AHC\WI: Old World civilisation as devastated by New World diseases as vice versa

As the title says.

The challenge is to have New World diseases have an impact on Old World civilisation just as devastating as the impact Old World diseases had on New World civilisation IOTL.
 
There are 3 new world diseases I can think of, pinta, bejel, and yaws (also syphilis derivatives), which are all spread by skin to skin contact and probably wouldn't have much trouble spreading in Europe. The issue is that none of the three disorders are fatal. They could possibly lead to opportunistic infections, pinta, bejel, and yaws all cause huge skin damage, and there are a lot of opportunistic pathogens hanging around Europe. Alternatively, you could use a POD in which one of the three diseases mutates to a more fatal form. Fortunately, all three diseases are caused by bacteria, which can take up DNA from the environment, so it wouldn't be too hard to create a POD in which one of the three bacteria takes up DNA from something more deadly.

Alternatively, you could take a deadlier New World disorder and mutate it to spread more easily, but I actually don't know of any particularly deadly New World diseases, nor have I been able to find any on google yet. The deadliest New World disease I know of, syphilis (in the STD form) does not spread very quickly, requiring sexual contact, and is not very deadly either...
 
*Ahem* check out the sig!

Although my TL doesn't have New World diseases that are quite as plentiful as the Old World ones, they still do cause devastation.

I should point out that, without colonialism and very devastating war, the diseases won't be so bad. Yes, smallpox was a killer (20%-30% of those infected every generation NOT 90% death rates) but without Conquistadors destroying harvests and killing people, recovery will be faster on both sides of the Atlantic.
 
Huh. So the smallpox epidemics were actually less deadly than the Bubonic Plague was? Because that's estimated to have killed a flat 40-50% of the European and Chinese population within a few decades, without any simultaneous invasion by plague-resistant invaders.
 
Most epidemic diseases are zoonoses, coming from animals that humans are in close contact with on a regular basis. Thus you really need to get the Americas to develop much more in the way of domesticated animals.

Which is going to have at least as large an effect as as the disease exchange.
 
The Old World did get hit by disease, the thing of it is, syphilis doesn't kill nearly as fast as small pox. And anything that did kill fast (like dengue) would kill too fast to make it back to Europe.
 
And anything that did kill fast (like dengue) would kill too fast to make it back to Europe.

Not if it arrived on the person of a native with some genetic resistance. Smallpox crossed the Atlantic heading west because a lot of the infected people had some degree of innate resistance, allowing them to live long enough to bring the virus to the New World. A similarly lethal New World disease could cross the Atlantic going the other way if a bunch of conquistadores or the equivalent took a native captive or two or three with them on the way back, and said captive(s) happened to include at least one infected with the lethal New World disease of your choice but withstanding it well due to his genetic resistance. Upon their return to Lisboa or A Coruna or Genoa or the European port (preferably densely populated) of your choice, the bacterium or virus or what have you would have the perfect chance to spread like wildfire among the totally unprepared European population. And if the disease organism ITTL has mutated to a version with a lethality comparable to such Old World delights as say smallpox, it could easily kill enough people to rip out the heart of European civilisation.

Montezuma's revenge - except for real.

Chilling thought.:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
 
Huh. So the smallpox epidemics were actually less deadly than the Bubonic Plague was? Because that's estimated to have killed a flat 40-50% of the European and Chinese population within a few decades, without any simultaneous invasion by plague-resistant invaders.

Well, singular smallpox epidemics by themselves are less deadly than the plague. Smallpox combined with all male adults being forced to work in sugarcane fields + other 'minor' diseases coming into the population does create problems.

However, it's that scenario less likely to with an equal exchange.

The effect on both sides of the Atlantic would be materially beneficial in many ways: fewer people, more wealth through inheritance, and easier to feed. I shudder to think at the cultural effects of an equal two-way Columbian exchange though.
 
Well, singular smallpox epidemics by themselves are less deadly than the plague. Smallpox combined with all male adults being forced to work in sugarcane fields + other 'minor' diseases coming into the population does create problems.

However, it's that scenario less likely to with an equal exchange.

The effect on both sides of the Atlantic would be materially beneficial in many ways: fewer people, more wealth through inheritance, and easier to feed. I shudder to think at the cultural effects of an equal two-way Columbian exchange though.

:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

The result of an equal two-way Columbian exchange of diseases is 90% of humanity dead and the collapse of civilization across Eurasia.

The Black Death spread from China to Europe via trade routes. 'Newplague' will do the exact same in reverse. Not just Europe but the Middle East, India, China, and sub-Saharan Africa is utterly wrecked.
 
The result of an equal two-way Columbian exchange of diseases is 90% of humanity dead and the collapse of civilization across Eurasia.

I disagree with this, because a two way exchange will largely go in fits and stops. Whenever a disease of significance crosses the Atlantic, Europeans will stop sailing (maybe even stop exploring the western Atlantic permanently!) and both they and the natives will have a chance to recover.

In addition, assuming a mostly viral exchange (a bacterial exchange would kill the native hosts as quickly as any foreign interlopers), then unlike the black death survivors will be immune. The next generation will be vulnerable to reinfection, but with older immune parents to take care of them and no maurading armies disrupting their care, their death rates will not be as high.

Of course these diseases combined with wars of religion could very well cause a Years of Rice and Salt scenario, where Europe is depopulated by disease and Middle-Eastern and Asian powers are more populous.
 
Last edited:
Of course these diseases combined with wars of religion could very well cause a Years of Rice and Salt scenario, where Europe is depopulated by Middle-Eastern and Asian powers are more populous.

Hmm... I wonder how Arab or Berber colonialism in the New World would go. And Muslim England and Italy ho!:D:D:D

EDIT: And I wonder if in such a situation it would become possible to have New Worlder colonies in the Old World...:D:D:D:D:D
 
Huh. So the smallpox epidemics were actually less deadly than the Bubonic Plague was? Because that's estimated to have killed a flat 40-50% of the European and Chinese population within a few decades, without any simultaneous invasion by plague-resistant invaders.

western exploration brought diseases to the new world, in the same way mongol invaders brought the black death to china and europe.

I did read that the plague killed up to 90% of the population of some chinese cities.
 
EDIT: And I wonder if in such a situation it would become possible to have New Worlder colonies in the Old World...:D:D:D:D:D[/SIZE][/FONT]

The butterflies from whatever agricultural POD caused the Americas to develop an equal germ package to Europe could very well give them superior technology and allow them to outright conquer Europe-or at least, establish some trading colonies through gunboat diplomacy.
 
Top