This is the second of a three‐section review of Kyle Harper's The Fate of Rome in which we examine in detail Harper's treatment of two allegedly widespread and mortal Roman outbreaks of disease. In the case of the second‐century Antonine plague, we demonstrate that Harper overlooked a major controversy and instead portrayed an oversimplified narrative of a catastrophic event. In the case of the third‐century Cyprianic plague, we call attention to several glaring methodological issues in Harper's treatment of the episode, point out the absence of corresponding evidence in the papyri, and cast doubt on the linkage previously drawn between the plague and archaeology.

中文翻译：

---

瘟疫，气候变化和帝国灭亡。对凯尔·哈珀（Kyle Harper）的《罗马的命运（2）：瘟疫与帝国危机》的回应

这是对凯尔·哈珀（Kyle Harper）的《罗马的命运》（Fate of Rome）的三部分评论的第二部分，在该篇文章中，我们详细研究了哈珀对两个据称广泛且致命的罗马疾病暴发的治疗。在第二世纪的安东尼鼠疫中，我们证明了哈珀忽略了一个主要争议，而是描绘了一场灾难性事件的过分简化的叙述。对于第三世纪的塞浦路斯鼠疫，我们呼吁注意哈珀治疗该病的几个明显的方法论问题，指出在纸莎草纸中没有相应的证据，并对先前在鼠疫和考古学之间的联系产生怀疑。