The reason given both in class and in the textbook was a lack of innate protection from new diseases in the Native American people's immune system. But if this is the case, wouldn't Europeans be adversely affected by Native American disease?
The answer is, probably, yes. Among others, the disease syphilis is believed by some scholars to have been introduced to Europe when Columbus returned, having brought it from the New World.
But as a whole, the impact on Native Americans was much more severe. The reason often given is that Europe simply had more disease vectors, as people lived closer to animals and large mammals not present in the Americas. Moreover, European cities were often less sanitary, and some diseases can only be sustained by a large population that can only be found in Europe. Few places in America harbored this kind of potential for pathogens to spread.
Nonetheless, these are only partial answers to why disease hurt the Native Americans so severely. There are numerous theories as to the spread of disease between the Old and New Worlds through the Columbian Exchange. Additionally, there are perpetually more questions than answers: why did Native Americans suffer more from the same disease that Europeans were plagued with, even though Native Americans lived in cleaner environments? Was more disease spread to the Americas than vice versa because the Old World was larger than the New World?
So with all this in mind, why did disease act in the way it did?
So with all this in mind, why did disease act in the way it did?
Diseases are a relentless force that don't care about race, religion or gender. So i believe it was less of immunity to diseases and more of religious and cultural practices. Compared to Europeans the native Americans were a very conservative group. The natives had not really progressed in technology, medicine, or in society. They kept their ways the same because it worked for them and their native neighbors. but once the Europeans landed and were introduced to new technology and ways of life they didn't really change their medicine and practices that badly affected their body like eating raw meats. Once the diseases were introduced they easily spread to other members of the tribe because of the closeness of the tribe and its people and housing. They all shared and contributed in one way or another so when many members of a tribe are affected by such diseases without the proper medicine the less work is being done, less food gathered etc. And with the help of the aggressiveness of the colonists the natives were being forced into smaller and smaller areas where the diseases could easily spread which lead to the death of many natives.
ReplyDeleteThe germs brought in from Europe the Native Americans were not already immune to because they have not been exposed to them. It was not because of unhygienic practices it was just that their bodies were not immune. There were also diseases from north america that the Europeans were not used to already like smallpox so the diseases spreading and outbreaks went both ways.
ReplyDeleteI find that very interesting: I've learned about the destruction of the Native American population and other native people of the Americas by disease but never considering why the effects were so devastating seemingly one way more than the other. Logically it would make sense that both populations would equally pass pathogens from one to another, but like you state, more critically the European populations are far vaster, interconnected, and crowded with hundreds of years of integration of diseases from all over the rest of the known world whereas many of the native populations were more secluded. Could a greater knowledge of science and medicine by the explorers also contributed to the control of many diseases received from native populations? **
ReplyDelete