Newman Kira L S
J Soc Hist. 2012;45(3):809-34. doi: 10.1093/jsh/shr114.
The outbreak of bubonic plague that struck London and Westminster in 1636 provoked the usual frenzied response to epidemics, including popular flight and government-mandated quarantine. The government asserted that plague control measures were acts of public health for the benefit of all. However, contrary to this government narrative of disease prevention there was a popular account that portrayed quarantine and isolation as personal punishment rather than prudent policy. In examining the 1636 outbreak on the parish as well as the individual level, reasons for this inconsistency between official and unofficial perspectives emerge. Quarantine and its effects were not classless, and its implementation was not always strictly in the name of public health. Government application of quarantine was remarkably effective, but it could never be uncontroversial both because of circumstances and because of misuse. The flight of the wealthiest from London and Westminster left only the more socially vulnerable to be quarantined. Though plague policy was financially sensitive to the poorest, it was costly to the middling sort. Another cause of controversy was the government's use of quarantine as a punishment to control individuals found breaking other laws. Though not widely publicized, popular narratives continually included grievances about the cruelty and inequity of quarantine and the militaristic nature of its implementation. Despite these objections, quarantine remained a staple of the government response to plague outbreaks throughout the seventeenth century.
1636年袭击伦敦和威斯敏斯特的腺鼠疫疫情引发了人们对流行病的惯常狂热反应，包括民众逃离和政府强制实施隔离。政府宣称，鼠疫控制措施是为了所有人的利益而采取的公共卫生行动。然而，与政府这种疾病预防的说法相反，有一种流行的观点认为，隔离和孤立是一种个人惩罚，而不是一项审慎的政策。在从教区层面和个人层面审视1636年的疫情爆发时，官方和非官方观点之间这种不一致的原因就显现出来了。隔离及其影响并非没有阶级之分，而且其实施并不总是严格以公共卫生的名义进行。政府实施的隔离措施非常有效，但由于各种情况以及被滥用，它永远不可能毫无争议。最富有的人从伦敦和威斯敏斯特逃离，只留下社会上更脆弱的人被隔离。尽管鼠疫政策在财政上对最贫困的人很敏感，但对中等阶层来说成本很高。另一个引发争议的原因是政府将隔离用作一种惩罚手段，以控制那些被发现违反其他法律的人。尽管没有广泛宣传，但民众的叙述中不断包含对隔离的残酷和不公平以及其实施的军事化性质的不满。尽管存在这些反对意见，但在整个17世纪，隔离仍然是政府应对鼠疫疫情的主要手段。
