Dear Workshop,
On Thursday, October 6, Pippa Koch, PhD candidate in the
History of Christianity will present her dissertation
proposal. Her proposal is entitled:
“Persistent Providence: Religion and Epidemics in Eighteenth-
Century America”
Time: 12:00, Thursday, October 6, 2011
Place: Swift Hall, Room 200
Food: Snacks provided, feel free to bring your lunch!
Paper: A copy of this essay is available by emailing changp@uchicago.edu
A quote from Pippa’s work:
Dysentery, or the “Bloody-Flux,” spread through Reverend John Mellen’s parish of eight hundred souls in seven weeks, leaving forty two dead. The “mortal pestiferous Distemper” killed 1 in 19, according to Mellen’s careful footnotes, and the proportions were even worse in neighboring parishes.
Dysentery, we now know, was both endemic and epidemic throughout eighteenth-century America. It affected old and young indiscriminately, had a high rate of fatality, and left survivors weak and susceptible to other infections and diseases. In Mellen’s own words, dysentery was “commonly attended with Vomiting, high Fever, extream Pain: and sometimes with visible Canker.—When the Patient appeared with high Symptoms of the Distemper at first, he often died in 3 or 4 Days: Others, and especially those less violently seiz’d, lived 8 or 10 Days, or more.” Dysentery occurred almost yearly in New England, and according to the historian John Duffy, “rarely did a five-year period elapse without at least one major epidemic.” From dysentery and smallpox to diphtheria and yellow fever, epidemics—along with their horrifying symptoms and often fatal outcomes—were a constant for early Americans.
Nonetheless, historians rarely engage the topic of epidemics in the eighteenth century, and those who have seldom manage to avoid troubling and simplistic dichotomies between religion and science, or between passive faith in providence and active endeavors to conquer disease. The evidence, however, suggests a more complicated narrative. Mellen situated the 1756 dysentery epidemic within a providential framework that characterized the deaths of community members, even children, as the work of God. At the same time, in his footnotes Mellen detailed his observations of the physical manifestations of the disease and pleaded for a more expansive and medical account than he could provide. Narrating the epidemic as both providential and medical, as arrows sent by God and as painful suffering combated by men, Mellen unwittingly created a problem for historians. Influenced by the traditional conflict narrative of science and religion, or the narrative of “medical enlightenment”—which suggests that mastery over natural forces eliminated the need for a doctrine of providence—historians are surprised to see the languages of providence and medicine so thoroughly joined.
I’m really looking forward to seeing you all again!
– Paul Chang
Persons with a disability who believe they may need
assistance, please contact Paul Chang in advance at
changp@uchicago.edu.