Retrospective diagnosis and the use of historical texts for investigating disease in the past

Disease in past populations can be studied using a wide range of sources, including archaeology, written texts, and art created in the past. This is an important topic as it helps us understand the course of human history. This study discusses some of the hazards associated with interpreting texts that provide evidence for disease episodes in past populations. It then suggests a framework with which to assess how reliable written passages may be in allowing us to reach a modern biological diagnosis for a historical disease event. The difference between diagnoses made by people living in the past (social diagnosis) and a modern biological diagnosis is stressed, and emphasis is placed upon explaining why it is just not possible to come to a modern biological diagnosis for many past disease episodes. It also considers the controversy regarding the reliability and relevance of attempting modern biological diagnosis, the Cunningham debate. This framework may help those studying written records of disease in past civilizations to minimise the misinterpretation of the recorded thoughts of those witnessing diseases in centuries prior to our own.

► This study discusses some of the hazards associated with interpreting ancient written texts that provide evidence for disease episodes in past populations.
► Highlights the difference between diagnoses made by people living in the past (social diagnosis) and a modern biological diagnosis.
► Explores the controversy regarding the reliability and relevance of attempting modern biological diagnosis for past disease events, referred to as the Cunningham debate.
► Suggests a framework with which to assess how reliable written passages may be in allowing us to reach a modern biological diagnosis for a historical disease event.