Shakespeare probably had syphilis and lost his hair as a result of it

17 Jan 2005

Shakespeare may well have had syphilis, known at the time as `French pox', says Dr J Ross, from the Caritas St. Elizabeth's Medical Center, Boston, USA. Dr Ross says Shakespeare seemed to know a great deal about the disease.

Shakespeare was probably being treated with mercury for syphilis, it seems. He lost his hair, wrote with a trembling hand and later became withdrawn and unsociable - mercury poisoning can do this to you.

Treating syphilis with mercury was common during the 16th Century.

Ross believes Shakespeare wrote too well about syphilis in his final sonnets - his knowledge was too detailed for somebody who had just an average knowledge of the venereal disease.

You can read about Dr Ross' report on the Journal of Clinical Infectious Diseases.

"Shakespeare's Writings Indicate He May Have Had Syphilis"

Shakespeare's name usually inspires thoughts of kings, fairies, lovers, wars and poetic genius--not syphilis. However, some passages in his plays and sonnets indicate that the Bard may have suffered from one or more venereal infections, according to an article in the Feb. 1 issue of Clinical Infectious Diseases, now available online.

Although syphilis is relatively uncommon now, it was rampant five centuries ago, transmitted from country to country by sailors, soldiers and merchants. Symptoms of syphilis can include genital lesions; rashes on the torso, palms, and soles of the feet; neurological problems; and destroyed facial tissue. Shakespeare alluded to sexually transmitted disease (STD) symptoms--and treatments--in several of his plays and poems, including Troilus and Cressida, As You Like It, and Sonnets.

Mentions of the ``pox,'' the ``malady of France,'' the ``infinite malady,'' and the ``hoar leprosy'' in his writings seem to indicate that the Bard knew--perhaps from personal experience--how torturous venereal disease could be. ``Shakespeare's knowledge of syphilis is clinically precise,'' said John Ross, MD, author of the study. A line in Sonnet 154, ``Love's fire heats water,'' apparently refers to an STD causing burning urination.

In Shakespeare's time, one of the treatments for syphilis, inhalation of mercury vapor, was worse than the disease. Dr. Ross suggests that Shakespeare's tremulous signature on his will, his social withdrawal in later years, and even his baldness might all be due to a mild degree of mercury vapor poisoning.

However, it doesn't seem likely that Shakespeare's death at 52 years of age was due to an STD. In fact, the alternative Elizabethan practice of using very hot baths to treat syphilitic people ``would have been at least somewhat effective and perhaps highly effective,'' according to Dr. Ross, of Caritas St. Elizabeth's Medical Center in Boston, because high, fever-causing temperatures can kill the organisms that cause syphilis. (There is a reference to a ``seething bath'' curing ``strange maladies'' in Sonnet 153.) Shakespeare was also an actor, and he appeared in plays until at least 1603, said Dr. Ross. ``It's unlikely that he would have been performing if he had been suffering from the ravages of tertiary syphilis.'' Nor did the Bard exhibit the mental problems toward the end of his life that would indicate severe mercury poisoning, judging from the quality of his writing, so any mercury treatment he received was probably limited.

His death mask suggested kidney failure.
Arsenic poisoning may cause kidney failure?

Also, I once attended a graphological seminar where a copy of Shakepeare's handwriting(his last will) was projected on the wall.
Throughout the will, his lower loop formations were made in the form of kidneys. This pictographic rendering of the kidneys for normal lower loop formations are a diagram of the unconscious;to draw these in such an important document indicates that he was at the least, unconsciously aware that he had a kidney problem; they were on his mind as he wrote his will. Consciously, he probably definitely knew.

If I recall correctly, I think the cp of the will I saw was of the changes made,one of which was to leave his son-in-law, and maybe his daughter out of it. Somehow they tie into this document in a negative sense.

Anyway, I think arsenic poisoning definitley killed him.

Tangentially, this is how Napolean was killed; slowly, by arsenic poisoning. When they exhumed, and tested him, he was loaded with arsenic. It preserved him extremely well. He looked as good as the day he was buried.

So, I'd wager that, if Shakespeare were exhumed and tested, he'd be loaded with arsenic--predominantly.

They should also check him and Napolean for Borrelia, since they spent many a night under the stars. Activities for contracting TBDs for both of them were infinitely many, esp. Napoleon.

[This message has been edited by DiffyQue (edited 19 January 2005).]