Rats were not responsible for the Black Death

Illustration for article titled Rats were not responsible for the Black Death

The spread of the Black Death — a devastating pandemic that ravaged European populations between 1348 and 1350 — has long been attributed to the black rat and the fleas it carried from port to port, while hitching a ride on merchant ships.


Now, a study examining the effects of the plague in London between 1348 and 1349 suggests that the black rat may be the victim of one of the longest-running smear campaigns in human history.

The findings of the extensive ten-year study — conducted by Barney Sloane, a former field archaeologist at the Museum of London — are published in Sloane's The Black Death in London. The book documents Sloane's detailed investigation of court records, excavation reports, and archaeological sites of the plague in London, and how his analyses led him to conclude that people, not rats, were responsible for the spread of the deadly plague.


"The evidence just isn't there to support it," Sloane recently told The Guardian's Maev Kennedy in an interview. Sloane continues:

We ought to be finding great heaps of dead rats in all the waterfront sites but they just aren't there. And all the evidence I've looked at suggests the plague spread too fast for the traditional explanation of transmission by rats and fleas. It has to be person to person – there just isn't time for the rats to be spreading it."

You can read more about Sloan's efforts to exonerate the black rat, and the evidence he has gathered to support his claims, over at The Guardian

Share This Story

Get our newsletter



Imagine this whole article as a demotivational poster and written underneath the words: RODENT BONES = INDESTRUCTIBLE

Come on. This whole thing reeks of soooo much bad science. On so many levels.

Rats spread the plague, but come on, OF COURSE the plague spread from person to person more easily and more frequently than it did from rats to people. I thought that that was common knowledge. Did this dude honestly start out thinking that all plague victims were in contact with plague-ridden rats and their fleas? Also, did this mastermind tare down most of London to find the rat bones he claims are missing? Even if the rats weren't resistant to the plague, and even if rodent bones weren't notoriously brittle and rodent corpses considered yummy by so many different predators, rats live in sewers and walls and cellars and damp creepy places where anything bigger than a rat probably can't FIT. This is also where they die. It's a rat thing. The essence of rattiness, one might say. What did he expect? Big ass graveyards with "plague-ridden rats buried here" signs? How the hell can this pass as legitimate science? Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of rats and rodents in general, and an even bigger fan of innovative approaches to human-animal relations through the ages, but this is just bullshit.