What do you think?
Rate this book
In the Wake of the Plague: The Black Death and the World It Made
Much of what we know about the greatest medical disaster ever, the Black Plague of the fourteenth century, is wrong. The details of the Plague etched in the minds of terrified schoolchildren -- the hideous black welts, the high fever, and the final, awful end by respiratory failure -- are more or less accurate. But what the Plague really was, and how it made history, remain shrouded in a haze of myths.Norman Cantor, the premier historian of the Middle Ages, draws together the most recent scientific discoveries and groundbreaking historical research to pierce the mist and tell the story of the Black Death afresh, as a gripping, intimate narrative.In the Wake of the Plague presents a microcosmic view of the Plague in England (and on the continent), telling the stories of the men and women of the fourteenth century, from peasant to priest, and from merchant to king. Cantor introduces a fascinating cast of characters. We meet, among others, fifteen-year-old Princess Joan of England, on her way to Spain to marry a Castilian prince; Thomas of Birmingham, abbot of Halesowen, responsible for his abbey as a CEO is for his business in a desperate time; and the once-prominent landowner John le Strange, who sees the Black Death tear away his family's lands and then its very name as it washes, unchecked, over Europe in wave after wave.Cantor argues that despite the devastation that made the Plague so terrifying, the disease that killed more than 40 percent of Europe's population had some beneficial results. The often literal demise of the old order meant that new, more scientific thinking increasingly prevailed where church dogma had once reigned supreme. In effect, the Black Death heralded an intellectual revolution. There was also an explosion of tapestries became popular as window protection against the supposedly airborne virus, and a great number of painters responded to the Plague. Finally, the Black Death marked an economic sea the onset of what Cantor refers to as turbocapitalism; the peasants who survived the Plague thrived, creating Europe's first class of independent farmers.Here are those stories and others, in a tale of triumph coming out of the darkest horror, wrapped up in a scientific mystery that persists, in part, to this day. Cantor's portrait of the Black Death's world is pro-vocative and captivating. Not since Barbara Tuchman's A Distant Mirror have medieval men and women been brought so vividly to life. The greatest popularizer of the Middle Ages has written the period's most fascinating narrative.
276 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 2001
256 people are currently reading
7820 people want to read
About the author
Norman F. Cantor
54 books91 followersBorn in Winnipeg, Canada, Cantor received his B.A. at the University of Manitoba in 1951. He went on to get his master's degree in 1953 from Princeton University and spent a year as a Rhodes Scholar at the University of Oxford. He received his doctorate from Princeton in 1957 under the direction of the eminent medievalist Joseph R. Strayer.
After teaching at Princeton, Cantor moved to Columbia University from 1960 to 1966. He was a Leff professor at Brandeis University until 1970 and then was at SUNY Binghamton until 1976, when he took a position at University of Illinois at Chicago for two years. He then went on to New York University, where he was professor of history, sociology and comparative literature. After a brief stint as Fulbright Professor at the Tel Aviv University History Department (1987–88), he devoted himself to working as a full-time writer.
Although his early work focused on English religious and intellectual history, Cantor's later scholarly interests were far more diverse, and he found more success writing for a popular audience than he did engaging in more narrowly-focused original research. He did publish one monograph study, based on his graduate thesis, Church, kingship, and lay investiture in England, 1089-1135, which appeared in 1958 and remains an important contribution to the topic of church-state relations in medieval England. Throughout his career, however, Cantor preferred to write on the broad contours of Western history, and on the history of academic medieval studies in Europe and North America, in particular the lives and careers of eminent medievalists. His books generally received mixed reviews in academic journals, but were often popular bestsellers, buoyed by Cantor's fluid, often colloquial, writing style and his lively critiques of persons and ideas, both past and present. Cantor was intellectually conservative and expressed deep skepticism about what he saw as methodological fads, particularly Marxism and postmodernism, but also argued for greater inclusion of women and minorities in traditional historical narratives. In both his best-selling Inventing the Middle Ages and his autobiography, Inventing Norman Cantor, he reflected on his strained relationship over the years with other historians and with academia in general.
Upon retirement in 1999, Cantor moved to Miami, Florida, where he continued to work on several books up to the time of his death.
After teaching at Princeton, Cantor moved to Columbia University from 1960 to 1966. He was a Leff professor at Brandeis University until 1970 and then was at SUNY Binghamton until 1976, when he took a position at University of Illinois at Chicago for two years. He then went on to New York University, where he was professor of history, sociology and comparative literature. After a brief stint as Fulbright Professor at the Tel Aviv University History Department (1987–88), he devoted himself to working as a full-time writer.
Although his early work focused on English religious and intellectual history, Cantor's later scholarly interests were far more diverse, and he found more success writing for a popular audience than he did engaging in more narrowly-focused original research. He did publish one monograph study, based on his graduate thesis, Church, kingship, and lay investiture in England, 1089-1135, which appeared in 1958 and remains an important contribution to the topic of church-state relations in medieval England. Throughout his career, however, Cantor preferred to write on the broad contours of Western history, and on the history of academic medieval studies in Europe and North America, in particular the lives and careers of eminent medievalists. His books generally received mixed reviews in academic journals, but were often popular bestsellers, buoyed by Cantor's fluid, often colloquial, writing style and his lively critiques of persons and ideas, both past and present. Cantor was intellectually conservative and expressed deep skepticism about what he saw as methodological fads, particularly Marxism and postmodernism, but also argued for greater inclusion of women and minorities in traditional historical narratives. In both his best-selling Inventing the Middle Ages and his autobiography, Inventing Norman Cantor, he reflected on his strained relationship over the years with other historians and with academia in general.
Upon retirement in 1999, Cantor moved to Miami, Florida, where he continued to work on several books up to the time of his death.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 649 reviews
June 10, 2011
Of all of Norman Cantor's books about the Middle Ages, this is by far the worst! Cantor was once a decent (though never great) medieval historian, but that time has long past. This book is not only poorly written/edited, but it is also wildly inaccurate. Its clear that the intended audience of this book is the general public and it is not for a specialist, but that does not make it acceptable to sensationalize/misrepresent facts in the guise of making the subject more interesting or more accessible. The problems with the content are too numerous to list individually, but I have listed a couple of the most glaring ones. First, he makes absurd and unsubstantiated claims (see section on how cosmic dust may have caused the plague) and he cites unverified legends as facts to support his scattered and incoherent argument (see the passages about the ring around the rosy song). His sloppy and casual presentation also leads him to make mistakes in terminology, like referring to women's garments as corsets even though corsets weren't worn until nearly 200 years later. Second, he is a very judgmental historian imposing his 20th century belief system on a 14th century society. Please don't misunderstand. As a medieval historian myself, I am completely aware that all interpretations of history are biased by the author's own views, but that does not mean you should dismiss your historical subject as backward, stupid, or laughable. In a wasted effort to be light-hearted (which is especially strange considering he is writing a treatise about pestilence and disease that ravaged a continent), he comes off as callous and insensitive, particularly in his discussion of Jews where he gets perilously close to blaming them for their own persecution. Even if you could put aside the numerous factual errors, the book is also almost impossible to read. It is repetitive, disjointed, and it appears never to have been edited. Cantor spends about a third of the book discussing the topic of this treatise (mostly inaccurately as I have already discussed) and then spends the remainder of the book going off on unrelated and poorly connected tangents rife with run-on sentences and incorrectly used vocabulary. He offers no new insights into this field and will lead newcomers to medieval history astray. Please do not waste your time reading this book. You will only be misinformed and aggravated. If I could give the book no stars, I would. Quite possibly the worst book of medieval history that I have ever been forced to read.
June 17, 2012
I have to agree with many of the earlier reviews. The number of digressions to unrelated issues and the sarcastic sideways swipes of the most blatant and subjective sort made this book unreadable.
I was interested in the Black Death. I was not interested in Mr. Cantor's personal feelings on the royal families of Europe, who owns Catherine of Aragon's vineyards today, or his scathing remarks on the medical ignorance of medieval physicians.
This strikes me as being written by someone who is far more in love with his own storehouse of unrelated bits of historical knowledge and far too amused by his own sarcastic wit to actually be genuinely engaged with the subject at hand.
I understand he teaches medieval history. God help his students.
I was interested in the Black Death. I was not interested in Mr. Cantor's personal feelings on the royal families of Europe, who owns Catherine of Aragon's vineyards today, or his scathing remarks on the medical ignorance of medieval physicians.
This strikes me as being written by someone who is far more in love with his own storehouse of unrelated bits of historical knowledge and far too amused by his own sarcastic wit to actually be genuinely engaged with the subject at hand.
I understand he teaches medieval history. God help his students.
August 25, 2014
In the Wake of the Plague: The Black Death and the World It Made by Norman F. Cantor is a lecture-type book filled with some interesting facts and amusing side stories; it is easy to read at only 220 pages long and does not have a single footnote. While it might not be the in-depth analysis that medieval scholars would look for on this subject, it was exactly what I (a casual history buff) wanted when I picked it up: general information into the plague, its causes, and its effect on European history. For those reasons, I thoroughly enjoyed it – though I do understand it has its shortcomings.
One of the most interesting topics of Cantor’s narrative was his presentation of the current theory that the Black Death was not a single disease caused by bubonic plague alone but a pandemic resulting from plague and a virulent form of anthrax. To support this idea, the author cites to the rapid course of the disease (People were dying too quickly for it to be bubonic plague); the lack of typical symptoms associated with bubonic plague; the fact that the extensive herds of cattle in Europe were decimated by the plague as well; the spread of the disease during winter months; the strange question of how the Black Death spread to Iceland when the country did not have rats until the 17th Century; and the discovery of anthrax spores in the mass burial sites of plague victims. All these things framed the idea that anthrax might have played a role in this pandemic, something that I had never heard before.
The other topic that Cantor expressed very well was the idea that the plague was the primary factor in the loss of the Plantagenet's continental provinces. Chapter 3, “Bordeaux is Burning,” was very enlightening for me, as it related the story of the death of King Edward III's daughter, Princess Joan, as she was traveling to Spain to marry Pedro, the heir to the throne of Castile. The argument that her death by plague frustrated Edward’s effort to unite the thrones of England and Castile, resulting in immense repercussions not only on the English domains in France but the history of Europe going forward was very well thought out and explained. Coupling her death with the decrease in the Plantagenet population resources and economic power did sound like a very reasonable cause of England losing its continental empire.
All in all, Norman Cantor's book was a nice read. It definitely resembled loosely connected lecturers woven together to create a theme than a true, single narrative, but even with that issue, it introduced me to some interesting ideas that I can now research and learn more about. Recommended for those looking for general information about the Black Plague.
One of the most interesting topics of Cantor’s narrative was his presentation of the current theory that the Black Death was not a single disease caused by bubonic plague alone but a pandemic resulting from plague and a virulent form of anthrax. To support this idea, the author cites to the rapid course of the disease (People were dying too quickly for it to be bubonic plague); the lack of typical symptoms associated with bubonic plague; the fact that the extensive herds of cattle in Europe were decimated by the plague as well; the spread of the disease during winter months; the strange question of how the Black Death spread to Iceland when the country did not have rats until the 17th Century; and the discovery of anthrax spores in the mass burial sites of plague victims. All these things framed the idea that anthrax might have played a role in this pandemic, something that I had never heard before.
The other topic that Cantor expressed very well was the idea that the plague was the primary factor in the loss of the Plantagenet's continental provinces. Chapter 3, “Bordeaux is Burning,” was very enlightening for me, as it related the story of the death of King Edward III's daughter, Princess Joan, as she was traveling to Spain to marry Pedro, the heir to the throne of Castile. The argument that her death by plague frustrated Edward’s effort to unite the thrones of England and Castile, resulting in immense repercussions not only on the English domains in France but the history of Europe going forward was very well thought out and explained. Coupling her death with the decrease in the Plantagenet population resources and economic power did sound like a very reasonable cause of England losing its continental empire.
All in all, Norman Cantor's book was a nice read. It definitely resembled loosely connected lecturers woven together to create a theme than a true, single narrative, but even with that issue, it introduced me to some interesting ideas that I can now research and learn more about. Recommended for those looking for general information about the Black Plague.
Read
April 26, 2008This is possibly the worst book of history I have ever read. High points include: a suggestion that Jews were to blame for their own massacre (152), a twenty-page-plus chapter on how the Black Death was good for women (123-146), the assertion that Shakespeare's Richard II is "in some ways the best account of that pathetic and unstable figure" (214) (who, Cantor takes pains to remind us, multiple times, was gay, gay, gay), pages of rambling about Jewish history into the twentieth century (164-167), the unmistakeable condensation of the author toward both his subject and his reader, his attempt to cite Francis Crick as an authority on disease transmission, a reference to Lucy as "the black mother of us all" (186), a bizarre predilection toward editorializing, sensationalizing, and modernizing references, and his addiction to the word "biomedical."
Un-freaking-readable.
(And, on closer examination, I find that he's Anne Rice's favorite historian. That explains *so much.*)
Un-freaking-readable.
(And, on closer examination, I find that he's Anne Rice's favorite historian. That explains *so much.*)
October 16, 2011
After reviewing this book for an undergrad history course (not by choice), I thought I would revisit it as more of a "fun" book--a decision I regret.
The most that can be said for this book is that it does contain some interesting factoids about the time period, which succeed in partially fleshing out the social life of the Middle Ages. For the uneducated layman, it does provide some introduction to the Black Death.
Unfortunately, the author looms large in this book, which by definition makes it bad history. What he presents as history is often smashed over the head and dragged around with his own bias (kudos to the author for mentioning Margaret Thatcher in a book on the 1300s). Of course, all scholars have bias, but here, the bias was not admitted but rather presented as history.
In sum, I can not recommend this book. Though it provides an easy to read introduction to those wanting to know more on the plague and its effects, it does so by presenting a skewed and unfair view of that same time period.
“Early 21st-century man prefers, like Chairman Mao, to let the past serve the present. If he stopped making jejune moral judgments about his ancestors and tried to understand what made them tick instead, he might make less of a mess of his own times.” - Robert Salisbury
The most that can be said for this book is that it does contain some interesting factoids about the time period, which succeed in partially fleshing out the social life of the Middle Ages. For the uneducated layman, it does provide some introduction to the Black Death.
Unfortunately, the author looms large in this book, which by definition makes it bad history. What he presents as history is often smashed over the head and dragged around with his own bias (kudos to the author for mentioning Margaret Thatcher in a book on the 1300s). Of course, all scholars have bias, but here, the bias was not admitted but rather presented as history.
In sum, I can not recommend this book. Though it provides an easy to read introduction to those wanting to know more on the plague and its effects, it does so by presenting a skewed and unfair view of that same time period.
“Early 21st-century man prefers, like Chairman Mao, to let the past serve the present. If he stopped making jejune moral judgments about his ancestors and tried to understand what made them tick instead, he might make less of a mess of his own times.” - Robert Salisbury
August 4, 2011
Cantor took a fascinating subject and basically threw away all the options he had to be interesting and craft a narrative with impact. His writing is basically what you'd expect from an academic (i.e., NOT a writer) trying to write for the popular market - he tries to engage the reader with stories and specific examples, only to lead you down a lot of irrelevant tangents, or to pique your interest and then never return to finish a subject he's opened. He's not even a very good writer, mechanically, producing the kinds of sentences where I'm left either trying to piece together what he intended to say, or scratching my head that anyone with that good an education would write so ungrammatically. I wish I could remember the term for his most common issue - it's when you put your prepositional phrases and objects in the wrong places and end up with things like (not from the book) "The guy went through the door that lived in the castle." I have very little tolerance for people who can't even get it right mechanically; there's no excuse for a book reaching the point of publication with so many glaring errors, and no excuses for Cantor writing that way.
Anyway, interesting subject, largely boring book.
Anyway, interesting subject, largely boring book.
January 20, 2016
While the late Norman Cantor, author of this book, may have been a Professor of History, etc. at NYU, this work has enough flaws for his editors to rightly have demanded a re-write.
Stubbornly, I hung in until Page 103 of the soft cover edition, when I threw up my hands and thought, "Enough!" Here are a few of my reasons for closing this book for good.
First, Cantor's overall tone is completely un-scholarly. Witness, for instance, his reference to Princess Joan, daughter of Edward III, as a "top-drawer white girl", or his referral to Henry II as "a nineteen-year old stud" who, apparently, had "heated loins"? (What on earth do either of those turgid examples of blue prose have to do with The Black Death?) References such as these serve only to make Cantor appear shallow and snide.
They also demonstrate another of this book's problems: the editing is atrocious, as one can see in one of the worst of Cantor's turns of phrase. On Page 57, he tells us (with what I can only describe as relish), "... Henry of Lancaster ... threw out his gay cousin Richard II and seized the crown". Whether Richard was a homosexual or not, his sexual orientation is irrelevant to The Black Death, and such a statement smacks of a lack of respect for the declared subject and comes off merely as a cheap, titillating (and unnecessary) aside. (For the record, I've never read anywhere that Richard II was gay, though he had a close male friend, Robert de Vere, the 9th Earl of Oxford. Still, there is no room for gossip or innuendo in a work purporting to be historical in nature. If you as an historian come out with a declaration such as that, you'd better be prepared to back it up with fact.)
In fact, Cantor liberally salts his text with many of these distracting attempts at superfluous flippancy and his editors failed him in not pointing this out before publication. Was he trying to be witty, or show he knew more than he actually did? Of what use is it, when trying to describe medieval Avignon, to interject that, "Today Avignon is known ... for the summer rock concerts and theater there ..."? Or why, when observing that "medieval England was not a welfare society", include a ham-handed attempt at historical name-dropping (for I can only see it as such) like, " ... Margaret Thatcher would have loved late-fourteenth-century and fifteenth-century England"? Again - examples of needless distraction and irrelevancy which should have been obliterated from the final text. Bad history and bad for the reader who wants to know about the plague.
In short, I selected this book to learn more about The Black Death after having read John Kelly's excellent work, "The Great Mortality". I noted that Cantor's book was a New York Times bestseller (though this fact, of course, does not make a book "good history"). There is even a glowing blurb by none other than Anne Rice, who says that, in Cantor, she's found "the perfect historian".
Well, as to THAT, I can only say, obviously, she has not read Barbara Tuchman
- or John Kelly, for that matter.
If you're new to The Black Death, or just want a really good book about the subject, seek out John Kelly or the incomparable Ms. Tuchman. On NO account should you even TOUCH "In the Wake of the Plague".
Stubbornly, I hung in until Page 103 of the soft cover edition, when I threw up my hands and thought, "Enough!" Here are a few of my reasons for closing this book for good.
First, Cantor's overall tone is completely un-scholarly. Witness, for instance, his reference to Princess Joan, daughter of Edward III, as a "top-drawer white girl", or his referral to Henry II as "a nineteen-year old stud" who, apparently, had "heated loins"? (What on earth do either of those turgid examples of blue prose have to do with The Black Death?) References such as these serve only to make Cantor appear shallow and snide.
They also demonstrate another of this book's problems: the editing is atrocious, as one can see in one of the worst of Cantor's turns of phrase. On Page 57, he tells us (with what I can only describe as relish), "... Henry of Lancaster ... threw out his gay cousin Richard II and seized the crown". Whether Richard was a homosexual or not, his sexual orientation is irrelevant to The Black Death, and such a statement smacks of a lack of respect for the declared subject and comes off merely as a cheap, titillating (and unnecessary) aside. (For the record, I've never read anywhere that Richard II was gay, though he had a close male friend, Robert de Vere, the 9th Earl of Oxford. Still, there is no room for gossip or innuendo in a work purporting to be historical in nature. If you as an historian come out with a declaration such as that, you'd better be prepared to back it up with fact.)
In fact, Cantor liberally salts his text with many of these distracting attempts at superfluous flippancy and his editors failed him in not pointing this out before publication. Was he trying to be witty, or show he knew more than he actually did? Of what use is it, when trying to describe medieval Avignon, to interject that, "Today Avignon is known ... for the summer rock concerts and theater there ..."? Or why, when observing that "medieval England was not a welfare society", include a ham-handed attempt at historical name-dropping (for I can only see it as such) like, " ... Margaret Thatcher would have loved late-fourteenth-century and fifteenth-century England"? Again - examples of needless distraction and irrelevancy which should have been obliterated from the final text. Bad history and bad for the reader who wants to know about the plague.
In short, I selected this book to learn more about The Black Death after having read John Kelly's excellent work, "The Great Mortality". I noted that Cantor's book was a New York Times bestseller (though this fact, of course, does not make a book "good history"). There is even a glowing blurb by none other than Anne Rice, who says that, in Cantor, she's found "the perfect historian".
Well, as to THAT, I can only say, obviously, she has not read Barbara Tuchman
- or John Kelly, for that matter.
If you're new to The Black Death, or just want a really good book about the subject, seek out John Kelly or the incomparable Ms. Tuchman. On NO account should you even TOUCH "In the Wake of the Plague".
December 8, 2021
Interesting how much this book parallels what's happening today - which I am now convinced is not unique, but has happened numerous times over hundreds of years.
The decrease in workers as a result of a pandemic gives them room to renegotiate their conditions and pay. History could be seen as a series of pandemics tipping the power back and fourth between the workers and the owners, actually.
This book is more of a historical background of England in the middle ages than a strict chronology or interpretation of the Black Death. There's some interesting information about how the great famine combined with the Black Death made bedlam out of the existing political order in England and led to the peasant revolts of 1381.
The decrease in workers as a result of a pandemic gives them room to renegotiate their conditions and pay. History could be seen as a series of pandemics tipping the power back and fourth between the workers and the owners, actually.
This book is more of a historical background of England in the middle ages than a strict chronology or interpretation of the Black Death. There's some interesting information about how the great famine combined with the Black Death made bedlam out of the existing political order in England and led to the peasant revolts of 1381.
April 11, 2020
This book was more like an introduction to what the plague left in its wake. So if you are just getting interested in it, this is a good book to start with.
May 21, 2010
Terrible. As someone who is keenly interested in both the time period as well as communicable disease, I found this book horribly biased (author frequently feels the need to comment on people of the time in often derogatory ways, particularly those of the ruling class), badly written, and could not even stomach finishing it more than halfway, when I can count the number of books I've put down unfinished on two hands. It jumps around like a scared rabbit in no particular order, and to be frank, it is mostly a poorly-written, rambling dialog about the time period, with astonishingly little mention of the plague at all. Much better books can be had on any of the subjects within, and the vast majority of those don't have scathing and inappropriate commentaries from the author at every turn.
March 30, 2020
“The survivors of the biomedical holocaust were at first too stunned and confused to do more than augment religious exercises. But slowly it was realized that institutions and the populace would be deeply affected by the great biomedical devastation and sudden severe shrinkage of the population. At various levels of society there were challenges to the old order and there were adjustments to be made to a drastically affected world. The pestilence deeply affected individual and family behavior and consciousness. It put severe strains on the social, political, and economic systems. It threatened the stability and viability of civilization. It was as if a neutron bomb had been detonated. Nothing like this has happened before or since in the recorded history of mankind, and the men and women of the …century would never be the same.”
If you think this is a futuristic assessment of the world post-covid 19 pandemic, think again. Instead of imagining the near future, we look back at the past, 600-plus years ago, during the 14th century to be exact. This was about the Bubonic Plague, the Black Death, which occurred in 1347 to 1351and which annihilated an estimated thirty to fifty percent of Europe’s population.
Many didn’t like this book for it has more on information than on entertainment (the author, after all, is a historian of the Middle Ages). Indeed, one can probably slosh through it and appreciate the fact that human nature and its reaction to something that threatens society’s very existence has not changed at all even after hundreds of years only when another plague is going on in the midst of one’s reading.
All the crazy stuff you hear today about the whys and wherefores of the current pandemic, including saints, and gods and miracle cures, they’ve had them all too 600 years ago. The Bubonic Plague, of course, was more lethal (considering the state of science at that time) but then, as it is now, the plague was democratic: both the poor and the mighty were afflicted and died like flies. Then as it is now, too, the numbers were more grim for those in the lower echelon of society. About forty to fifty percent of them perished while those who belonged to the upper strata (like the Lords, Archbishops and the like) had only about twenty-five percent mortality rate.
Right now, the covid 19 pandemic is cleaning the air and waters of the world. But what good did the Black Death do? The book says that in 1997 scientists discovered a genetic mutant called CCR5 which gave its human carriers immunity against HIV (and therefore immunity against AIDS also). It was said to have been created during the Black Death so that if you are descended from a Caucasian who contracted the plague of the mid-fourteenth century and that ancestor survived, you may have complete immunity to HIV/AIDS.
February 9, 2021
Eeek this book is for sure the worst book I've read this year. The black plague is normally something I'm interested in learning about but this book was just not interesting. The facts is not well written or interesting and he keeps putting out his opinions trough out that doesn't make the book more interesting or feelt needed. Can like it sometime if it has a point but in non fiction I want to learn the facts not the opinion of the author. I had more issues with it but I'm not writing everything here. Check other reviews if your curious. I almost never say this in a review but this is a book better skipped then read.
December 19, 2014
Oh golly was this a bad book.
Incoherent and inaccurate, this late effort by Cantor fails to even live up to its title, and elucidate the lasting effects the Black Plague. The sources Cantor cites are antique and appear selected just because they agree with his own opinions, the chapter order is random and compose of rambling anecdotes that arrive in weird places, and throughout the book unsupported observations repeat endlessly as if repetition makes the assertion more truer.
Furthermore, Cantor endlessly presents tautologies and teleologies as though they are objective and demonstrated observations. His theses can be effectively summed up as: This thing that happened made Europe more like us today, so that is because of the Black Death. This other thing that happened made Europe less like us today, so that was because of the Black Death.
Because the book is so lightweight and otherwise uninteresting it is natural to focus upon the one original contribution Cantor makes in this volume, which is his theory that the pandemic and mortality was not actually caused by the presumed Bubonic Plague, but was instead a combination of anthrax, the plague, and cattle murrain. How he settled upon these three is kind of a mystery, excepting that the combination gives him the symptom profile of a worst case plague victim. Problem is, two of these are not normally infectious to humans, and this unlikely combination would need to repeat several times across decades, not just once. To add weight to this tri-part theory Cantor makes an entirely dismissive assessment of the Bubonic theory (ignoring entirely the evidence that the vector was not rats but aerosols and the demonstrated behavior of a disease in a virgin population is often very different than that same disease in one previously exposed), and then presents a bizarre summary of a cosmic panspermia plague theory that no one takes seriously as though that were the only counter theory to the fleas and rats vector theory. In short, the proof that his theory is the correct one is because all the others are stupid.
Let us just say that only Cantor's profile as a popular medieval scholar made the publication of this book possible. 1.5 stars (rounded to two) for being an entertaining failure instead of a dreary failure, and the fact that I have a nostalgic liking for Cantor's other (but equally poorly researched) books and know that this volume is just particularly bad. When Cantor was in his prime he was a fascinatingly opinionated boor, and all kinds of readable.
Incoherent and inaccurate, this late effort by Cantor fails to even live up to its title, and elucidate the lasting effects the Black Plague. The sources Cantor cites are antique and appear selected just because they agree with his own opinions, the chapter order is random and compose of rambling anecdotes that arrive in weird places, and throughout the book unsupported observations repeat endlessly as if repetition makes the assertion more truer.
Furthermore, Cantor endlessly presents tautologies and teleologies as though they are objective and demonstrated observations. His theses can be effectively summed up as: This thing that happened made Europe more like us today, so that is because of the Black Death. This other thing that happened made Europe less like us today, so that was because of the Black Death.
Because the book is so lightweight and otherwise uninteresting it is natural to focus upon the one original contribution Cantor makes in this volume, which is his theory that the pandemic and mortality was not actually caused by the presumed Bubonic Plague, but was instead a combination of anthrax, the plague, and cattle murrain. How he settled upon these three is kind of a mystery, excepting that the combination gives him the symptom profile of a worst case plague victim. Problem is, two of these are not normally infectious to humans, and this unlikely combination would need to repeat several times across decades, not just once. To add weight to this tri-part theory Cantor makes an entirely dismissive assessment of the Bubonic theory (ignoring entirely the evidence that the vector was not rats but aerosols and the demonstrated behavior of a disease in a virgin population is often very different than that same disease in one previously exposed), and then presents a bizarre summary of a cosmic panspermia plague theory that no one takes seriously as though that were the only counter theory to the fleas and rats vector theory. In short, the proof that his theory is the correct one is because all the others are stupid.
Let us just say that only Cantor's profile as a popular medieval scholar made the publication of this book possible. 1.5 stars (rounded to two) for being an entertaining failure instead of a dreary failure, and the fact that I have a nostalgic liking for Cantor's other (but equally poorly researched) books and know that this volume is just particularly bad. When Cantor was in his prime he was a fascinatingly opinionated boor, and all kinds of readable.
March 4, 2013
Well written and absorbing. This book offered me a lot of insights into not just what the plague did to Europe, but how it changed social structure, especially in regard to the role of wealthy women. Recommended highly.
August 19, 2022
I never have any luck when finding books about the Black Death. Of the handful I’ve read, the only interesting accounts I’ve come across have been chapters in history books covering a broad spectrum of issues related to the 14th and 15th centuries. Norman F. Cantor’s In the Wake Of the Plague is no exception. It’s difficult to even tell why Cantor wrote this dreadful book. Maybe he wanted to finish one last project before he died. Maybe he was senile. I don’t know. But I do know this book is a waste of time.
Cantor opens up with a chapter on what the Black Death actually was. His contention is that it was not entirely the bubonic plague, but a mixture of that with anthrax that had spread from diseased cattle to the human population. He doesn’t appear to know much about science, but fair enough, I’ll stay with him for the time being. But then he launches into a long, unnecessary sidetrack about plagues, pandemics, and other diseases that adds nothing of value to his discussion.
From there, he goes into an analysis of medieval society that starts with Princess Joan’s journey to Spain to get married. There is a lot about the Hundred Years War, peasant uprisings, the structure of the nobility, the relation between church and state, the disputes over the papacy, and a detailed account of Bradwardine’s progressive theology and his conflict with the more conservative and less-scientific philosophers of the day. At some points, this all reads more like a general history of the era and less like a treatise about the Black Death. In fact, the Black Death only has a tenuous connection to what Cantor actually writes about. He details the lives of people who died of the plague, but doesn’t say much about the plague itself as if it is little more than an afterthought or a way of making connections between people that aren’t really connected. Then there is some other stuff about the scapegoating of Jews and witches. It’s a mishmash of information loosely tied together by the theme of the plague, but none of it ever congeals into any kind of an intriguing narrative. It all seems quite boring and pointless.
The book ends with a couple of goofy chapters considering that the Black Death might have come from people eating snakes, something from outer space, or germs that spread from eastern Africa. There are then more sidetracks about diseases in ancient Greece and Rome, and AIDS in the 20th century. None of this is explained with sufficient detail to be convincing or even interesting. In the afterword, Cantor tries to explain how the Black Death affected society, but all he comes up with is some abstract social theorizing and commentaries on art history; none of these claims can be supported with any kind of tangible or relevant data.
The only good thing I can say about In the Wake Of the Plague is that it has a cool picture on the cover. That and the fact that it is so short and simple that it can be read in one day. In other words, it won’t waste too much of your time if you actually bother to pick it up. It is best to pass this one by.
https://gravitysrainbowbookseller.blo...
Cantor opens up with a chapter on what the Black Death actually was. His contention is that it was not entirely the bubonic plague, but a mixture of that with anthrax that had spread from diseased cattle to the human population. He doesn’t appear to know much about science, but fair enough, I’ll stay with him for the time being. But then he launches into a long, unnecessary sidetrack about plagues, pandemics, and other diseases that adds nothing of value to his discussion.
From there, he goes into an analysis of medieval society that starts with Princess Joan’s journey to Spain to get married. There is a lot about the Hundred Years War, peasant uprisings, the structure of the nobility, the relation between church and state, the disputes over the papacy, and a detailed account of Bradwardine’s progressive theology and his conflict with the more conservative and less-scientific philosophers of the day. At some points, this all reads more like a general history of the era and less like a treatise about the Black Death. In fact, the Black Death only has a tenuous connection to what Cantor actually writes about. He details the lives of people who died of the plague, but doesn’t say much about the plague itself as if it is little more than an afterthought or a way of making connections between people that aren’t really connected. Then there is some other stuff about the scapegoating of Jews and witches. It’s a mishmash of information loosely tied together by the theme of the plague, but none of it ever congeals into any kind of an intriguing narrative. It all seems quite boring and pointless.
The book ends with a couple of goofy chapters considering that the Black Death might have come from people eating snakes, something from outer space, or germs that spread from eastern Africa. There are then more sidetracks about diseases in ancient Greece and Rome, and AIDS in the 20th century. None of this is explained with sufficient detail to be convincing or even interesting. In the afterword, Cantor tries to explain how the Black Death affected society, but all he comes up with is some abstract social theorizing and commentaries on art history; none of these claims can be supported with any kind of tangible or relevant data.
The only good thing I can say about In the Wake Of the Plague is that it has a cool picture on the cover. That and the fact that it is so short and simple that it can be read in one day. In other words, it won’t waste too much of your time if you actually bother to pick it up. It is best to pass this one by.
https://gravitysrainbowbookseller.blo...
July 5, 2012
Norman Cantor’s slim little volume the Black Death is a great example of how to write a popular history. His main goal is to tell us, in broad strokes, what he thinks. He’s the well known professor out on the lecture circuit, not the Ph.D. candidate defending his thesis. There’s not a footnote in sight, but there are plenty of one-liners and off-handed jabs:
Cantor’s overall thesis is broad and somewhat difficult to characterize. In the opening section, “Biomedical Context,” and again in the closing one, “History,” he argues that the Black Death was probably not solely due to rodent-borne forms of the bubonic plague. Admitting that the biological evidence is scanty, he still makes the case that cattle-borne anthrax was also a likely culprit. “What is most puzzling about the Black Death of the fourteenth century is its very rapid dissemination, a quality more characteristic of a cattle disease than a rodent-disseminated one.” Regardless, the effects were terrifying: at least a third of Western Europe’s population were killed by it from 1347 to 1350.
Interestingly, the plague coincided with the end of a long period of warm, crop-friendly weather. England’s population was nearing six million in 1300. A few famines in the early part of the fourteenth century had begun to reduce that number, but the plague had such an impact that the English population didn’t fully rebound until 1750 or so.
Somewhat obviously, the “pestilence” (as contempories called it) had a huge social impact. The fortunes of the English monarchy changed dramatically as the Platagenet family, hit hard by the plague, lost power as the House of Lancaster was able to gain ground and sit on the throne. As the death rate mounted, a rural labor shortage slowly developed. Cantor argues that the moment was ripe for a successful peasant uprising, but the opportunity was lost, and the old social hierarchy was kept intact. The Jews, whose social isolation and dietary rituals kept their population healthier than their Gentile neighbors, were nonetheless hit hard by scapegoating persecutions, especially on the continent.
In all, this is a satisfying little book. It’s comprehensive enough to get a good glimpse of the breadth of the plague’s impact without getting mired down in a myriad of details of more use to professional historians than the broader public.
Late medieval England was not a welfare society. That did not happen until the application of the Elizabethan poor laws in the 1580s which, however, treated the able-bodied poor as prisoners in workhouses and gave the rest starvation-level aid. By a broader and more humane definition the English welfare state did not begin until the Labor government of 1945-51, and Margaret Thatcher would have loved late-fourteenth-century and fifteenth-centry England.
Cantor’s overall thesis is broad and somewhat difficult to characterize. In the opening section, “Biomedical Context,” and again in the closing one, “History,” he argues that the Black Death was probably not solely due to rodent-borne forms of the bubonic plague. Admitting that the biological evidence is scanty, he still makes the case that cattle-borne anthrax was also a likely culprit. “What is most puzzling about the Black Death of the fourteenth century is its very rapid dissemination, a quality more characteristic of a cattle disease than a rodent-disseminated one.” Regardless, the effects were terrifying: at least a third of Western Europe’s population were killed by it from 1347 to 1350.
Interestingly, the plague coincided with the end of a long period of warm, crop-friendly weather. England’s population was nearing six million in 1300. A few famines in the early part of the fourteenth century had begun to reduce that number, but the plague had such an impact that the English population didn’t fully rebound until 1750 or so.
Somewhat obviously, the “pestilence” (as contempories called it) had a huge social impact. The fortunes of the English monarchy changed dramatically as the Platagenet family, hit hard by the plague, lost power as the House of Lancaster was able to gain ground and sit on the throne. As the death rate mounted, a rural labor shortage slowly developed. Cantor argues that the moment was ripe for a successful peasant uprising, but the opportunity was lost, and the old social hierarchy was kept intact. The Jews, whose social isolation and dietary rituals kept their population healthier than their Gentile neighbors, were nonetheless hit hard by scapegoating persecutions, especially on the continent.
In all, this is a satisfying little book. It’s comprehensive enough to get a good glimpse of the breadth of the plague’s impact without getting mired down in a myriad of details of more use to professional historians than the broader public.
October 21, 2017
Dreadful. Just avoid and read any other book on the subject.
I have noticed many people have rated this 2 stars, due the them thinking Cantor had done lots of research. He didn't or if he did, he changed, or more likely chose to change the facts, to meet his totally invented ideas. I should have guessed early when he states that the population of England on the eve of the Black Death was around 6 million? Total nonesense, but then the whole book is shot through with invented 'facts'.
Most estimates put it between 2.5 million and 4 million the latter always with big qualifications?
Basically he had a modern extreme left wing political agenda, and tries to impose it onto Medieval Society? In one chapter where he asserts the Black Death enforced the class system and kept the poor down. Two paragraphs later he tells of a peasant farmer rising through the ranks? he then tries to backtrack as if he has realised he contradicts himself.
If you insist on reading it, and it is readable, take all the facts as dubious at best, and a bunch of lies at worse.
I have noticed many people have rated this 2 stars, due the them thinking Cantor had done lots of research. He didn't or if he did, he changed, or more likely chose to change the facts, to meet his totally invented ideas. I should have guessed early when he states that the population of England on the eve of the Black Death was around 6 million? Total nonesense, but then the whole book is shot through with invented 'facts'.
Most estimates put it between 2.5 million and 4 million the latter always with big qualifications?
Basically he had a modern extreme left wing political agenda, and tries to impose it onto Medieval Society? In one chapter where he asserts the Black Death enforced the class system and kept the poor down. Two paragraphs later he tells of a peasant farmer rising through the ranks? he then tries to backtrack as if he has realised he contradicts himself.
If you insist on reading it, and it is readable, take all the facts as dubious at best, and a bunch of lies at worse.
August 1, 2011
This book is pretty terrible. I gave it two stars, as opposed to one, because it is clear that he knows a fair amount about the Middle Ages. He didn't earn any more than two because 1) it's clear that he knows very little about the Bubonic Plague and 2) he doesn't make very many strong connections about how the plague impacted the world.
Most of his focus is on England and not the rest of Europe. He goes off on tangents about the English royal family 3 generations before the plague.
The few good points he does make (about women gaining more power after the plague, for example) are weakly made. He spends most of the rest of the book meandering back and forth between random points. As another reviewer pointed out... if I was a teacher (which I am) and I was given this as a paper, I would give it back and say "put some structure to this verbal diarrhea".
Most of his focus is on England and not the rest of Europe. He goes off on tangents about the English royal family 3 generations before the plague.
The few good points he does make (about women gaining more power after the plague, for example) are weakly made. He spends most of the rest of the book meandering back and forth between random points. As another reviewer pointed out... if I was a teacher (which I am) and I was given this as a paper, I would give it back and say "put some structure to this verbal diarrhea".
May 14, 2016
Unbelievably awful.
December 21, 2008
Frankly, I was disappointed. I had high hopes for this book. I am fascinated by the Black Death and interested in the author's theory that the Black Death was actually a combination of the plague and anthrax. This is not a theory I had heard much about. Rather than enhancing my understanding of his hypothesis, it left me without answers or substantiation of this cutting edge theory.
Rather than the story of the plague itself, it seemed the relative merits of the economic feudal system of the middle ages was his real book topic. There also seemed to be a disturbing "women didn't have it so bad in the middle ages because they were protected from inheriting nothing by the dowager rules and besides all the dead people left them jobs and all those dowagers destroyed the landholding system anyway" bent to his writing as well. His statement that "saying married women in gentry society were mere property in the time of the Pestilence does not get at the reality of their situation. As in rich families today, the words mere and property did not go well together. There was nothing dismissive or perjorative about property. It was the heart and soul of gentry life." (p. 142). As a woman, I respectfully disagree.
While parts of the book were fascinating (persecution of Jews for suspicions of causing the plague) much of the book reads as a who begat who with the necessity of a dictionary close at hand. His overall points about the way the plague shaped the world for the next centuries was lost amid his random sidetracks. A good editor could have done wonders for this book.
Rather than the story of the plague itself, it seemed the relative merits of the economic feudal system of the middle ages was his real book topic. There also seemed to be a disturbing "women didn't have it so bad in the middle ages because they were protected from inheriting nothing by the dowager rules and besides all the dead people left them jobs and all those dowagers destroyed the landholding system anyway" bent to his writing as well. His statement that "saying married women in gentry society were mere property in the time of the Pestilence does not get at the reality of their situation. As in rich families today, the words mere and property did not go well together. There was nothing dismissive or perjorative about property. It was the heart and soul of gentry life." (p. 142). As a woman, I respectfully disagree.
While parts of the book were fascinating (persecution of Jews for suspicions of causing the plague) much of the book reads as a who begat who with the necessity of a dictionary close at hand. His overall points about the way the plague shaped the world for the next centuries was lost amid his random sidetracks. A good editor could have done wonders for this book.
April 3, 2021
I left this book unfinished almost midway through. This is a book about one of the most tragic incidents in human history which has many aspects to explore, but this author appears to be completely unqualified for such exploration. This book is full of gossips and unfounded claims, and the author doesn’t even bother himself with providing a single reference. The other annoying element if this book is that less than a third of its content is directly about Black Death. I understand that any work of history [be it a popular book or an academic publication] must provide a thorough historical background to explain and analyse its subject appropriately, but this is not the case with this book. The author tries to hide his utter lack of knowledge about the Black Death by speaking about some random events at length and then connects them with the Black Death in less than a paragraph. I really couldn’t continue reading this book because of this latter problem; reading it was making me angry. This was an absolute disappointment.
November 18, 2012
In a parenthetical, Cantor claims that one of his sources wrote his book after "his department head reminded him it was publish or perish time." I suspect this is true of Cantor's work too. It is sloppy, unfocused, and frankly, only about 20% relevant to the Plague. There are places too where he comes off as blissfully ignorant of some of his subject matter--as in his description of the ancestral hominid Australopithecus as "probably black"--and makes one wonder what else he's got wrong that you aren't knowledgable enough to notice. About the only part worth reading is the chapter about the scapegoating of Jews. If the book hadn't been so short and quick to read, I probably wouldn't have finished it. In fact, I kind of wish Cantor had given me an excuse to quit.
October 12, 2018
This book looks at what happened after the Plague ravaged Europe. Cantor speculates on what historical changes were possible only because of the plague and what could have happened without its devastation. I've read this book a few times, and I have always been intrigued by how much was changed in Europe due to the sheer amount of deaths and the lack of workers in the countries affected by the Black Death. Don't go looking into this book as another history about what happened during the plague years, because this doesn't focus on that, only what came after. It's one of my favorite history books and will probably read it a few more times in the years to come.
April 27, 2016
Disappointing. The concept was fascinating: how did the Black Death change society? The execution of this concept was sadly wanting. Too gossipy in tone in some places, dry in others, the author skips from topic to topic as though he were writing a series of essays entitled, "Some Things I Know About the Plague and Medieval Europe (Now With 75% Less Verification).
Cantor has some valid points and attempts to breathe life into people who now seem to be only names. But the positives are outweighed by rambling tangents and chapters that never seem to grapple with their main topic, let alone pin it down.
Cantor has some valid points and attempts to breathe life into people who now seem to be only names. But the positives are outweighed by rambling tangents and chapters that never seem to grapple with their main topic, let alone pin it down.
January 7, 2010
I don't read a lot of books about history. Is this how they're supposed to read? I found it convoluted, disjointed, and prone to tangents. I would spend pages wondering what in the hell this was supposed to do with the main topic of the chapter, and then finally, at the end, he would tack on an epilogue explaining how it all fit together. In the end, I guess I did learn a lot about medieval history, but not all that much about the Black Death itself. I think it would have been more interesting to read a book about the actual plague, and not about how it shaped history afterwards.
November 29, 2020
I struggle to remember the whole properly after a short while, which probably says that it was not very innovative. There are some interesting stories, though, notably about the Jewish conspiracy; and also the general attitude of historians to the whole affair, which lacks a lot, unfortunately, primarily because the understanding of biological mechanisms is still (and probably will remain) rather sketchy.
September 8, 2008
The focus of this book was primarily upon the effects of the Black Death (as you might guess from the title).
Cantor did talk about possible causes of the Plague mostly in the beginning and end of the book. The current theory seems to be the Y. Pestis carried by black rats with a simultaneous outbreak of Anthrax contracted from sick cattle. Apparently black rats are very slow moving and generally have a very limited range of travel so while it is quite possible they carried the fleas that spread the Plague onto ships which then spread the Plague in various ports, some scientists think it is unlikely that fleas alone could account for the rapid spread of the disease over such a large geographic area.
There is also some discussion of more radical theories about the origin of the Plague, including one theory that this disease, like most diseases, is from outer space and arrives in comet debris.
There is also much discussion about how contemporaries viewed the Plague and tried to treat it. Many Western Europeans viewed it as a punishment from God for sins of the wicked, although the widespread nature of the disease made that explanation somewhat problematic. Muslims believed that it was more of a blessing from God and they believed that dying from Plague made a person as great a martyr and was as honorable a death as dying in battle.
There was also much discussion of Galen and his theories about the four humors and how their imbalances would cause the disease.
The Church viewed human dissection as a great sin, so while there were many advances in other areas, particularly theology and philosophy, there was little advancement in science at that time. There are conflicting views on whether the Plague caused people to become more religious or if it caused people to lose faith in the Church, as the Church was obviously powerless in the face of the Plague.
Not surprisingly, outsiders and Jews were blamed for the spread of the disease. One Jew was "lightly tortured" at least twice before "confessing" that he had poisoned wells which caused the Plague. Jews were driven out of some areas but were often rounded up and burned alive.
The Plague had a great affect on the politics of the time. I must admit, reading this book made me ashamed of my limited knowledge of European History. I have a hard time keeping all the Richards, Edwards and Henrys straight.
The Plague had a profound affect on the lesser nobility, serfs, and yeomen as well. There was much discussion about the fact that the Plague caused a severe labor shortage which hastened the end of serfdom. Serfs were able to demand better wages and standards of living and if they couldn't get it from their current employer they'd move and find work elsewhere. Some governments, including England's, passed laws to try and keep wages at pre-Plague levels. This led to revolts by the peasantry. (Surprise).
The Plague had a profound affect upon real estate law. In fact, much of real estate law in modern America is based upon cases that rose up immediately after the Plague. One of the effects of lawsuits was to free serfs (one could only sue or be sued if one was free i.e. not a serf and the courts were pretty lax about determining a person's status and once they'd been part of a lawsuit they were free even if they weren't before).
Because widowers were entitled to a large amount of an estate, and because the disease seems to have affected more men than women and sometimes the only family member left alive was a woman who would then inherit everything, there was some discussion that the Plague actually helped women gain more independence than they'd had before.
There was also some suggestion that Germany in particular may have been devastated by the Plague, possibly depressing the population so much that it led to some of the troubles of World War I and II. (Other theories say Germany did not lose much more than other locations that were devastated by Plague and the population would have rebounded long before World War I).
It was a fascinating book. Although there were sections that were repetitive and a few small sections that seemed pretty random, the book seemed well researched. Cantor was careful to say what the prevailing theory was but also describe some previous theories and explain why those theories were no longer believed. After reading this book I had a much greater appreciation for the role disease played in European history.
Recommended.
Cantor did talk about possible causes of the Plague mostly in the beginning and end of the book. The current theory seems to be the Y. Pestis carried by black rats with a simultaneous outbreak of Anthrax contracted from sick cattle. Apparently black rats are very slow moving and generally have a very limited range of travel so while it is quite possible they carried the fleas that spread the Plague onto ships which then spread the Plague in various ports, some scientists think it is unlikely that fleas alone could account for the rapid spread of the disease over such a large geographic area.
There is also some discussion of more radical theories about the origin of the Plague, including one theory that this disease, like most diseases, is from outer space and arrives in comet debris.
There is also much discussion about how contemporaries viewed the Plague and tried to treat it. Many Western Europeans viewed it as a punishment from God for sins of the wicked, although the widespread nature of the disease made that explanation somewhat problematic. Muslims believed that it was more of a blessing from God and they believed that dying from Plague made a person as great a martyr and was as honorable a death as dying in battle.
There was also much discussion of Galen and his theories about the four humors and how their imbalances would cause the disease.
The Church viewed human dissection as a great sin, so while there were many advances in other areas, particularly theology and philosophy, there was little advancement in science at that time. There are conflicting views on whether the Plague caused people to become more religious or if it caused people to lose faith in the Church, as the Church was obviously powerless in the face of the Plague.
Not surprisingly, outsiders and Jews were blamed for the spread of the disease. One Jew was "lightly tortured" at least twice before "confessing" that he had poisoned wells which caused the Plague. Jews were driven out of some areas but were often rounded up and burned alive.
The Plague had a great affect on the politics of the time. I must admit, reading this book made me ashamed of my limited knowledge of European History. I have a hard time keeping all the Richards, Edwards and Henrys straight.
The Plague had a profound affect on the lesser nobility, serfs, and yeomen as well. There was much discussion about the fact that the Plague caused a severe labor shortage which hastened the end of serfdom. Serfs were able to demand better wages and standards of living and if they couldn't get it from their current employer they'd move and find work elsewhere. Some governments, including England's, passed laws to try and keep wages at pre-Plague levels. This led to revolts by the peasantry. (Surprise).
The Plague had a profound affect upon real estate law. In fact, much of real estate law in modern America is based upon cases that rose up immediately after the Plague. One of the effects of lawsuits was to free serfs (one could only sue or be sued if one was free i.e. not a serf and the courts were pretty lax about determining a person's status and once they'd been part of a lawsuit they were free even if they weren't before).
Because widowers were entitled to a large amount of an estate, and because the disease seems to have affected more men than women and sometimes the only family member left alive was a woman who would then inherit everything, there was some discussion that the Plague actually helped women gain more independence than they'd had before.
There was also some suggestion that Germany in particular may have been devastated by the Plague, possibly depressing the population so much that it led to some of the troubles of World War I and II. (Other theories say Germany did not lose much more than other locations that were devastated by Plague and the population would have rebounded long before World War I).
It was a fascinating book. Although there were sections that were repetitive and a few small sections that seemed pretty random, the book seemed well researched. Cantor was careful to say what the prevailing theory was but also describe some previous theories and explain why those theories were no longer believed. After reading this book I had a much greater appreciation for the role disease played in European history.
Recommended.
July 28, 2007
I found this book very different from my expectations but nonetheless fascinating. It does not spend as much time on the progression and details of the black plague's spread as it does on the historical and socialogical import and impact of the plague on Europe--which was catastrophic and world order changing in its scope! The author explores the origins and possible spread theories of the plague, which are imperfectly explained by the most popular 'rat infestation' alone. I was surprised.. and intrigued sufficient to whet my appetite for further research into the fascinating study of germs, their origin, spread, impact and import to mankind and the world. I highly recommend this author. He is readable and clearly yet embraces a scientific and scholarly standard for his work.
April 25, 2019
Sadly, there is no way to write a positive review on this book. I have always found that knowing a lot is relevant, but being able to share that knowledge is a different story. Norman Cantor comes across as a smug writer, constantly passing judgemental comments using a modern perspective towards the past. He also tries to be light and even funny, but his condescending bias is too heavy to be missed. Moreover, the analysis on the topic is vague if not shallow. Read this book only if have just started reading on this topic, but you will be better off with historians as Ian Mortimer, or even with some well documented historical fiction.
February 15, 2020
This is the only book I've ever written to the publisher about to demand a refund. (There was no reply). It doesn't seem the manuscript was edited or reviewed. The book is about Europe, but the terminology is often American - eg 'ranch'. To me, the book reads as if Cantor took his lecture notes and gave them to an undergraduate student to write up into a manuscript, as a money-making exercise. I hope the student got their cut of the royalties!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 649 reviews