Improving the use of historical written sources in paleopathology

Abstract

The texts written by the people of past societies can provide key information that enhances our understanding of disease in the past. Written sources and art can describe cultural contexts that not only help us interpret lesions in excavated human remains, but also provide evidence for past disease events themselves. However, in recent decades many biohistorical articles have been published that claim to diagnose diseases present in past celebrities or well known individuals, often using less than scholarly methodology. This article aims to help researchers use historical written sources and artwork responsibly, thus improving our understanding of health and disease in the past. It explores a broad range of historical sources, from medical texts and histories to legal documents and tax records, and it highlights how the key to interpreting any past text is to understand who wrote it, when it was written, and why it was written. Case studies of plague epidemics, crucifixion, and the spinal deformity of King Richard III are then used to highlight how we might better integrate archaeological and historical evidence. When done well, integrating evidence from both archaeological and historical sources increases the probability of a complete and well-balanced understanding of disease in past societies.

Advancing the understanding of treponemal disease in the past and present

“…Additionally, translators often have political agendas motivating their publication in a specific language at a particular time (Adorno, ). A rigorous reliance on primary sources or accurate translations of such works must be implemented, necessitating collaboration among anthropologists, physicians, historians, and linguists, particularly in regions of the world other than Europe or North America, and especially if they are to be used for any retrospective diagnosis (Arrizabalaga, ; Mitchell, , ). Digital humanities initiatives are becoming increasingly common, and original sources are now available to scholars through online resources including the Internet Archive (http://archive.org/) and Project Gutenberg (http://www.gutenberg.org/).…”

Reply

“…On the one hand, historians are fully aware that accounts of miracles should not be seen as factual reality but rather texts that always need to be interpreted. 4 On the other hand, although medieval medical and surgical texts explicitly state that the gangrenous part has to be removed using various means, even to the point of amputating the limb, the possibility of a transplant is never contemplated. 5 The miracle in question must therefore be examined within the confines of its narrative topos.…”

“…Also, Dr Foscati does not take into account the methodologic guidelines established by the Paleopathology Association for the correct retrospective assessment of diseases from ancient literary sources. 4 Concerning the concept of allogeneic transplantation, it is obvious that it could not be performed during the Middle Ages. Amputation, however, was performed as mentioned by Dr Foscati herself.…”

Paleopathology of soft tissues: what mummies can reveal

“…The history of medicine is usually based on written historical records [1], but sometimes ancient subjects are actually sufficiently preserved over long periods of time, and upon discovery, provide an amazing wealth of valuable direct evidence of both diseased human remains, and more rarely, medical procedures.…”