After the hysteria of the bottle-throwing protests by quarantined medical workers at the Taipei Municipal Hoping Hospital on Friday, the suicide of a quarantined patient on Saturday and the attempted suicide of another yesterday, let us tell a historical story.
In 1665 London was engulfed by bubonic plague -- memorably recorded in Daniel Defoe's A Journal of the Plague Year. Nobody now can be sure what the connection between plague-stricken London and the remote lead-mining village of Eyam in Derbyshire was. The story handed down by posterity is that the plague first appeared in the village in late August or early September via a consignment of cloth, ordered from London by the village tailor, Alexander Hadfield. It is thought that the cloth was infested with plague-carrying fleas. The first person to die, on Sept. 7, 1665, was Hadfield's assistant George Vicars. The disease soon claimed most of Vicar's unfortunate family.
Plague was not, of course a new disease in those times. Since the great pandemic of 1347-50, which might have killed a third of Europe's population, people knew how to recognize the disease and how it progressed. What they didn't know was how the sickness was transmitted or how to cure it. They did, however, think that person-to-person contact played an important role.
With plague appearing in the village, the most obvious thing for anyone to do was to get out as fast as they could. For some, of course, this was impossible -- they simply had no means of survival outside the village. And for the other villages around Eyam, a mass flight would have been the worst possible state of affairs.
This was prevented by the hard work of the village rector, or priest, William Mompesson, and his predecessor Thomas Stanley. That Mompesson and Stanley could work together was something of a triumph in itself since they were radically divided on religious issues and Mompesson had in fact taken Stanley's job after the purges of radical clergy following the restoration of the monarchy and the end of the incredibly bitter civil-war period in 1661.
Nevertheless the two clergymen worked together to persuade the villagers that they should stay put, making use of the Gospel of St. John: "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends (15:13)."
The village agreed to establish a cordon sanitaire around it that nobody was to cross for any reason until the disease had burned itself out. Food was deposited by the surrounding villages at designated sites at the edge of the cordon, from which the people of Eyam collected it at different times to avoid cross-infection.
The village thus simply cut itself off from the world and throughout the winter of 1665 and the spring and summer of 1666 experienced an extraordinary, and extraordinarily harrowing, silent martyrdom. The parish register records 273 deaths from the plague, from Vicars' in September 1665 to that of Abraham Morton on Nov. 1, 1666. Since the village is thought to have had a population of around 350 at the beginning of the plague, this is a staggering mortality rate. Nobody outside the village, however, was infected. The clergymen's plan worked -- at a terrible cost.
We leave it up to readers to ponder what relevance this little-known story might have for modern Taiwan. Obviously there are worse things than being shut up at home or in Hoping Hospital for a couple of weeks. But are there bigger issues involved. Is Taiwan a society where self-indulgence and personal gratification have eroded values of moral responsibly? What other interpretation might we put on Friday's events?
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS