CSI: Renaissance

benbenberi

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 7, 2012
Messages
3,706
Reaction score
3,145
Location
Connecticut
A very interesting article in this summer's Smithsonian Mag. about a forensic pathologist in Italy who has examined a lot of medieval and early modern bodies (inc. some famous ones).

Short version: medieval & Renaissance aristocrats endured a much worse level of everyday health than we tend to imagine. (Status didn't exempt you from parasites, & armor-wearing from an early age predisposed noblemen to severe arthritis at an early age...) People sometimes did die unexpectedly of unglamorous natural causes, like malaria. But sometimes they killed each other with arsenic.

Just as a related addendum, I have noted in my own research on 17c French nobles that that they really were much less healthy overall than most of us are today. This isn't even including life-threatening conditions, just everyday fevers, digestive woes, abscesses, rotten teeth, etc. they mentioned in passing -- if you didn't find yourself confined to bed with some painful ailment two or three days a month you were exceptionally robust & people remarked on it.
 

Ol' Fashioned Girl

Hand? What hand?
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
15,640
Reaction score
6,849
Location
Last Star on the Right
Website
www.jenniferdahl.com
I've often remarked on the things we suffer from today that we consider to be 'minor' (kidney infections, fungal fun, bladder infections, yeast!) were likely much more serious and/or annoying back 'in the day'. How in the world did they treat a yeast infection back then?
 

angeliz2k

never mind the shorty
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 24, 2008
Messages
3,727
Reaction score
488
Location
Commonwealth of Virginia--it's for lovers
Website
www.elizabethhuhn.com
A very interesting article in this summer's Smithsonian Mag. about a forensic pathologist in Italy who has examined a lot of medieval and early modern bodies (inc. some famous ones).

Short version: medieval & Renaissance aristocrats endured a much worse level of everyday health than we tend to imagine. (Status didn't exempt you from parasites, & armor-wearing from an early age predisposed noblemen to severe arthritis at an early age...) People sometimes did die unexpectedly of unglamorous natural causes, like malaria. But sometimes they killed each other with arsenic.

Just as a related addendum, I have noted in my own research on 17c French nobles that that they really were much less healthy overall than most of us are today. This isn't even including life-threatening conditions, just everyday fevers, digestive woes, abscesses, rotten teeth, etc. they mentioned in passing -- if you didn't find yourself confined to bed with some painful ailment two or three days a month you were exceptionally robust & people remarked on it.

I love Smithsonian Magazine. Great stuff each month.

I do wonder if some of the bolded isn't due to perception. For many people, writing about their health and their family's health was a kind of obsession. Did they blow every sniffle out of proportion, or were they really ill? It's like me complaining to my mother and then realizing, to my embarrassment, that she thinks I'm a not-very-happy person. I am happy! I just wanted to vent. In other words: it could possibly be over-reporting.

Not that it wasn't rough before the advent of modern medicine--it most definitely was.
 

benbenberi

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 7, 2012
Messages
3,706
Reaction score
3,145
Location
Connecticut
For many people, writing about their health and their family's health was a kind of obsession. Did they blow every sniffle out of proportion, or were they really ill? It's like me complaining to my mother and then realizing, to my embarrassment, that she thinks I'm a not-very-happy person. I am happy! I just wanted to vent. In other words: it could possibly be over-reporting.

There's certainly some of that going on. Some people did obsess about trivial ailments, as you say. (Though in a time when people might die quickly of apparently trivial causes, they may have had some reason.) The workings of the bowels were a particular fascination in some circles: one of the people I have researched was a doting grandfather, and received weekly if not daily reports from the family doctor detailing the digestive status of the children & the quality of their stool. A lot of people routinely took enemas and purges just on general principle, which probably had an unfortunate long-term effect on them.

But there's also a lot of casual comments on the ill health of friends and associates, mention in passing of a recurrence of someone's habitual illness, etc. - notable only because it interfered with some plan or affected their appearance or troubled them more severely than usual. These were mostly people who did not consider themselves sickly, and by the standards of the day they weren't. But they assumed a much lower baseline of overall health than we tend to today.
 

angeliz2k

never mind the shorty
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 24, 2008
Messages
3,727
Reaction score
488
Location
Commonwealth of Virginia--it's for lovers
Website
www.elizabethhuhn.com
There's certainly some of that going on. Some people did obsess about trivial ailments, as you say. (Though in a time when people might die quickly of apparently trivial causes, they may have had some reason.) The workings of the bowels were a particular fascination in some circles: one of the people I have researched was a doting grandfather, and received weekly if not daily reports from the family doctor detailing the digestive status of the children & the quality of their stool. A lot of people routinely took enemas and purges just on general principle, which probably had an unfortunate long-term effect on them.

But there's also a lot of casual comments on the ill health of friends and associates, mention in passing of a recurrence of someone's habitual illness, etc. - notable only because it interfered with some plan or affected their appearance or troubled them more severely than usual. These were mostly people who did not consider themselves sickly, and by the standards of the day they weren't. But they assumed a much lower baseline of overall health than we tend to today.

Delightful!

Yes, agreed: there were definitely reasons for health to be discussed, and most of what was reported was probably very truthful. But it behooves us to take into account 1) the difference in attitudes towards health in bygone eras and 2) the disposition of the individual in question (was he or she given to melodrama, worry, or exaggeration?). I just wanted to point that out.

If I had lived two hundred years ago (heck, even a hundred) I might be dead by now. Modern medicine for the win!
 

Alessandra Kelley

Sophipygian
Super Moderator
Moderator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 27, 2011
Messages
17,874
Reaction score
8,096
Location
Near the gargoyles
Website
www.alessandrakelley.com
It's mostly later periods, but last spring I read Bee Wilson's Swindled, about food fraud and tampering (it has a brief dip into the middle ages, but it doesn't really start swinging until the 18th-19th centuries). It's a good read, and it brings across how precarious people's health was, and how it was just assumed that beyond iron-stomached youth people would have digestive ills all their lives.

I'm always fascinated by research into the details of people's lives.
 

Shakesbear

knows a hawk from a handsaw
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 4, 2008
Messages
3,628
Reaction score
463
Location
Elsinore
Benbenberi thanks you so much for posting the link. Interesting reading. I have to admit to being some what uncomfortable with the deliberate exhumation of a body just because science can now reveal so much of the past. I am, after watching The Bodies in the Well, also aware that there can be surprises when the bodies are found by chance and there is no extant evidence about them.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0125kbf though this did have a surprise at the end http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13855238 -