3.8 Article

Beyond Plague Pits: Using Genetics to Identify Responses to Plague in Medieval Cambridgeshire

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY
Volume 24, Issue 4, Pages 496-518

Publisher

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/eaa.2021.19

Keywords

plague; second plague pandemic; ancient DNA; burials; Cambridge

Categories

Funding

  1. Wellcome Trust [200368/Z/15/Z]
  2. McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research
  3. St John's College, Cambridge
  4. European Union [2014-2020.4.01.16-0030]
  5. Estonian Research Council [PRG243]
  6. Wellcome Trust [200368/Z/15/Z] Funding Source: Wellcome Trust

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Ancient DNA from Yersinia pestis has been found in skeletons at burial sites in Cambridge, England, dating back to the period between ad 1349 and 1561, representing individuals who died during the second pandemic. Detailed contextual analysis reveals a variety of burial responses to the pandemic within the town and its surroundings, shifting focus from exceptional mass burials to normative individual burials in most medieval contexts. This discovery allows for a richer and more varied narrative of the second pandemic than previously thought possible.
Ancient DNA from Yersinia pestis has been identified in skeletons at four urban burial grounds in Cambridge, England, and at a nearby rural cemetery. Dating to between ad 1349 and 1561, these represent individuals who died of plague during the second pandemic. Most come from normative individual burials, rather than mass graves. This pattern represents a major advance in archaeological knowledge, shifting focus away from a few exceptional discoveries of mass burials to what was normal practice in most medieval contexts. Detailed consideration of context allows the authors to identify a range of burial responses to the second pandemic within a single town and its hinterland. This permits the creation of a richer and more varied narrative than has previously been possible.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available