Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1884-04-18
Biblical and Modern LeprOsy.
TDr. George II. Fox, in Popular Science Montf
fer AUrll,1

TDr. George II. Fox, in Popular Science Monthly
fer APRIL
The somewhat detailed description Of lep-
rosy which is found 10 the thirteenth chapter
Of Leviticus is almost unintelligibe in the
light of our present knowledge and, after
making due allowance for the necessarily
imperfect translation Of the Hebrew scrip
tuies, we are forced to believe that Moses
associated lcprosY with other diseases. as
many distinguished menca writer's hav,
done in later years Indeed 1t is only during
the past few decades that the disease ha,
been carefully studied in various parts TT the
world and its identity thoroughly established.
In studying the Mosaic laws respecting
lcprosy, we mud statements made and
directions given for its recognition by the
priests who could not have referred 10 the
disease which We now cal leprosy. Fol
instance it is stated that If the leprOsy cover
the whole skin OF him who hath the plague,
the priest shall pronounce him clean. ThiS
would hardly apply to modern leprosy,
which never involves the whole skin, as fal
rs my observation goes. But here are othtl
cutaneous affections which frequently d.
cover the afflicted subject from his head
even to his foot" Why the lercr should be
pronounced unclean while the disease was
spreading, and clean when it had reached
that point where further spreading was i'm.
possible, | will leave for others to determine,
merely remarking that a law which per
mitled only such lepers within the camp rs
were covered by the disease from head to
foot could certainly not have had a sanitary
origin. Furthermore, the rule that the lepel
should be shut UP for seven days and then
examined by the priest, with view to
noting the change that had taken place in the
meantime, would seem to indicate some
other disease than modern leprosy, for the
latter is extremely chronic in its course, and
never presents, any noticeable change in so
short time even under the most active
treatment What was meant by the reference
to leprosy Of clothing ami of houses is now
difficult to understand, There are infectious
diseases at the present day, the germs OF
which may dwell for time in clothing and
the walls of houses, but there is nothing in
connection with the modem leprosy which
would justify us in believing that it ever
affects an inanima,e object.
On the other hand, if we assume that the
| ltprosy of ancient times was identical with
that of the present day, it seems strange that
Moses failed to mention the loss OF sensa-
| ton, the tefOrmity Of the hands and other
features which are the most striking char
actcristlcs of the disease. That the leprosy
which | have described has not changed its
type in the course Of centuries as other
diseases have done in a comparatively Short
time, is shown ay the fact that some of the
earliest medical descriptions are so correct
that they answer their purpose in moderr
textbook, and We are therefore led to tht
conclusion that Moses, though possessing al
the learning of the Egyptian priests, includ
ing the highest medical knowledge of hi
age did not note the distinctive character
istics Of leprosy, but CLOSED it under thu
name of other prevalent diseases.