Published in 1977, Plagues and Peoples seems an old, non-popularized Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond. However, the scope of McNeill's book is, granted, much smaller than that of Diamond's, who purports to explain the trajectory of the human race. I found Plagues and Peoples in a used-book store, and was excited, upon reading it, to find how well it fit into my knowledge-base and interests. The basic premise is familiar from such authors as Diamond and the vehement pre-Columbian population number debates-- disease has a vastly under-rated effect on societies, particularly indigenous peoples and nomad-type cultures. The key concept here is that the introduction of a disease to a hitherto unexposed population will wreak havoc amongst the people and the society. People will die, they'll begin to doubt their gods who aren't saving them from the plague, authority structures will fall apart, food will not be obtained or prepared, people will turn hostile or isolationist. The mechanics of the original rise of disease involve population density, animal husbandry, and permanent settlements. Columbian-age Europe, for example, had a sufficiently dense population to sustain diseases caught from closely-quartered animals or poorly santitized cities. The same could not be said for most of the Americas, where there were few domesticatable animals, populations seldom became significantly dense on the landscape, and many civilizations were highly mobile and thus did not live amongst their own wastes. Europeans had a much higher incidence of disease, and thus more virile immune systems. They lived with diseases for their entire lives, catching childhood illnesses and becoming immune, sustaining parasites for years without symptoms.The very arrival of Europeans on American shores began a huge depopulation of indigenous peoples even in absence of fighting. They had no immunity, and the people suffered greatly. Previously endemic, low-level diseases from Europe became virulent pandemics in the Americas. One of McNeill's original contributions to this concept in my experience is his apt comparison of disease mechanisms to governmental evolution. Like a disease parasite, a government requires a significantly large base (wealth) before it can be plundered. An overzealous parasite which kills all of its victims is akin to a government seizure of necessities, leaving its work force to face starvation-- thus, there will be no future opportunities for the government to plunder the population. Eventually, a balance is reached: the parasite becomes less virulent, the government less hostile, and the population base is sufficiently large to take losses of life or wealth in stride. A successful government provides protection against catastrophic raids to those who pay taxes, much like a low-level parasite can immunize a person against deadlier attackers. In both cases, it is a burden to the population-- people are sickened and occasionally killed by disease, or taxed out of their wealth and production. However, these burdens are typically less onerous than periodic exposure to lethal disasters such as an epidemic disease or comprehensive seizure of property: at least the population has a chance at survival, even if a dismal life.2006-05-14
This book by William McNeil offers an interesting interpretation of the way that epidemic disease has shaped the course of world history from ancient times to the present day, a topic that the author asserts has been neglected in traditional historical accounts. The book is written in a charmingly old-fashioned style which is pleasant to read, although it is at times a bit tediously wordy and the citations are sparser than I would like.Nevertheless, here is one passage from the Introduction that I think provides a good example of the interesting theories underpinning this book:"Disease and parasitism play a pervasive role in all life. A successful search for food on the part of one organism becomes for its host a nasty infection or disease. All animals depend on other living things for food, and human beings are no exception. Problems of finding food and the changing ways human communities have done so are familiar enough in economic histories. The problems of avoiding becoming food for some other organism are less familiar, largely because from very early times human beings have ceased to have much to fear from large-bodied animal predators like lions or wolves. Nevertheless, one can properly think of most human lives as caught in a precarious equilibrium between the microparasitism of disease organisms and the macroparasitism of large-bodied predators, chief among which have been other human beings."Originally published in 1977, parts are noticeably antiquated, but it remains an interesting and thought-provoking work which has sparked my interest in learning much more about the bubonic plague and the medieval period.
Do You like book Plagues And Peoples (1977)?
Finally finished this book. It took me a while to read it due to personal stuff and the subject matter, but it ended up being one of my favorites (hence the labor of love category). It being a favorite is leading me to believe I have a soft spot for environmental history. Yes the book was much about epidemiology, but the focus was also very much on how certain diseases were possible within certain environments – how they got there, how they survived there, and how those environments were affected in the way of future outbreaks, food cultivation, population growth/ reduction, etc.You will not get a lot of unknown facts about diseases from this book as the majority of the time periods addressed were prior to formal record keeping and disease identification. However, you will get a great exercise of the mind in the way of a priori thinking and cause and effect relationships. McNeil does a great job of showing us how the evidence that is available - evidence from sources such as religious writings, population records, and recent day archeological finds - can be constructed to shed light on when certain pandemics/epidemics broke out, what they more than likely were, how the specific viruses affected populations, how the human body reacted to the viruses over time, and how those viruses in return reacted to the human body. Although this book's main subject is epidemiology, it is very similar (although a precursor) to books like Guns, Germs and Steel in that it addresses various macroparisitic and microparisitic effects on the growth of civilizatoins. However, its focus on diseases makes it particularly interesting and provides a sort of mental anchor when thinking about the multitude of variables that has shaped our world. Yes, I can appreciate that after reading this book I am now more aware of the major viruses/diseases that affected our history, but more than anything, that ebb and flow thinking of how the big picture came to be is more concreted in my mind. And this is the book’s greatest value to me.
—Becky
This was one of the most compelling books I have ever read. In particular, I admired the sourcing and the boldness of some of the claims; I much prefer scholars putting their necks out on the line with bold, properly caveated arguments, rather than seeing them retreat into timid, easier intellectual spaces. McNeil clearly prefers the former.At the core of the book, McNeil argues that we should view humans as one species among many in the competition and struggle for survival, facing other macroparasites (humans, megafauna, animal predators) and microparasites (bacteria, viruses, worms, etc.). Once you view history through that prism, you can see new worlds of explanations for human development and survival. It's just a very solid piece of scholarship and holds up quite well 30+ years after first publication.
—Dan
This was an interesting book about the interplay between micro- and macro-parasitical entities and the effects on human populations beginning in prehistory and ending with the 20th century. Micro-parasites are considered to be diseases and illness, whether viruses or otherwise, and macro-parasites are governments, or rent-extracting entities etc. The assumptions and conclusions that McNeill came to seemed for the most part reasonable and interesting, though it was at times a dry and in places repetitive read. For me, the book picked up most in the final two chapters, on the 1500s onwards. I would have liked to have read more detail on the more recent events. In all, a thought-provoking book on how illnesses have impacted the development of our world now.
—Deborah Anderson
