in averting the plague. Some people thought sweet, herbal smells would ward it off. Others thought awful smells would do the trick, and covered themselves in excrement (the worst thing they could do). The Flagellants traveled from town to town, increasing their chance of exposure and spreading the plague to the towns themselves. Nobles swallowed jewels and precious stones. I remember reading about a bishop who kept bonfires burning night and day in his study in the hope that it would ward off the "miasmas" that caused the plague. He did not escape it. People were told to wash their hands and feet, but not their body, as that would open the pores to the poisonous vapors in the air. Then, of course, medieval doctors practiced bleeding, which did nothing but weaken the victim. I don't think most Christians realized that simple hygiene was the best answer; they were too focused on superstitions and penitence.

ring around the rosie was the song they made about the black death. they used to put possies in their pocket to cover the smell of rotting flesh, the sores that were in the shape of a ring on their bodies. and they would die quickly, and all would fall down.

people used to do all kinds of things to ward away the black plauge, alot of the religious people thought that it was god means of punishing them for thier sins, and there was a group that actually purged, (scourging) themselves because of that beliefe.

i read about the bishop that continually kept bon fires in his quarters to try and keep from dying. actually bateria grows in heat and warm places. if anything he speed up the process of catchng the plauge.

at the time they had no knowledge of science and all people looked to the church for a divine answer. therefore all the studies they did at the time were wrong. the cures they did try were based off false beliefs.

i read about healers going around the sick completely covered head to toe in hooded garnments to prevent the disease from coming in contact with them while they took the dead and tried treating the dying.

if the black plauge was spread by fleas, why dont we see so many cases of it now. i think it is very possible that as humans grew more immune, the bacteria devoloped into a new disease such as aids or meleria.

[phedrereine]

ring around the rosie was the song they made about the black death. they used to put possies in their pocket to cover the smell of rotting flesh, the sores that were in the shape of a ring on their bodies. and they would die quickly, and all would fall down.

Actually, that's most likely not true. The first printed version of "Ring Around the Rosie" appeared in 1881, which means that children would have been repeating it for five centuries before it was printed. That's highly unlikely. Furthermore, the first solid interpretation that the nursery rhyme was about the plague at all did not appear until 1961.

There's another theory that the rhyme refers to how Protestants would try to bypass the ban on dancing with "play-parties," also known as ring games. Only modern versions use "Ashes, ashes," whereas older ones use "Husha, husha," referring to the ring of dancers stopping and hushing in quiet, and then "we all fall down" -- letting go of each other and falling down in the circle.

http://www.snopes.com/language/literary/rosie.asp


people used to do all kinds of things to ward away the black plauge, alot of the religious people thought that it was god means of punishing them for thier sins, and there was a group that actually purged, (scourging) themselves because of that beliefe.

Yes.. Flagellant groups arose all over northern and central Europe by 1349, and they never stayed long in any one place, which only spread the plague faster.


if the black plauge was spread by fleas, why dont we see so many cases of it now.

Because rats, the carriers, where extremely pervasive in populated areas throughout the Middle Ages. Note that the Black Death was virulent in great cities. This is because not only were people packed in tightly together, but because there were more rats. There were no sewage systems to speak of. Excrement filled rivers, and was literally tossed onto the street to boot. Rats thrive on excrement. So they were common place, as were fleas. All it took was a single flea bite, and if the bacteria spread to your lungs and you developed pneumonic plague, you could spread it to others merely by coughing.

Not to mention the Great Famine of 1315-1317 and the onset of the Little Ice Age, and conditions caused by warfare in China and Europe, which made populations more susceptible, as I've suggested..

Take into account, too, that many people had no idea how to prevent the plague, instead guided by superstition, as you've pointed out. Some bathed in urine or wore excrement to ward it off, and even during the Great Plague of London 300 years later, which killed 100,000, people still believed that wearing herbs or religious symbols would ward it off. And sanitation among the poor was deplorable by our standards. Some peasants only bathed once a year.


i think it is very possible that as humans grew more immune, the bacteria devoloped into a new disease such as aids or meleria.

Yes, survivors did tend to acquire a higher resistance towards the plague, and seemed to have passed on those genes to future generations. That's another reason, I believe, why there aren't as many cases today. Leprosy, too, which has been around for over 2,000 years, is more difficult to contract, and it's believed that this is because people have developed immunities towards it.

Bubonic Plague could not have developed from malaria. Malaria has been active for over 50,000 years, much older than the Plague, which only made its first recorded appearance in the 6th century's Plague of Justinian.

I'm not sold on AIDS, because the contraction, symptoms and course of the disease are so different, but it could be possible. Those who have less chemokine receptors on the surface of cells have less of a chance of contracting HIV, and this genetic quirk has been found at greater levels in European populations, the same that suffered from the Plague:

http://www.darwinawards.com/science/bubonic.html

But then how do you explain the high prevalence of HIV in Asia (5 million affected as opposed to less than a million in Europe), which took just as great of a blow from their Plague in the 1330's as Europe did from 1346-1350?

Also, there is the theory that bubonic plague ultimately originated in Africa, as did AIDS, so there is that association, and yet Africa is by far and away the most afflicted by AIDS than any other region in the world. If AIDS developed from Bubonic Plague, wouldn't Africans have a higher immunity, then?

[chillax33]

Interesting thread, pity didn't see this sooner. I personally don't think the two were the same for a few reasons: as previously mentioned rats, specifically the black rat are carriers of the flea which are vital for disease transmission. The spread of Black death (100 miles in only a few days) is far to rapid to have been a bubonic plague. Also Black death arrived in Iceland with no rat population. Britain was affected by the black death yet black rats rarely enter inland rural britain. The temperature needed for the flea to hatch ~18C not persistent in britain therefore it could not have spread throughout.

I know someone suggested pneumonic plague did not need rats (can't remember who sorry) but symptoms of Black death included bubobes on the skin which are not seen with the pneumonic form of the disease. Person to person transmission was also seen in Black death, not true for bubonic plague, rats needed.

The incubation period for both diseases differ also, Black death had an incubation period of about ~32 days,( latent period for 12 and infectious for 20) whereas bubonic plague has an incubation period of about 5-6 days. The death rate for bubonic plague is also far lower than Black death.

The black death shows similarity with modern african haemorrhagic fever such as marburg and ebola suggesting african origin.
Bit late on the reply but hope my arguements seem plausible :)