Antonine plague

[guy]

Here is an excellent lecture on the Antonine plague with Kyle Harper, author of the excellent “The Fate of Rome: Climate, Disease, and the Fate of an Empire.”

Here’s some background information:

Quote

“The Antonine Plague of 165 to 180 AD, also known as the Plague of Galen (after Galen, the physician who described it), was an ancient pandemic brought to the Roman Empire by troops who were returning from campaigns in the Near East. Scholars have suspected it to have been either smallpox or measles.”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonine_Plague

 

 

Edited August 16, 2021 by guy

[guy]

I appreciate the fact that Professor Harper recognizes my problems with attributing the Antonine plague to smallpox. These are the lack of ancient sources which describe either the eye complications, including blindness (2-8% of cases) or the horrendous scarring (65-80%) after a bout of smallpox.

Here’s a previous thread on the subject:

 

Edited July 4, 2022 by guy

[caldrail]

Pandemics aren't likely to be all that unusual. I was watching a video earlier today discussing how neolithic peoples in western Europe may have suffered a catastrophic drop in population from disease - with the caveat that it also conforms to issues with colonisation. Too many people moving into one region, setting up farms, and not surviving long because they haven't adapted to local conditions well enough. Noticeably these population shrink to around half of what they were then become stable. This happened in Britain during the 4th millenium BC.

However I did understand that much of the disease associated with the classical city of Rome was malaria, spread from standing water (Although the Cloaca Maxima was a feature the Romans were proud of, it is wrong to see ancient Rome as having a sophisticated drainage system catering for the whole urban sprawl)

[guy]

Thank you for reading my post.
 

There are many who believe it was malaria (and not the will of God with Pope Leo I) that stopped Attila the Hun and his invading army from capturing the city of Rome.

 

Quote

"Armies coming to attack Rome — beginning with Hannibal and the Carthaginians, and then the Visigoths, Attila and his huns, and the Vandals — couldn't essentially either take or hold Rome because of this malarial shield."

 

https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.5249424

Edited August 21, 2021 by guy

[caldrail]

That's an interesting take on things. In Hannibal's case I doubt the prospect of disease was a major consideration. His forces were depleted by campaigning and he was getting desperately short of supply such that a siege of Rome wasn't a practical idea. Note that he doesn't even try, despite the panic in Rome that his arrival could be imminent.