Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2003-11 > 1069416597

From: "Peter A. Kincaid" <>
Subject: Black Death was Re: [DNA] END of Thread for me re Viking ancestry
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 08:09:57 -0400

Travel to where though? It was widespread. Like any disease
isolation was more the way to fight it. However, the more
populated urban areas were exposed more and thus suffered
more. As you note the labourers who clustered in the villages
were more at risk. However, so too would also have been the
tradesmen who in many cases were drawn from younger sons
of the ruling class.

Regardless, it seems clear that the Black Death, which
affected 1/3 of the population was not evenly distributed.
How can one, not knowing which groups of people may
have been more affected, project any sort of analysis
on more ancient peoples in Europe. Surely today's
statistics are more a reflection of the survivors of the
Black Death versus the times prior to it; a sort of global
founder effect.

At 01:38 PM 19/11/03 EST, you wrote:
>As I read it, the upper classes were the ones with the money and the means
>travel and there is evidence that they did to avoid the plague. The feudal
>system meant that the villeins and serfs were tied to the land and couldn't
>move. The good news is that so many serfs died that there was a national
>of labour and the feudal system was undermined as a result. I suspect the
>serfs would have settled for a little more of the feudal system, but you
>have everything can you?
>John Clare
>> I occurred to me that nobody is taking into consideration the
>> effect of the Black Death in the British Isles. Would this not
>> have skewed today's results in favour of the conquered versus
>> the conqueror (ie. the ruling class residing in the more urban
>> areas were more affected by the Black Death)? Food for
>> thought
>To join and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records,
go to:

Peter A. Kincaid
Hampton, NB, Canada

This thread: