When explosive chaos and malign disaster strikes a people, the outer garments of their society shrivel to reveal their fleshy underbelly. Community weaknesses and vulnerabilities often reveal themselves in the form of anxiety and panic. In late 18th century America, yellow fever caused fear among citizens, reflecting an outwardly religious and holy population fearing the wrath of God. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”?Get the original essayThe deadly grip of yellow fever in 1793 emerged as a viral disease transmitted by mosquitoes. The humid summer climate of Philadelphia's swampy summer attracted these blood-sucking insects native to parts of Africa and South America, resulting in the deaths of an estimated five thousand people. Yellow fever, or “American fever,” gets its name from the yellowing of the eyes and skin, or jaundice, that it causes in people who suffer from it. Contraction of the disease also led to hemorrhages, internal bleeding, black stools, vomiting, and high fevers (Bauer 1896). Within weeks of the disease's first victim, Philadelphia residents fled their homes in an attempt to preserve their own lives. The founding fathers and members of Congress notably participated in this exodus. A xenophobic mentality took hold of society and foreigners were prevented from entering Philadelphia for fear of spreading the disease. However, yellow fever spread with the intensity of a wildfire and claimed the lives of one-sixth of Philadelphia's population. With such a contagious epidemic ravaging the city so suddenly, hospitals simply could not treat all the sick and the daily death toll increased tenfold between August and October. Congress was forced to evacuate and the city's local government collapsed under the tumult and pressure of the epidemic. The Philadelphians' flight to safety is described in an account by Mulford Stough in "Pennsylvania History: A Journal of Mid-Atlantic Studies." . A thick, asphyxiating cloud of despair hung over the society of the sick, forcing approximately 17,000 citizens to flee their homes. After hordes of cars filled with furniture and families had escaped the city, all that was left were desolate, empty streets. Hearses and doctors' cars eventually took their place. Businesses collapsed, newspapers stopped production, and friends avoided each other as the “City of Brotherly Love” lost its livelihood and its identity. Stough's account so clearly paints a picture of Philadelphians' brutal rejection of their city's name; fear of neighbor dominated yellow fever society as individuals turned inward. Such rejection of the commandment to “love thy neighbor as thyself” has in part led to moral and religious interpretations of the disease's hold on Americans. Due to such a disturbing scourge, victims and residents began to view the disease from a moral point of view. Their anxiety came from their understanding of the Bible. Instead of a flood destroying humanity, there was yellow fever, and instead of Noah's people facing the wrath of God, it was the Philadelphians. They began to reflect on their moral history and their actions as a society; What could justify the loss of so many lives? In a 1793 sermon, John Mason called the time of the plague “evidence that it is a day of reproof and wrath of the Lord” (Mason 1793). He calls the faithful to implore mercy fromLord in such a troubled time, but remind them that their sins and iniquities have brought them to this cursed and tormented year. Before the saint, it is easy to imagine his emotionally enriched supplications and chastisements as he speaks of illness and conditions, "a host of destructive infections, playing with the feeble efforts of human effort, passed through the country and mowed down, in their march, the rod of life" (Mason 1793). A similar judgment prevails in "a discourse of Christian love" addressed to the inhabitants of Philadelphia by Thaddeus Brown. In this writing, Brown compares the people of Philadelphia to the Egyptians cursed with epidemics as punishment from God in the Old Testament. However, instead of taking a completely negative approach, Brown also talks about a plague that helped save David's army in battle. Yellow fever was a direct punishment from God, so only God could end this crippling disease. Brown goes on to say, “Is not this city defiled by its inhabitants; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinances, broken the everlasting covenant? And therefore has not the curse devoured the city, and those who dwell therein are desolate, and few men remain...and its borders stricken with destruction? (Brown 1798) Such a feeling shared by two religious figures testifies to the fears of the American people affected by yellow fever. Instead of immediately questioning which physical entity was causing the plague, the general population instead concluded that such death was punishment for society's grave sins. It was deemed necessary for the Philadelphians to fall on their knees, already weakened, and beg for mercy from Jehovah. Their anxiety manifested itself in having to come to terms with the sins they had committed, causing such a destructive black mark on their community. This idea was not only present in the writings of religious figures, but also among ordinary citizens. A poem called “Fever,” published in 1799, speaks of the faults of society and paves the way for punishment. The anonymous poet speaks of a time when his city was bustling by the water and home to mirth, joy and beauty. “Every heart with pleasures, ah, how vain! And ran on the fatal path of madness” (Citizen 1799). Happiness is described as the result of naivety and folly; therefore, this requires an eventual calculation. The citizen's poem then takes on an increasingly humble and holy tone as it turns towards God; “Come down, O shower: the breeze blows stronger and fills our hearts with habitual joy. » Described as an elegiac poem, such a haunting tale movingly details the pain of the plague and the desire for mercy on the part of its victims. The idea of ​​God's wrath as the source of yellow fever is clearly taken up not by one, but by many. However, a physician named Benjamin Rush refused this explanation for the fever and instead turned to his practice of medicine. Such a conclusion on his part was not easily accepted by his neighbors, as his personal account of the illness shows. “Having labored in vain for nearly six years to persuade the citizens of Philadelphia that yellow fever is of national origin, I had determined to renounce all further attempts to produce a conviction on the subject” (Rush 1799) . Rush described the origin of yellow fever with a simile, comparing the city's stale air to gunpowder, the atmosphere to sparks of fire, and the heat and cold to a hand, all mixing together to inside the bodies of citizens for an explosive effect. He concluded that yellow fever is not contagious but comes directly from dirt in..