Unauthenticated source |
"Eyam plague was not, of course, a romantic interlude in village life: the
bloody weight of the epidemic is unavoidably asserted by the death roll of the
parish register, whether it was over three-quarters or under one half of the
inhabitants who died. The villagers, Mompesson, Stanley and their neighbours
may or may not have saved the area from further infection, but that this
question remains unresolved hardly diminishes the horror of the events they
experienced. This very extremity of experience which gives the story its
enduring interest must also give us greatest pause for thought when seeking to
understand such events or to interpret the heroic or romantic narratives that
continue to permeate accounts of epidemics, even in the more recent inversions
where the old heroes are dethroned and bravery reinterpreted as tragic
ignorance. It is salutary to contrast the empathetic freedom felt by
interpreters of such distant epidemics, and their willingness to judge
individuals' failings or heroism, with the more recent recognition by
historians and others of the difficulties of addressing and representing
traumatic events such as genocide, which constantly escape our attempt to grasp
and describe them. As William Mompesson noted after the epidemic had drawn to a
close: 'The condition of the place has been so sad, that I persuade myself it
did exceed all history and example.'"
Patrick Wallis, "A
dreadful heritage: interpreting epidemic
disease at Eyam, 1666-2000," History workshop journal no. 61 (2006): 50 (31-56). Cf. Philip Jenkins, "The plague village," Anxious Bench, 27 March 2020.