Did Europe Get Syphilis From Columbus?
EmailIt’s the side of the Christopher Columbus story that you won’t find in grade school history books, and it’s a theory that continues to raise the ire of some historians.
Specifically, some researchers believe that Columbus brought syphilis to Europe, along with the cocoa, tobacco, spices and other booty he hauled back from the Americas. At the forefront of this hypothesis is Kristin Harper, a Health and Society Scholar at — somewhat ironically — Columbia University in New York.
The analysis adds to previous work done on the topic by Harper and her colleagues at Emory University in Atlanta, Ga. The difference is that this time Harper and co-authors Molly K. Zuckerman and George Armelagos said they reviewed all 54 published reports of diseases similar to syphilis detected in the Old World in the years before Columbus came back from the New World.
What they claim to have found is that none of these accounts provide evidence that the cases documented were both truly syphilis and occurred before Columbus’ return to Europe. By eliminating these cases, the research say their work strengthens the argument for the Columbian theory of syphilis — in short, that the disease hitched a ride back on one of Columbus’ vessels.
The theory that Columbus’ crew brought this bacterium home with them to Europe is not at all new; it’s an idea that can be seen in Spanish accounts from the 16th century. But it’s a theory that has angered some — and it is also not the only theory out there for how the disease arose in Europe.
Notably, some researchers believe evidence shows the disease may have existed in Europe long before Columbus set out across the sea to the New World, but that it was misdiagnosed at the time as leprosy. Others say it may have existed in one form or another in the Old World and simply spread more rampantly during Columbus’ time because of relatively rapid changes in hygiene and urbanization in Europe. Opponents of the Columbian hypothesis cite accounts of a similar disease that predate Columbus by centuries, and many researchers also point to a purported case of the illness in a 13th-century Augustinian friary in England.
While those embroiled in the debate over the origins of syphilis in the Old World may spar over these questions, non-experts may ask the question of how something that could have happened hundreds of years ago could matter today. In response, Harper said the underlying principles of the disease’s spread may be more relevant to today’s illnesses than one might guess.
“Even though it has been more than 500 years since Columbus returned from the New World, I think the story of how syphilis originated and spread may reveal some important lessons,” Harper told ABCNews.com. “Syphilis was one of the first examples of a truly global epidemic, and I think its history demonstrates how effectively a novel pathogen can spread around the world, even without the benefit of modern travel, and also how hard it is to predict where and when a novel new infection may arise and permanently take hold in a population.”
Man Discovers He's a Woman at the Hospital 
Head Trauma, Behavior Problems Linked
If there were ever a person that should NEVER have a statue or holiday in his honor, it’s Christopher Columbus.
Posted by: hereticzero | December 30, 2011 December 30, 2011, 4:04 pm
And why does this theory anger folks? hmmmm. The author makes the claim and imo, fails to explain specifically who is offended. Is it just that the theory runs counter to other theories or, is to something else?
Posted by: fedup_11 | December 30, 2011 December 30, 2011, 4:35 pm
Well dont you think that a historical analysis of what records there are in the Pre columbian world might shed light on the issue? If Columbus brought it back he brought it back from the pre-columbian world or from the Caribs…the native tribe on Hispaniola..there might still be differences…genetic even in the bacterium believe it or not…this issue can be clarified some more.
Posted by: SDFSDFSF | December 30, 2011 December 30, 2011, 5:01 pm
hereticzero said Columbus should not be honored. Okay, lets purge from history, eliminate from the calendar and remove from every public space anything about or dedicated to every person who did anything that offends 21st century sensibilities and violates 21st century moral standards. That should eliminate history books, commemorative holidays and all historical-figure statues.
Posted by: MizFW | December 30, 2011 December 30, 2011, 6:03 pm
MIZFW, there’s a big difference between writing about a person in the history books as a means of documenting and discussing what occurred historically and honoring and celebrating them by giving them a national holiday. Columbus is an important historical figure, but he doesn’t deserve to be honored as a national hero.
Posted by: Minorkey1 | December 30, 2011 December 30, 2011, 7:49 pm
FEDUP_11: “And why does this theory anger folks?” – - – ROFL. Seriously? How can anyone with half a brain not understand who this theory might anger. It angers any white folk unwilling to admit that colonization in general and Columbus in particular caused any negative consequences to anyone.
Posted by: B-K KnightRider | December 31, 2011 December 31, 2011, 12:06 am
MINORKEY1: “Columbus is an important historical figure, but he doesn’t deserve to be honored as a national hero.” – - – AMEN to that. What is truly amazing is how many people are incapable of understanding the distinction between the two issus.
Posted by: B-K KnightRider | December 31, 2011 December 31, 2011, 12:18 am
Syphilis has been a bane of humans but probably brcame more prevalent in the Old World from the time of the Crusades — much earlier than Columbus stumbling upon the islands and continets of the Western hemisphere. Prior to the Crusades mass movements of people in the Old World were comparatively limited. However, the waves of rampaging crusaters who raped, pillaged and burned through Europe on their way to slay the infidel in the Holy Land were very likely bearers and transmitters of the disease. How much have these researchers studied the pre-Columbian people? Granted, they left no written records themselves, but oral histories can be winnowed for clues as to whether a form of the disease existed. Additionally, friars who accompanied the conquistadores did keep extensive journals which have been preserved and archieve for study. Syphilis is an STD; by far more deadly to the pre-Columbian populations of the Western Hemisphere were the diseases of measles, chicken pox, small pox, mumps and scarlet fever which the conquistadores and those following them bestowed upon populations which had no antibodies to combat those diseases and therefore killed vast numbers of Aztecs, Incas, Mayans, and the people of Espaniola.
Posted by: amn | December 31, 2011 December 31, 2011, 1:30 pm
Anyone “embroiled in the debate over the origins of syphilis in the Old World” really needs to get a life. Do something important in your work. All forms of STDs come from adulterous sex. Do it right and you will never have a problem. Do it wrong, and you just might. Easy, easy, easy.
Posted by: ADub | January 1, 2012 January 1, 2012, 1:51 pm
Nun: “Mother Superior, we’ve, uh, discovered a case of syphilis in the convent.”
Mother Superior: “Oh, good! I was getting so tired of the chablis!”
Columbus was a religious fanatic and mercenary who brought slavery and genocide to the Americas in the ruthless pursuit of gold, not a hero or even that good of an explorer (he miscalculated and ended up in the wrong place!)
Is there still ANYONE who celebrates this man? Aside from Columbus day sales? Seriously.
Posted by: Raven | January 1, 2012 January 1, 2012, 5:46 pm
BK-KnightRider: I disagree. The reason some people don’t want to believe Columbus brought syphilis over from the New World is that they want to continue believing that the Native Americans were peace-loving with no problems, illnesses, disease, etc. UNTIL the big-bad white people from Europe came over. If syphilis originated with the Native Americans and that the big-bad white people caught something from them, it contradicts their theories. Many want to continue to believe that ALL disease began with the white Europeans who spread it to the helpless Native Americans.
Posted by: Amy Rider | January 1, 2012 January 1, 2012, 5:46 pm
Adub, Sexually transmitted diseases were around long before there WAS such a thing as marriage and adultery. Try again.
Posted by: Minorkey1 | January 1, 2012 January 1, 2012, 8:04 pm
Well AMY RIDER, all I can say is, ROFLMAO. I have never met or read of any of the kind of people you describe, but I have met a lot of the kind of people I described. While I am sure there are some like you describe, the kind I describe greatly outnumber them.
Posted by: B-K KnightRider | January 1, 2012 January 1, 2012, 11:40 pm
ABUD: “Anyone “embroiled in the debate over the origins of syphilis in the Old World” really needs to get a life. Do something important in your work. All forms of STDs come from adulterous sex. Do it right and you will never have a problem. Do it wrong, and you just might. Easy, easy, easy.” – - – ROFLMAO. Wrong, it is not quite so easy. What about the innocent faithful spouses who “do it right” with their unfaithful spouses and get an STD? And of course unmarried people have been doing it with each other since, well, as long as people have been around. Technically pre-marital sex is not adulterous.
Posted by: B-K KnightRider | January 1, 2012 January 1, 2012, 11:45 pm