Danuta Raj

Already in the 19th century, researchers of the history of medicine tried to reinterpret the old pathogenesis and diagnostics by framing the descriptions of past epidemics within the framework of their own scientific discourse. However, this practice has sometimes led astray both then and now due to the incompatibility of modern medical language with historical sources, often of a narrative character. In addition, researchers in the field of historical science are often not qualified enough to correctly interpret the descriptions of the symptoms and course of the epidemic. On the other hand, representatives of medical sciences dealing with the past often misinterpret sources, cutting single pieces of information out of context and building a picture that is consistent with the current state of knowledge but inconsistent with the past. Given the persistence of this problem, which has been observable in the historiography of epidemics for many decades, it is worth investigating such cases in order to identify points that are particularly vulnerable to the risk of error.