Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

Ancient and ArchaeologyΒ  permalink

The Black Death

• Message 1.Β 

  Posted by Stephen (U14751372) on Wednesday, 12th January 2011

  In Michael Wood's 'The Story of England' (which I have only just seen on DVD) he seems to accept that the Black Death was an outbreak of bubonic plague carried by rat fleas. I was under the impression that recent research, particularly that done by Susan Scott and Christopher Duncan, has provided almost conclusive evidence that this was not the case. What is the current 'state of play'?

  Link to this forum: The Black Death

  Report message1

• Message 2

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Thursday, 13th January 2011

  Hi Stephen
  
  Retrospective medical diagnosis is much more difficult than some people believe! Ideally for mass deaths you need a highly infective agent coupled with a long period of symptomless incubation to allow for spread. There are some aspects of the Black Death that closely resemble the 'modern' Bubonic Plague. This disease can produce buboes (swollen lymph nodes) and black patches of skin caused by intravascular coagulation. Since 40-60% victims die if untreated the disease can certainly account for the large human casualties. The vector is thought to have been the black rat (Rattus rattus). The replacement of this creature by the brown rat (Rattus norvegicus) is one possible cause of the disappearance of epidemic plague from Europe. The black rat is said to be a better climber and more habituated to living close to man.
  
  The arguments against this identification are that the Black Death killed very quickly, victims were said to have 'eaten lunch with their friends and dinner with their ancestors'. There really doesn't seem to have been time for the disease to have spread into a wild population of new animal hosts so the historical descriptions sound more like a direct person to person spread. No ancient author records the expected preceding mass death of rats although the disease is reported as affecting other animals (Florence: dogs, cats, chickens, oxen, donkeys, sheep). Areas without a rodent population (eg Iceland) experienced severe outbreaks (50% mortality) of the Black Death. The cycles of recurrence (5-15 years) noted with historic plague are not a feature of the modern disease (annual deaths). This probably indicates that immunity developed to the historic plague, but not to modern plague. Other possible causes of the Black Death that have been considered are a mutated form of Yersinia pestis that no longer exists in the wild. The disease anthrax affects many animal species and the 'malignant pustule' could be mistaken for a bubo. A viral haemorragic fever would explain the infectivity and the huge human casualty rate (cf Ebola), but not really the animal deaths.
  
  The proof would be to extract Yersinia DNA from victims of the plague. There is debate over whether this has yet been achieved or not. Didier Raoult (Marseille) in 2000 reported the extraction of Yersinia DNA from the teeth of three 14th C skeletons from Montpelier. The teeth were said to be from plague victims and to have contained Yersinia DNA sequences on PCR amplification. But, since Susan Scott and Christopher Duncan wrote their book, Alan Cooper (Oxford Biomolecules Centre) could not find Yersinia DNA in plague pit skeletons. He analysed 121 teeth from 66 skeletons in mass graves in London, Denmark and Angers, France. He did find human mitochondrial DNA proving that DNA could survive in these conditions. So, the jury is still out.
  
  TP
  

  Link to this forum: The Black Death

  Report message2

• Message 3

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by Herewordless (U14549396) on Thursday, 13th January 2011

  Well, Michael's In Search of England was first written in 1999 and presented on Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ TV in 2000, before the more recent findings in 2005, so he would be adhering to the previous theory?
  
  What is so concrete and revelatory about Susan Scott and Christopher Duncan's findings, or evidence?

  Link to this forum: The Black Death

  Report message3

• Message 4

  , in reply to message 3.

  Posted by somewhatsilly (U14315357) on Thursday, 13th January 2011

  On the other hand, Bramanti et al said they did find evidence of Yersina Pestis.
  
  
  
  What do the genetics buffs think?

  Link to this forum: The Black Death

  Report message4

• Message 5

  , in reply to message 4.

  Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Friday, 14th January 2011

  Hi ferval
  
  Many thanks. Clean bowled. I'd never heard of the Journal let alone the publication.
  
  But it seems absolutely fine with perfectly acceptable controls against contamination. A strain of Yersinia pestis genetically different from those now present would explain almost everything. An old mystery may be solved at last.
  
  Regards,
  
  TP

  Link to this forum: The Black Death

  Report message5

• Message 6

  , in reply to message 2.

  Posted by Stephen (U14751372) on Friday, 14th January 2011

  Hi TR,
  Many thanks for the time you have taken to answer my question. I am still wondering (as a non-scientist) if the work of Scott and Duncan has been generally accepted (apparently not), whether anyone has questioned their evidence or their conclusions, or whether they have have simply restated the established theories.
  I visited Eyam recently and was impressed by the small museum and, in particular, by the display about the CCR5 Delta 32 mutation, also described by Scott and Duncan.
  Stephen

  Link to this forum: The Black Death

  Report message6

Back to top