Dancing Around the Four Sides

It's a fascinating article, but I dont' buy the argument. Spread of plague by rats doesn't imply that there would be large numbers of rat remains to be found necessarily -- all it would take would be an increase in the number of fleas on the existing rats, and fleas don't show well in the archaeological record. And rats (and their fleas) were *everywhere*. Could it *not* have been Bubonic plague? Possibly -- that argument gets batted around periodically, and it's possible.

However, Bubonic plague still exists, matches the symptoms described at the time, and has a highly contageous pneumonic form. I'm no expert, but I'd bet it's still Yersinia pestis, and that rodent borne fleas were still the starting point, unless they have better proof otherwise. (For that matter it's still possible to contract -- and die from -- Bubonic plague. Ironically your odds are better in Third World nations, where the doctors see the ailment somewhat regularly, diagnose it, and prescribe the appropriate antibiotics. One ill traveler in the U.S. succumbed relatively recently because his doctors didn't know what they were looking at before it was too late.)