"Jeffrey Amherst and Smallpox Blankets" Topic

Lord Jeffrey Amherst's letters discussing germ warfare against American Indians

"…Despite his fame, Jeffrey Amherst's name became tarnished by stories of smallpox-infected blankets used as germ warfare against American Indians. These stories are reported, for example, in Carl Waldman's Atlas of the North American Indian [NY: Facts on File, 1985]. Waldman writes, in reference to a siege of Fort Pitt (Pittsburgh) by Chief Pontiac's forces during the summer of 1763:

… Captain Simeon Ecuyer had bought time by sending smallpox-infected blankets and handkerchiefs to the Indians surrounding the fort -- an early example of biological warfare -- which started an epidemic among them. Amherst himself had encouraged this tactic in a letter to Ecuyer. [p. 108]
Some people have doubted these stories; other people, believing the stories, nevertheless assert that the infected blankets were not intentionally distributed to the Indians, or that Lord Jeff himself is not to blame for the germ warfare tactic…"
Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

This was disproved back in the '30's. The alleged letters are NOT in Amherst's hand, nor do the signatures match authentic examples. And analyses of the ink and paper prove they date from the mid-19th Century.

Ross,

Don't let the facts get in the way of paleface bashing.

Based on current thinking (and the thing about the winners writing the history), we should be writing this in Algonquin.

Hadn't seen that refutation of the claim – good to know in the future when the topic arises.

I would interested to read more about the study that demonstrated the letters were not authentic.

Hadn't seen that refutation of the claim

Does anyone have some sources for this?

Don't let the facts get in the way of paleface bashing.

Right. Because the whites did nothing to destroy the Indians and their way of life.

One thing that puzzles me. How did the people that initially infected the blankets with smallpox, then collected the blankets, then stored the blankets, then transported the blankets, and then distributed the blankets to the Indians never get smallpox themselves?

This was decades before Jenner first inoculated people against smallpox in England.

Following the logic of the scenario you set up, it was possible to catch smallpox and survive, although often with extensive scarring. Those individuals would, in theory, have an immunity to further infection. In theory, such individuals could be directed, or paid, to handle the blankets. We are talking about people with origins in Europe where the didease was endemic. The disease was much more lethal to the native population who had not built up any genetic resistance to the disease (Apologies to medical science for any oversimplification).

Was it a question of deliberately creating a stock of infected blankets or simply taking the blankets exposed to infection and disposing of them accordingly? What is the shelf life of the smallpox virus?

I would assume that those in charge of the logistics had already had smallpox.

I have always believed the story, if only because the namesake university is such a hotbed of liberal and progressive thought. The irony amuses me.
But I have nothing against clearing the old boy's name.

I think some people see this episode simply as a dastardly conspiracy to kill Bambi in order to clear the woods for white settlement.

The article blandly refers to Pontiac "leading an uprising," depicted as a justifiable response to being snubbed, which glosses over the fact that the summer of 1763 had seen an extremely bloody outbreak along the frontier from the Great Lakes to the Delaware, after the French had surrendered authority on the Great Lakes and Ohio.

As evinced by his reference to 'bloody and inhuman deeds, 'Amherst was furious and disgusted at what he saw as the perfidy and savagery of the Indians who had attacked outposts and settlements whose occupants believed the war was over. Those highly selective quotations from the letters need to be set in their proper context.

Amherst was not sanctioning the extinction of the native American peoples on the North American continent, a entity of which he probably had little grasp- even though, in the mood he was in, he would probably not have objected to the proposition. Amherst was confronting a specific miltary problem for which he could not see a military solution.

There is however no evidence that Bouquet carried out his proposition. In any case there was little need, since the commander at Fort Pitt had already given infected blankets to the Delwares besieging the post – more an act of survival than genocidal intent- and the damage was done.

Well said 42nd. It was a genocidal war on both sides. The Indians thought nothing of killing women and children, many times on land they lived no where near.

I would also point out the incident at Fort William Henry when the Indians broke into the infirmary and killed all the patients there. After that they found the booze and got blind drunk. The result was that some of them turned to the cemetery and dug up some of the recently interned deceased to mutilate the bodies as they believed you went into the after world as you left this earth. The unknown consequence was that many of those recently buried were small pox victims and the Indians carried the disease back to their villages where it devastated their own people – estimates vary up to 30% or more of many villages.

My $.02 USD Cents----Not only was it war, but it was war to the death. I bet that very few (none) of the folks being besieged inside Fort Pitt, would have argued that killing the Indians off using germ warfare was wrong.

When did war become so non-war like?

Tom Semian
Avalon, PA. 15202

Good point my friend.

Amicalement
Armand

Was it a question of deliberately creating a stock of infected blankets or simply taking the blankets exposed to infection and disposing of them accordingly? What is the shelf life of the smallpox virus?

Well, I'm not sure smallpox has a shelf life. Smallpox requires close contact with infected liquids. It's an airborne or fluid based transmission. A sneeze is the most common form, or contact with smallpox infused fluid contaminated materials.

Even if there was this nefarious plan to distribute infected blankets it wouldn't have mattered. The disease would have spread to all the indigenous people at some point, regardless of any genocidal motivation. Smallpox kills about 30% of the infected in cultures already exposed to smallpox (different mutations of the virus flaring up). These rates would be appreciably higher in people that have never been exposed to the virus. Add to that diphtheria, measles, and influenza and we have a genocide, irregardless of intent.

For an alternative view see link

link

Ignore the costumes (and they are) worn by the men in that one photo. They are just a hot mess. :-(

Thanks for the links!.

Amicalement
Armand