"More doubt cast on impact of Justinianic plague" Topic

"Many have claimed the Justinianic Plague (c. 541-750 CE) killed half of the population of Roman Empire. Now, historical research and mathematical modeling challenge the death rate and severity of this first plague pandemic.

Researchers Lauren White, PhD and Lee Mordechai, PhD, of the University of Maryland's National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center (SESYNC), examined the impacts of the Justinianic Plague with mathematical modeling. Using modern plague research as their basis, the two developed novel mathematical models to re-examine primary sources from the time of the Justinianic Plague outbreak. From the modeling, they found that it was unlikely that any transmission route of the plague would have had both the mortality rate and duration described in the primary sources. Their findings appear in PLOS ONE…"

Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

Are they really saying they're ignoring primary sources based on modeling? That seems like very poor research/history/anything to me.

Especially as the current pandemic's modeling is appearing to be very off.

I doubt ancient records were particularly detailed when it came to anything other than business and the military. It's possible that a city suffering a plague takes a census and discovers that the population has declined by x_thousand so the plague is blamed for that number of deaths when those numbers could include people leaving the city to get away from the plague.
Whatever the case the opening line from the article is a strawman. Who is this "many" who have claimed half the population died? The number was certainly high as it was in Persia, it's likely what gave the Arabs the inroad they needed to establish themselves in both Empires and push their new religion.
It would be useful if the paper compared its findings to any archaeological finds detailing an increase in graves, increased evidence of forest and grass seed, decreased evidence of crop seeds etc.
Ignoring primary evidence is not new, happens all the time with ancient battle numbers, particularly the earlier battles involving people of different cultures where numbers are inflated like the Persian army of Xerxes invading Europe consisting of over a million men.

Given the issues with models created for this current virus I have my doubts about accuracy in this study. The authors are guessing for the most part. In fact much of what we know about the Justinian Plague is guesswork. It is not even known what the plague was although it probably was an early type of bubonic plague. Field archaeology with several sites know to be from the time needs to be done. Maybe then approximate numbers of the plague impact can be determined.

Glup!….

Amicalement
Armand

See Kyle Harper's "The Fate of Rome" for a very interesting discussion on plagues in the Roman Empire.