I am skeptical. Plague continued to be endemic and intermittently epidemic in China and India for most of the 20th century. Why would Europeans have developed the highest degree of resistance? Our knowledge of the medieval plagues in Europe compared to other areas of the old world is probably more related to documentation than to prevalence.
When you consider the resistance that other genetic variations provide such as Tay-Sachs (resistance to tuberculosis) and sickle cell anemia (resistance to malaria), it makes sense that another variation could have become more common under the pressure of a plague.
Our knowledge of the medieval plagues in Europe compared to other areas of the old world is probably more related to documentation than to prevalence.I agree. Also, any epidemic prior to about WWI is either still with us, somewhere, or is extinct. Some tissue samples from those who succumbed from the "Spanish Lady" flu epidemic that hit in full force (apparently there were a few bad years in sequence prior to it) at the end of WWI still exist. The rest of the "data" appears to be speculation, at best.
I am skeptical. Plague continued to be endemic and intermittently epidemic in China and India for most of the 20th century. Why would Europeans have developed the highest degree of resistance?The gene was already there (according to this speculation), but (according to this speculation) those with it had more children than those who didn't.