So I have run into a bit of a problem with my novel, and I am hoping the you, as my fellow writers might be able to help me out a bit. So here is my problem/question: In a late victorian era novel, what long term illness could I use to kill a character. For a bit of information on the reason reason behind this question. One of the main characters of my novel is the son of a wealthy gentleman in London, at the time the novel starts he is already ill, and has been for some time. The book basically starts with him being told he has months to live, which jumpstart the plot of the novel. (I don't want feedback on the plot or time period, just on the question itself.)
It largely depends what symptoms you want; in a time before antibiotics and vaccines pretty much anything could do the job. A simple flesh wound could fester for months before finally getting out of control. In Napolean's Russian campaign more soldiers died of Typhus than from engagement with the enemy - but TB would be good bet as @The Dapper Hooligan says
Typhus would kill too quickly. TB (called Consumption) back then killed lots of people ...but slowly.
As already mentioned, TB (consumption) was a big killer during the Victorian Era... the other one was, Syphilis (The French Disease). It's a slow slide into insanity, and body parts falling off and whatnot.
Cancer was available, or a canker. And the best one that we hardly have anymore is a goutre - I can hardly spell it, massive horrendous swelling at the neck from iodine deficiency.
Goiter= hypothyroidism, not necessarily a killer A canker is usually how syphillis starts. Syphillis can be slow if it becomes tertiary syphyillis. Of course that was done in "Of Human Bondage". Good book and good movie. I agree, TB is the slow killer for that time.
Okay I'll raise you scarlet fever, measles, mumps, rubella and then get back on the web scurvy phossy jaw
Well, I couldn't say anything about that. I just know I've been given enough crap for spelling it canker instead of chancre, that now it just looks wrong and unholy to me. Maybe there's medical differences, maybe it's a regional difference, maybe it's the memory of my grandmother in her full Irish Catholic glory telling tales of sinful syphilitic sailors from the thirties, but to me it will always be 'chancre,' hail Mary, full of grace...
Yeah, I'm not a Dr. Is it a porridge/porage? A gaol/jail? A segar/cigar. I'll do the full google if you like but 'canker' is out there. I thought it might work great in dialogue whereas 'chancre' might be less impactful...? ...Am I wrong to think of it as the archaic term for cancer?
No. No you are not. It's also one of the OG words for crabs, though I don't think that was a medical term specifically, but take it for what you will.
Jack London died of medical malpractice. Strong drink, simple starvation, clubbed to death by the Old Bill. Suggest you read ol' Jack's " People of the Abyss."
cankers are ulcerative type lesions....the first lesion of syphillis or a canker sore in the mouth. Nothing to do with cancer except maybe in the old days when it got advanced it reminded people of an ulcer. If you google this is at the top of the search engine: https://www.webmd.com/oral-health/guide/canker-sores
During the Victorian era and perhaps in my most distant memories? At sea in an old book, that kind of thing. We are looking at this through different prisms. Surely we all want the pirate to explain: 'See fellows it is a weeping canker.'
"weeping canker" sounds like an ulcer to me... just saying... here's a picture of a syphillis chancre on the finger (don't open it if you are squeamish): https://sw.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picha:Extragenital_syphilitic_chancre_of_the_left_index_finger_PHIL_4147_lores.jpg
Not disagreeing with you here, but just noting that Syphilis was named under many terms. usually referring to a neighbouring ethnicity, old rivallry, or otherwise. So: Dutch called it the Spanish Disease, so on so forth. Almost every country passed through the: "The XXXX Disease". Just saying it might be relevant as, for example, a russian doctor or a doctor from another ethnicity may refer to it as something else (like spanish disease if dutch).
Yep, you are correct. Same with the "Spanish Flu" (The Great Influenza Pandemic of 1918). It also went by many names depending on where in the world you were, and what prejudices were at work.
Interestingly, the Spanish Flu is now considered to have originated in the USA in circa 1917 and introduced to europe through USA's troops. The first cases were reported there at a particular military base I have since forgotten the name. But, this is slightly off-topic.
