III. It was _not_ cholera.
IV. It probably _was_ a variety of the Oriental plague, which
has reappeared in Europe in more modern times, and regarding which
they who wish to know more must seek their information where it is to
be found.
The next question usually asked is, Where did the new plague come
from? And here the answer is even more uncertain than that to the
other question--What the great plague was.
In fact, a careful comparison of such testimony as comes to hand
leaves the inquirer in a very perplexed condition, and inclines him
rather to accept than reject the old-fashioned theory of a "general
corruption of the atmosphere" as the only working hypothesis whereby
to account for the startling spontaneity of the outbreak and its
appearance at so many and such distant points at the same time.
The Imperial author, who appears to have done his best to gather
information, evidently found himself quite baffled in his attempt to
follow the march of the plague. It had originated among the
Hyperborean Scythians; it had passed through Pontus, and Libya, and
Syria, and the furthest East, and "in a manner all the world round
about." Other writers are just as much in the dark as Cantacuzene,
and it seems mere waste of time to endeavour to arrive at any
conclusion from data so defective and statements so void of
historical basis as have come down to us.
Pages:
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172