|
Grand Fromage posted:Crowded conditions where people are also living in close proximity to lots of animals is how you get new plagues. Crowded city conditions in addition to being a major hub of trade, so any plagues that develop in other cities get quickly ferried into the biggest city to fester in.
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 17:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 00:48 |
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:Roman sexuality seems to be full of contradictions that we'll never fully understand in part because there weren't thousands of people writing blog posts and thinkpieces about contradictions in contemporary sexuality. Why don't you go write on a wall about how you have given up pussy in favour of dude's asses if you care so much
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 18:00
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:Why don't you go write on a wall about how you have given up pussy in favour of dude's asses if you care so much
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 20:44
|
|
|
Those are YouTube comments, not blog posts.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 00:07
|
|
|
The Black Death probably got as big as it was because the Mongol Empire made travel and trade a lot easier allowing what would probably have been an isolated epidemic become an drat near apocalyptic plague. Either that or the Mongols purposely infected the Genoese colony city of Caffa by catapulting the corpses of people who died from sickness over the walls and the survivors went home to Italy and infected people there. Possibly both. FreudianSlippers fucked around with this message at 02:47 on Jan 31, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 02:45
|
|
|
Why were constant plagues not as much of an issue in the early modern period, when there was more trade and travel than ever?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 02:55
|
|
|
Koramei posted:Why were constant plagues not as much of an issue in the early modern period, when there was more trade and travel than ever? I mean plagues were a big issue in the Americas! If I had to guess, it's because of the evolutionary pressures on diseases. The extremely lethal, easily communicable ones tend to disappear quickly because they kill everybody who isn't genetically resistant. The period didn't have any big plagues because truly terrible ones like the black death or 1920s influenza only evolve to be that deadly very rarely, and the 1500s and 1600s just lucked out. Notably, the first recorded instances of something that we can confidently identify as syphilis came in like 1494 or thereabouts (leading to speculation it comes from the new world) and was originally very deadly, much much more deadly than modern syphilis, before the microbe evolved into a less deadly but more successful form. This is like 50% speculation though. Maybe there was some change in society that decreased the odds of plague.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 03:00
|
|
|
It's only been a 100 years since the Spanish Flu spread to basically the entire world and killed as much as a 100 million people so something on the scale of the Black Death was still a possibility in the fairly recent past. So these things still happened fairly recently. Society got progressively better at containing outbreak but for centuries semi-regular epidemics of deadly diseases were just a part of life.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 03:08
|
|
|
It's likely that the "Spanish Flu" wouldn't have spread as fast or been as bad if there hadn't been tons of extra soldiers being shipped about and tons of people already living in worse health from wartime shortages and things like that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 04:13
|
|
|
Koramei posted:Why were constant plagues not as much of an issue in the early modern period, when there was more trade and travel than ever? Because after the black death people started taking quarantines/public health seriously.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 04:20
|
|
|
Koramei posted:Why were constant plagues not as much of an issue in the early modern period, when there was more trade and travel than ever? edit: also i suspect the early modern people were descended from medieval people who were, for whatever reason, less vulnerable
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 04:46
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:Because after the black death people started taking quarantines/public health seriously. Random internet articles tell me that post-black plague Europe figured out that disease has a hard time spreading if you burn the houses of the sick. If the sick person wasn't still in the house at the time of the fire then ship him off to some remote island so he doesn't get anyone else sick. Probably not true but urban Europeans definitely learned the value of a quarantine afterwards.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 05:02
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:They were, people just sort of gloss over that while talking about the huge wars which were also an issue Right. Everybody talks about the Black Death in the 14th century, but people don't realize that the bubonic plague kept returning, and a lot of times, the wars contributed to them, because the movement of soldiers spread the disease. The Great Plague of Milan in the 1630s, which was carried by French troops, killed over half the population of Verona, about half the population of Milan, and about a third of Venice. The Great Plague of London in 1665-6 killed up to 100,000 people. In the 1670s, there was an outbreak of plague in the Ottoman Empire that spread both into North Africa and up into the Balkans and then north into Austria. In 1675, Malta lost about 11,000 people from plague. About 76,000 died in Vienna in 1679 (which led the Emperor at the time to construct a monument called the "plague column") and, about 83,000 in Prague in 1681. There's one report that said that for a while, Paris had an outbreak of plague about once every 3 years. It was bad, in other words. eta: I forgot to mention the other gigantic plague outbreak, the Great Northern War plague, which started in Poland after the Swedish victory at the Battle of Klissow, probably spread to Poland by Swedish troops. From 1704-1710, it ravaged Poland. The Kingdom of Prussia put up a quarantine to try to stop the spread, but nevertheless, you start seeing reports of plague in Prussia in 1708. Danzig loses about half of its population, Koenigsberg about a quarter. East Prussia put together lost about a third of its population. It spreads into Brandeberg, Pomerania, Latvia, Estonia. It kills about half the population of Stockholm, about 2/3 the population of Helsinki. It spreads west, into Hamburg and Bremen, and also down into Bohemia and Austria again, again hitting Prague and Vienna., into Hungary and Bavaria. Epicurius fucked around with this message at 05:22 on Jan 31, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 05:10
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:Why don't you go write on a wall about how you have given up pussy in favour of dude's asses if you care so much Don't doxx me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 05:12
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:Right. Everybody talks about the Black Death in the 14th century, but people don't realize that the bubonic plague kept returning, and a lot of times, the wars contributed to them, because the movement of soldiers spread the disease. The Great Plague of Milan in the 1630s, which was carried by French troops, killed over half the population of Verona, about half the population of Milan, and about a third of Venice. The Great Plague of London in 1665-6 killed up to 100,000 people. In the 1670s, there was an outbreak of plague in the Ottoman Empire that spread both into North Africa and up into the Balkans and then north into Austria. In 1675, Malta lost about 11,000 people from plague. About 76,000 died in Vienna in 1679 (which led the Emperor at the time to construct a monument called the "plague column") and, about 83,000 in Prague in 1681. There's one report that said that for a while, Paris had an outbreak of plague about once every 3 years. edit: you keep talking about the Literal Plague, the Black Death, but don't forget all the other epidemic diseases you could get then as well! Europe's first great cholera epidemic was in the 1830s, it killed Hegel and Clausewitz. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1829%E2%80%9351_cholera_pandemic HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 05:28 on Jan 31, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 05:22
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:It was bad
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 05:23
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:17th_century.txt I thought that was "somehow, against all odds, things got worse". That's always the impression I got
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 05:27
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:Roman sexuality seems to be full of contradictions that we'll never fully understand in part because there weren't thousands of people writing blog posts and thinkpieces about contradictions in contemporary sexuality. Hell, there are millions of people writing in detail about their various sexual proclivities and most of it is still utterly baffling. There's probably at least a conference presentation in how the various internet fetish subcultures provide indirect evidence for Human-Neanderthal interbreeding. I mean, if there's people who get off by having insects sting their dicks or imagining Dr. Watson impregnating a fictionally-gendered Sherlock Holmes with a werewolf dick, what's so strange about a caveman and a neanderthal shacking up together because everyone else they knew were killed by a cold snap or eaten by bears?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 05:29
|
|
|
Don Gato posted:I thought that was "somehow, against all odds, things got worse". That's always the impression I got
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 05:29
|
|
|
All of them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 05:35
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Hell, there are millions of people writing in detail about their various sexual proclivities and most of it is still utterly baffling. I had to parse the last sentence for a minute, because I couldn't imagine bears being a thing in the neolithic. Then I realized you meant the animals.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 10:27
|
|
|
One day archeology will discover that the ancient bear cult that is the root of all religions actually revolved around hairy, pudgy gay guys.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 11:12
|
|
|
Grand Prize Winner posted:I had to parse the last sentence for a minute, because I couldn't imagine bears being a thing in the neolithic. Then I realized you meant the animals. I mean...why not? Pretty sure being gay goes all the way back and probably therefore being gay and also liking the larger hairier dudes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 11:43
|
|
|
FreudianSlippers posted:All of them. things aren't perfect here but we do have SLIGHTLY less poo poo in the water
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 11:55
|
|
|
fishmech posted:It's likely that the "Spanish Flu" wouldn't have spread as fast or been as bad if there hadn't been tons of extra soldiers being shipped about and tons of people already living in worse health from wartime shortages and things like that. Didn't it get named after Spain not because it began there, but because spanish press had the luxury of reporting on the early outbreaks while most of the world was still focused on the end of the war? Maybe luxury isn't the right word There's a lovely horror movie on netflix where the baddie's origin story begins during the 1918 flu. It's the first time I've ever seen it mentioned anywhere remotely mainstream.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 21:42
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:Didn't it get named after Spain not because it began there, but because spanish press had the luxury of reporting on the early outbreaks while most of the world was still focused on the end of the war? The real reason it was called Spanish Flu is because wartime censors tended to under-report the seriousness and death toll it was having in places like Germany and the US because they were concerned that it would harm morale. Spain was neutral though, so newspapers could talk about how awful it was there. As a result people were under the impression that Spain was the origin point/was particularly devastated by it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 21:57
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:Didn't it get named after Spain not because it began there, but because spanish press had the luxury of reporting on the early outbreaks while most of the world was still focused on the end of the war? It was more due to wartime censorship. Dudes were dying by the thousands but reporting on it wasn't allowed, so first news of the pandemic came out of Spain. efb anyway I'm neither a germophobe nor a pussy but the possibility of a major flu pandemic is a thing that scares me and it should scare you too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 21:59
|
|
|
bewbies posted:I'm neither a germophobe nor a pussy but the possibility of a major flu pandemic is a thing that scares me and it should scare you too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 22:36
|
|
|
Whatever gets me out of work honestly
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 22:39
|
|
|
this was neat: https://twitter.com/PaulMMCooper/status/955458643192934400 https://twitter.com/PaulMMCooper/status/955814657851314176 Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 22:42 on Jan 31, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 22:40
|
|
|
Hangover 4 script leak ? https://twitter.com/PaulMMCooper/status/956125659318902784 Nuclear Pizza fucked around with this message at 23:05 on Jan 31, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 23:02
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:this was neat:
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 23:28
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:There's a lovely horror movie on netflix where the baddie's origin story begins during the 1918 flu. It's the first time I've ever seen it mentioned anywhere remotely mainstream. Twilight?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 23:51
|
|
|
It was referenced in Downton Abby
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 02:52
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:especially since most of us are probably exactly the right age to get clotheslined by it I've been clotheslined by the flu once and I never want it to happen again. Ynglaur posted:Twilight? Yes. That was the only part of the movie I found legitimately interesting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 02:58
|
|
|
sullat posted:It was referenced in Downton Abby And a major plot point in the original Upstairs, Downstairs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 15:34
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:Twilight? Oh wow, I forgot about that. I only remembered Jasper's backstory, because the Confederacy being ruled by a cabal of vampires who wanted to keep their system of brutalizing human chattel intact is, of course, historical.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 15:48
|
|
|
Reading Tom Holland's Rubicon, and man this dude is down as hell on Sulla. Not entirely unreasonable I guess, but he doesn't throw half as much as shade Marius' way, and he probably deserves it just as much. It's very well written, but I can't shake the feeling that the author sees the Republic as a golden age of untrammelled freedom and liberty for all (free men), and the Empire as some period of darkness to come. PittTheElder fucked around with this message at 18:49 on Feb 1, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 18:46
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:Oh wow, I forgot about that. I only remembered Jasper's backstory, because the Confederacy being ruled by a cabal of vampires who wanted to keep their system of brutalizing human chattel intact is, of course, historical. Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter is amazing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 21:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 00:48 |
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Reading Tom Holland's Rubicon, and man this dude is down as hell on Sulla. Not entirely unreasonable I guess, but he doesn't throw half as much as shade Marius' way, and he probably deserves it just as much. Tom Holland is probably my favorite pop history writer because of his ability to construct a narrative out of historical facts but with only one exception his books don't really attempt to have interesting scholarly insights--they're just telling the history as a story.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 21:15
|
|