Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper analysed mortality in the 1742-1743 plague epidemic along the Camino Real in Argentina using parish records as primary sources. During the epidemic the paper finds that it affected the marginalized groups, particularly the enslaved individuals and Indigenous populations, the most. However, the paper does not look into the details of how much such populations were affected during the coronavirus pandemic, after more than 250 years since the 1742-1743 plague epidemic. This comparision will shed light not only on the improvement in the socio-economic status of such marginalized groups, but also the status of their public health in more than 250 years later.

Author Response

The paper analysed mortality in the 1742-1743 plague epidemic along the Camino Real in Argentina using parish records as primary sources. During the epidemic the paper finds that it affected the marginalized groups, particularly the enslaved individuals and Indigenous populations, the most. However, the paper does not look into the details of how much such populations were affected during the coronavirus pandemic, after more than 250 years since the 1742-1743 plague epidemic. This comparision will shed light not only on the improvement in the socio-economic status of such marginalized groups, but also the status of their public health in more than 250 years later.

Response: We sincerely appreciate your valuable suggestion and agree that comparing the 1742–1743 plague epidemic with the COVID-19 pandemic could offer important insights into the socio-economic and public health evolution of marginalized populations over 250 years. However, the primary aim of this article is to examine the 18th-century epidemic, with a focus on its demographic and social dynamics within the colonial context of Latin America. A detailed analysis of the COVID-19 pandemic, while highly relevant, exceeds the current scope and objectives of this study.

That said, the discussion already incorporates an analysis highlighting parallels between both crises. Specifically, we emphasize how marginalized groups—Indigenous and Afro-descendant populations—were disproportionately affected in both instances, which exacerbated pre-existing social inequalities. This perspective underscores the historical continuity of vulnerability and resilience dynamics without detracting from the central historical analysis.

Moreover, resilience, defined as the capacity of communities to absorb shocks and adapt to emerging conditions, plays a critical role in our analysis. Drawing from historical examples, as detailed in "From Conquests to Epidemics in 18th-Century South America: A Reflection on Social Resilience and Reconstruction" (Villafañe, 2024), the institutional and community responses to the 1742–1743 plague demonstrate adaptive strategies under extreme public health pressures. These historical lessons provide a valuable comparative framework for understanding resilience in contemporary public health crises.

To fully address your suggestion, a more in-depth analysis of contemporary data on the COVID-19 pandemic within the same regions and its long-term implications for health and equity would be required. While beyond the scope of this article, such an analysis represents a promising avenue for future interdisciplinary research. We hope this response addresses your concerns and remain open to additional feedback.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I congratulate the authors on the choice of the research problem of their study and on the very good execution of the intended purpose. The social context of the plague that struck populations along the Camino Real, the main colonial trade route linking Buenos Aires and Lima, with Córdoba in Argentina as a critical focal point between 1742 and 1743, is an intriguing issue not only from the point of view of the historian but also of the researcher of social processes. Admittedly, the historical data presented in the article are exceedingly meagre, but the authors made the most of them. The authors wanted to answer the question: how do public health crises intersect with demographic and socio-economic structures? This is the novelty and at the same time the actualization of the analyzed issues in this study, in that it shows how diverse the social consequences of a pandemic can also be in the present day. Whether it is possible to prepare in any way for a pandemic such as Covid-19 remains an open question, but the social-historical analysis carried out at least shows which social groups are worth paying special attention to in such situations.

Author Response

I congratulate the authors on the choice of the research problem of their study and on the very good execution of the intended purpose. The social context of the plague that struck populations along the Camino Real, the main colonial trade route linking Buenos Aires and Lima, with Córdoba in Argentina as a critical focal point between 1742 and 1743, is an intriguing issue not only from the point of view of the historian but also of the researcher of social processes. Admittedly, the historical data presented in the article are exceedingly meagre, but the authors made the most of them. The authors wanted to answer the question: how do public health crises intersect with demographic and socio-economic structures? This is the novelty and at the same time the actualization of the analyzed issues in this study, in that it shows how diverse the social consequences of a pandemic can also be in the present day. Whether it is possible to prepare in any way for a pandemic such as Covid-19 remains an open question, but the social-historical analysis carried out at least shows which social groups are worth paying special attention to in such situations.

Response: We are truly grateful for your thoughtful and encouraging comments. Your recognition of the study’s interdisciplinary nature, bridging historical and social perspectives, as well as its relevance to contemporary public health discussions, is deeply appreciated.

While we acknowledge the inherent limitations of the historical data, we are heartened by your acknowledgment of our efforts to derive meaningful insights from these sources. As you noted, the intersection of public health crises with demographic and socio-economic structures forms the core of our analysis. This allowed us to explore not only the immediate demographic impacts of the epidemic but also its broader social and institutional dimensions.

In response to your observation regarding the novelty of the study, we have further emphasized the concept of resilience as a key analytical framework. Historical examples from the 1742–1743 plague epidemic, such as the implementation of quarantines, temporary hospital construction, and administrative reforms, underscore the adaptive capacity of colonial societies to respond to severe health crises. These measures mitigated the epidemic’s impacts and fostered long-term recovery, highlighting resilience as not merely survival but a process of social reorganization and reconstruction.

Moreover, the parallels drawn between the 1742–1743 plague and the COVID-19 pandemic illustrate how historical patterns of resilience and adaptation can inform contemporary strategies for managing public health emergencies. As you rightly pointed out, identifying vulnerable groups is a critical aspect of preparedness, and historical analyses such as this can offer valuable lessons for shaping equitable and targeted public health interventions.

We deeply value your recognition of the study’s broader implications and hope that the revisions enhance its clarity and impact. We welcome any further feedback or suggestions that could strengthen the manuscript.