The Great Mortality & Immorality 9

The Black Death or as it was more commonly called at the time, The Great Mortality invaded Europe in 1347-52 apparently from the steppes of Central Asia becoming the most devastating plague of all time. The population of Europe has been estimated to be 75 million at that time and fully 1/3, at least 25 million people, died from the plague. Even if the mortality rate was not greatly iatrogenically accelerated, effective medical intervention was practically nonexistent. There have been many accounts of this plague, but one of the best is the 2005 book The Great Mortality by John Kelly.

The disease was caused by the bacillus, Yersinia pestis, with the transmission vector mainly being the rat flea, Xenopsylla cheopis, and also likely the human flea, Pulex irritans. The fleas in turn were carried by the black rat, Rattus rattus, although other varmints such as marmots may have also been involved.

There are additional aspects to this story besides the massive deaths and horrendous human suffering caused by the disease and one is implied by the second part of this article title.

Often a kernel of truth is contained in some of the most hackneyed sayings and this episode of disease is no exception. The cliché, originally from Psalms, “it is an ill wind that blows nobody good” illustrates the point. In the years after the Black Death abated, farm land became more plentiful (there were many fewer people) and the cost of labour in Europe increased for the same reason. Thus economic advantage accrued to the peasantry versus the landed gentry. Even in the cities labourers, especially skilled labour, saw their wages rise dramatically along with prices of course. There was an attempt by the ruling classes to impose wage and price controls, but then as now this never works. As frequently stated by the likes, among many others, of economists Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, et al. the putative proposition is when wage and price controls are imposed which are set below free market wages and prices then shortages result; when price and wage supports are instituted which are above free market wages and prices then over supply and over production result which is wasteful and inefficient in a capitalistic economy because it takes resources in labor or goods away from other more desired production/consumption. This is such a simple concept yet is either not understood or not accepted by socialists or other hard left types to the detriment of economic prosperity.

Book making in the Middle Ages was a labor intensive undertaking which required several copyists. In the high wage post-plague years this cost became prohibitively expensive except for the very richest nobility. Enter Johann Gutenberg with his invention of the moveable type printing press in 1453. One could say that the advent of the Black Death led to mass production of printed material, including books, and a much higher literacy rate in Europe. “necessity became the mother of invention” might be the watchword.

Once again we have the proposition that “It is not that the primitive mind can not link cause and effect, but does so where none exists.” In this case it took an ugly and deadly turn. When the Black Death hit Europe in 1347-48, perhaps understandably with the discovery of microorganisms being centuries in the future, people, especially Christians, looked for more tangible agents. As in the previous, but much less severe, plagues in the 11th, 12th, 13th, and early 14th centuries the candidates were lepers, beggars, vagrants, and Jews. By far the most popular of these were the Jews. And Christians, by and large, showed little mercy in dealing with what they perceived was the source of their misery by inculpating Jews. One exception was Pope Clement VI who issue a Papal Bull on July 6, 1348 stating “it can not be true that the Jews…are the cause…of the plague…for [it] afflicts the Jews themselves.” Little attention was paid to this sensible analysis.

Unlike previous campaigns against the non-culpable Jews in Europe this time banishment and prohibition from entry were not the main actions taken. Real pogroms including massacres and attempted force conversion to Christianity were undertaken. Jews in what are now Austria, England, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and Switzerland among other European countries were targets of indiscriminate killing – the favorite mode being burning at the stake. In at least one documented incident all the Jews in one town - men, women, and children – were crowded into one building which was locked and set on fire. Nobody survived. Apparently the syllogism was: The Great Mortality was bad; Jews do bad things, therefore Jews caused the deadly disease.

Naturally this horrendously deadly torment had to be justified – and so it was. You see the Jews caused the plague by poisoning water wells all over Europe. There were even a few Jews who confessed to this. After, of course, they were put on the rack or subjected to other unbearable torture.

It was not just in the 20th century where compurgation was not afforded the Jews, but they were massacred in great numbers during the holocaust. Whether the number was 6 million the Nazis slaughtered or 5 million or 7 million is of little import – it was undeniably millions. Given their history of persecution it should be natural to cut them a little slack in their dispute with the Arabs over Palestine. Especially the Europeans, with their historically deplorable treatment of Jews, should reasonable be less biased against the Israelis vs. the Palestinians than they are.

I am not claiming that the Israelis are completely blameless in the tête-à-tête with the Arabs although the Arabs did start the 1948 war because they saw the Jews getting stronger with immigration and aid from around the world. When I was in Libya in the late 1950’s I met several young Palestinian Arabs who were given 24 hours by the Jews to leave their homes in 1948. They could take with them as much of their personal property as they could manage, but they had to get out. The Israeli ambassador to the U.N., Dan Gillerman, was recently asked in a TV interview in the United States whether the Jews had not forced some Arabs out of Palestine during the 1948 war and he said “no, absolutely not.” Ambassador Gillerman is a smart, educated, well informed politician so he had to know what he said was not true. Yes, I am saying he lied.

Regardless of which side has the more legitimate claim on Palestine, a proposition which could be debated endlessly, it is abundantly clear to all sane, reasonable people that Israel wants to live in peace (and do business wouldn’t you know?) with their portion of the Holy Land while the Palestinians and other Muslims in the Middle East want the Jews either exterminated or exiled from all Arabs lands.

It is singular that the funest crimes committed by Christians against Jews and perceived non-believing other people hundreds of years ago in Europe would be absolutely unthinkable today. Can the same be said about Muslims?

Christians in the Middle Ages burned their enemies, real or imagined, at the stake. That does not differ materially, and certainly not in outcome, with Islamo-fascists blowing up innocent people with IED’s today. At times Medieval Christians gave Jews the option of converting to Christianity on pain of death if they refused, which they sometimes did. One of the stated objectives of current Islamic fanatics is to convert all non-adherents of their brand of Islam and Sharia (Arabic for "well-trodden path") law, on the pain of death if they refuse. Sound familiar?

One gets the impression that the madman in Tehran (President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad) would rather forgo any conversion option when it comes to the “Great Satans” of the United States and Israel and proceed directly to termination. If the Iranian regime manufactures nuclear bombs and acquires additional help from North Korea for developing long range missile technology then they will be in position to carry out their intimidation if not downright elimination strategy against the United States and Israel. The Iranians would find out too late the meaning of a pyrrhic victory – no matter how much damage they inflicted they would be completely incinerated in retaliation. Sane people would realize this, but can fanatics, religious or otherwise, be counted on to be rational?

My conclusion is that Christianity has advanced immeasurably in the last few hundred years in terms of compassion, morality, and rationality while Islam is still stuck in their concomitance with the earlier Christianity past.

I would enjoy entertaining dissenting opinions with my theses if they are supported by facts - Fons et origo, and apodictic reasoning. Even any lapsus calami pointed out would be appreciated.