New world illnesses kill 90% of the Old world

[aargauer]

So - instead of just getting syphilis, and passing on smallpox, cholera, dysentery and tuberculosis, we get something nasty that kills the vast majority of the old world.

Does this end Abrahamic religions? Do we go back to the dark ages and lose technology? End of western civilisation? Does the industrial revolution happen?

[J.G.Harston]

Jul 17, 2022 21:12:01 GMT aargauer said:

So - instead of just getting syphilis, and passing on smallpox, cholera, dysentery and tuberculosis, we get something nasty that kills the vast majority of the old world.

Does this end Abrahamic religions? Do we go back to the dark ages and lose technology? End of western civilisation? Does the industrial revolution happen?

When does it happen? 1350s (when it almost did)? 1550s (when we were wiping out the New World)? 1950s?

[aargauer]

Jul 17, 2022 21:32:19 GMT J.G.Harston said:

Jul 17, 2022 21:12:01 GMT aargauer said:

So - instead of just getting syphilis, and passing on smallpox, cholera, dysentery and tuberculosis, we get something nasty that kills the vast majority of the old world.

Does this end Abrahamic religions? Do we go back to the dark ages and lose technology? End of western civilisation? Does the industrial revolution happen?

When does it happen? 1350s (when it almost did)? 1550s (when we were wiping out the New World)? 1950s?

At time of contact with the new world - 1492. In the reign of Henry VII.

We can presume brief Viking contact didn't result in any intercontinental disease spreading.

[J.G.Harston]

Jul 18, 2022 6:10:25 GMT aargauer said:

Jul 17, 2022 21:32:19 GMT J.G.Harston said:

When does it happen? 1350s (when it almost did)? 1550s (when we were wiping out the New World)? 1950s?

At time of contact with the new world - 1492. In the reign of Henry VII.

We can presume brief Viking contact didn't result in any intercontinental disease spreading.

Call it 1500. Initial thoughts are that Europe had already gone through a mass winnowing in 1350 where the Black Death had taken a third of the population, drastically changing social and economic dynamics. In the 1500s the population had generally built up again, and the expansion into the New World was a useful outflow of surplus population. There's an argument that this population outflow and the inflow of resources from the new lands delayed the industrial revolution, as there's no impetus to improve agriculture and technology when you can just import other people's surpluses.

The first though is if there was a mass dying in Europe in, say, 1550, there would not be that surplus population to get up and go to the New World to develope it and send resources home. If you have a 90% chance of inheriting land from a dozen relatives dying, instead of a 90% chance of never inheriting anything, you're much more likely to stay at home.

That lack of population may have spurred the start of the industrial revolution, as with not enough people around to work the land, there would be a pressure to invent techniques to use fewer workers, and the machinery to do that. So, workable steam engines by 1600? Locomotives by 1650? Radio by 1750?

[neilm]

It's an interesting thing to explore, but do we kmow of any New World diseases that were brought back, apart from, possibly, syphilis? My mind has drawn a blank, but it is 2am.

[greenchristian]

Jul 28, 2022 1:04:16 GMT neilm said:

It's an interesting thing to explore, but do we kmow of any New World diseases that were brought back, apart from, possibly, syphilis? My mind has drawn a blank, but it is 2am.

Syphilis is the only one that's even theorised. Most new diseases are the result of something crossing the species barrier as a result of close contact between humans and (usually domesticated) animals, and the pre-Columbus Americas had virtually no domesticated animals (Llamas and Alapacas in the Inca Empire, and that's about it). So there was very little opportunity for something deadly to emerge in the Americas.

[neilm]

Jul 28, 2022 5:50:18 GMT greenchristian said:

Jul 28, 2022 1:04:16 GMT neilm said:

It's an interesting thing to explore, but do we kmow of any New World diseases that were brought back, apart from, possibly, syphilis? My mind has drawn a blank, but it is 2am.

Syphilis is the only one that's even theorised. Most new diseases are the result of something crossing the species barrier as a result of close contact between humans and (usually domesticated) animals, and the pre-Columbus Americas had virtually no domesticated animals (Llamas and Alapacas in the Inca Empire, and that's about it). So there was very little opportunity for something deadly to emerge in the Americas.

The population was also very spread out, so even if something zoonotic made the jump to one of the tribes that was more village-y/developed it would be unlikely to go further: although there were trade links they were limited by geography, mountain ranges etc. Supposition on my part.

[Daft H'a'porth A'peth A'pith]

Jul 29, 2022 20:27:58 GMT neilm said:

Jul 28, 2022 5:50:18 GMT greenchristian said:

Syphilis is the only one that's even theorised. Most new diseases are the result of something crossing the species barrier as a result of close contact between humans and (usually domesticated) animals, and the pre-Columbus Americas had virtually no domesticated animals (Llamas and Alapacas in the Inca Empire, and that's about it). So there was very little opportunity for something deadly to emerge in the Americas.

The population was also very spread out, so even if something zoonotic made the jump to one of the tribes that was more village-y/developed it would be unlikely to go further: although there were trade links they were limited by geography, mountain ranges etc. Supposition on my part.

Regarding population it depends on when and where you're talking about. Trade in precious stones etc was taking place between the different empires that rose and fell, we're talking about an area from what is now Mexico to Peru at a minimum. At their height these empires were very Urban / settled covering wide areas, now recovered by forest. Even the Amazon had civilizations within it. This is for at least 1500 years before. Overall it probably had less consistent concentrated urbanisation.

[The Bishop]

Jul 30, 2022 10:00:34 GMT Daft H'a'porth A'peth A'pith said:

Jul 29, 2022 20:27:58 GMT neilm said:

The population was also very spread out, so even if something zoonotic made the jump to one of the tribes that was more village-y/developed it would be unlikely to go further: although there were trade links they were limited by geography, mountain ranges etc. Supposition on my part.

Regarding population it depends on when and where you're talking about. Trade in precious stones etc was taking place between the different empires that rose and fell, we're talking about an area from what is now Mexico to Peru at a minimum. At their height these empires were very Urban / settled covering wide areas, now recovered by forest. Even the Amazon had civilizations within it. This is for at least 1500 years before. Overall it probably had less consistent concentrated urbanisation.

At its height the Inca empire extended to northern Argentina/Chile and southern Colombia, with influence even further than that.

[neilm]

Jul 30, 2022 10:00:34 GMT Daft H'a'porth A'peth A'pith said:

Jul 29, 2022 20:27:58 GMT neilm said:

The population was also very spread out, so even if something zoonotic made the jump to one of the tribes that was more village-y/developed it would be unlikely to go further: although there were trade links they were limited by geography, mountain ranges etc. Supposition on my part.

Regarding population it depends on when and where you're talking about. Trade in precious stones etc was taking place between the different empires that rose and fell, we're talking about an area from what is now Mexico to Peru at a minimum. At their height these empires were very Urban / settled covering wide areas, now recovered by forest. Even the Amazon had civilizations within it. This is for at least 1500 years before. Overall it probably had less consistent concentrated urbanisation.

I'm thinking specifically about North America, but in the case of Central and South I'm surprised there weren't one or two more unique-to-the-New-World diseases. I wonder if there has been any study on remains to see if there was anything that can be studied (although right now, Lab work on old viruses that no one has had contact with in generations might not be the most popular move).