• BeeegScaaawyCripple
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Thanks. I have so many questions about some of these. Cut of the stone, king’s evil, Planet, rising of the lights, teeth… I’m mostly curious what king’s evil is in this context. Gonna go look Edit: per the link it’s scrofula.

    • Zagorath@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      92
      ·
      1 year ago

      “People called cancer the wolf, because it ‘ate up’ the person.” But this wasn’t just a linguistic quirk. The idea was actually translated into practice. “Some doctors would even apply raw meat to a cancerous ulcer, so that the wolf could feast on that for a while instead of ‘eating’ the patient.

      Source

      • SuperIce
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        52
        ·
        1 year ago

        I could see how people 400 years ago could think that makes sense.

        • finitebanjo
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          57
          ·
          1 year ago

          “There are two wolves inside of you. I’m afraid it’s terminal.”

    • 9point6
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      1 year ago

      Classic comedy duo, well until cancer went through the divorce…

  • someguy3
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    ·
    1 year ago

    Made away themselves.

    Ah British dancing around the point terms.

    • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      59
      ·
      1 year ago

      “Teeth” actually meant “a child who’s still teething.” As with “chrisomes and infants,” so many little ones died that often they were categorized by age rather than a specific cause. Probably the only reason to specify “overlaid, and starved at nurse” would be to blame and punish the wet-nurse.

    • TheOrcWhoWrites
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      73
      ·
      1 year ago

      Scary:

      “Dying of planet” was a term used in the 17th and 18th centuries to describe a sudden and severe illness or paralysis that was attributed to astrology and the influence of malevolent planets. People who died from “planet” exhibited symptoms similar to strokes, heart attacks, and aneurysms. At the time, people who picked up bodies for burial often knew little about the cause of death. Other causes of death listed in The Diseases, and Casualties this year being 1632 included “affrighted” and “made away themselves”. -Via Overview.

    • Maalus
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I know right? Especially when it’s so good you starve to death. And she’s a nurse too

      • captainlezbian
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Don’t know why they felt the need to have it and executions separately

  • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Only 7 murders? The population of London was apparently about 400,000 back then so that’s less than half the murder rate of present-day New York City (which is considered a relatively safe city). I don’t think that can be right…

    1632 London: 7 / 400,000 = 17.5 murders per million people

    2023 New York: 312 / 8,258,000 = 37.8 murders per million people

    • Plagiatus
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      72
      ·
      1 year ago

      a relatively safe city […] 37.8 murders per million

      Ignoring that in 1632 it might’ve been easier for murder to go undetected, here are the numbers of present day London. It’s about 13.1 mpm, even lower than in 1632, about a third of present day New York.

      https://www.statista.com/statistics/862984/murders-in-london/

      America is not really a shining example when it comes to those things…

      • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        New York’s murder rate (and the overall murder rate in the USA) is shaped by a history of race relations which is quite different from London’s. A white person in New York is much less likely (and conversely a black or Hispanic person is much more likely) to be murdered than the overall murder rate for the city might lead someone to think.

        • Klear
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Username checks out.

          • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Source

            Source

            Black and Hispanic people make up 52% of the city’s population but 88% of the murder victims. The murder rate of the white and Asian population works out to approximately 8.4 per million, so the average European tourist is not in much danger here.

            • Klear
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yeah, exactly. You seem to arbitrarily place higher value on white people’s lives…

              • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I’m not making a value judgement. I’m explaining why New York City’s murder rate is so much higher than London’s. It’s because NYC has a population of white and Asian people who are as safe as Europeans and another, de facto segregated population of black and Hispanic people who are much less safe.

                I presume that a big part of the reason why things are the way they are is that society places a higher value on white people’s lives, but I’m not doing that here. Explaining isn’t the same as justifying.

                • Klear
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Why bring it up at all then? The topic was New York being unsafe, you come rushing it explaining it’s because of the brown people.

                  Welp. Even though at this point I’m leaning towards “very clumsy with words” rather than “disgusting racist”, I don’t really have much interest in talking to you further.

      • ChickenLadyLovesLife
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s a lot harder to murder somebody when you actually have to stab them or beat their head in with something.

    • Klear
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      present-day New York City (which is considered a relatively safe city).

      Relative to USA. It would easily be one of the most violent cities in Europe.

    • Danquebec@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I’m especially dumbfounded as I thought that before there was an important police force and a mature legal system, murders were far more frequent than after.

      At the same time, it’s possible I’m imagining 1632 London to be more primitive than it really was.

    • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not sure, but I’m guessing part of the reason to specify the difference between “infants” and “Chrisomes” (baptized babies) might be to say where they’d be buried/where their souls would go.

    • rational_lib
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      “And in other news, the death figures were released today. Once again, the leading cause of death is: being a baby. Over the last year, 2,268 infants died naturally of babyness.”