— 957-1,004 Blanchard tabulation based on locality breakouts below.[1]

Boston (844-899)

— 899 Krawczynski. Daily Life in the Colonial City. 2013. Table 12.1, Epidemics in the Cities.

— 891 Fitz. “Zabdiel Boylston…Smallpox…Boston…1721,” J. Hopkins…Bul., 22/9, 1911, 316.

— 855 Apr 1721-Feb 1722 (5,889 cases amongst population of 10,700). Behbehani, p. 458.

— 850 Henry. “Experience in Massachusetts…with Smallpox…” 1921, p. 221.

— 848 Purvis, Thomas L. Colonial America to 1763. NY: Facts On File, Inc., 1999, p. 173.[2]

— 844 April-Dec 1721. Harvard Univ. Library. “The Smallpox Epidemic, 1721.” Contagion.

— 844 New York Times. “Boston’s ‘Grievous Calamity of the Small Pox’.” 12-17-2002.[3]

— 844 Celebrate Boston. Boston Disasters. “Smallpox Epidemics;” Kohn 2001, p. 30

— 848 Purvis, Thomas L. Colonial America to 1763. NY: Facts On File, Inc., 1999, p. 173.[4]

— 844 Willsey and Lewis. “Massachusetts,” Harper’s Book of Facts. 1895, 488.

— 844 Woodward. “The Story of Smallpox in Massachusetts — Annual Oration 1932.” MA MS.

–>800 Christianson. “Medicine in New England,” in Leavitt, Sickness…America. 1997, 54.

— 411 October. (Harvard Univ. Library. “The Boston Smallpox Epidemic, 1721.” Contagion.)

Some of the named victims:

–1 Mr. Samuel Demming, April 22, 1722. (Letter-book of Samuel Sewall. 1888, p. 302.)[5]

–1 Mrs. Dixwell, after inoculation. (Coss. The Fever of 1721. 2016, p. 152.)

–1 Mrs. Joseph Gardner, Nov 2. (Sewall. Letter-book of Samuel Sewall. 1888, p. 302.)

–1 Henry Sewell, July 10. (Sewall. Letter-book of Samuel Sewall. 1888, p. 302.) [6]

–1 Susanah Thayer, Sister Coopers maid, Nov 30. (Letter-book of Samuel Sewall. 1888, p. 302.)

–1 Mrs. (Bromfield) Webb, Sep 14. (Sewall. Letter-book of Samuel Sewall. 1888, p. 302.)

–1 John White, after inoculation. (Sewall. Letter-book of Samuel Sewall. 1888, p. 302.)

Brookline ( 1)

–1 Joseph Gardner Jr. Dec 21. (Sewall. Letter-book of Samuel Sewall. 1888, p. 302.) [7]

Cambridge ( >1)

–1 William Hutchinson, Nov 30. (Sewall. Letter-book of Samuel Sewall. 1888, p. 302.)

–? Fitz. “Zabdiel Boylston…Smallpox…Boston…1721,” J. Hopkins…Bul., 22/9, 1911, . 317.[8]

Charlestown ( 100)

–100 Fitz. “Zabdiel Boylston…Smallpox…Boston…1721,” J. Hopkins…Bul., 22/9, 1911, 317.[9]

–100 Woodward. “The Story of Smallpox in Massachusetts — Annual Oration 1932.” MMS.

Some of the named victims:

–1 Nathaniel Robbins Jr. about 21, July, 1721. (Chandler. The Chandler Family. 1883, p. 36.)

–1 Martha Robbins (daughter of Nathaniel), Nov 10, 1721. “

–1 Martha Robbins (wife of Nathaniel), Nov 21, 1721. (Chandler. Chandler Family. 1883, p36.)

–1 Reverend Stevens, Nov 17. (Sewall. Letter-book of Samuel Sewall. 1888, p. 302.)

Roxbury ( >3)

–1 Jacob Chamberlain. “…died on November 7, 1721 at Roxbury, Suffolk…from small pox.”[10]

–1 James Pierpont, Dec 21. (Sewall. Letter-book of Samuel Sewall. 1888, p. 302.)

–1 Mrs. Edmund Weld, after inoculation, Dec 20. (Letter-book of Samuel Sewall. 1888, p. 302.)

–? Fitz. “Zabdiel Boylston…Smallpox…Boston…1721,” J. Hopkins…Bul., 22/9, 1911, . 317.[11]

–? Woodward. “The Story of Smallpox in Massachusetts — Annual Oration 1932.” MA MS.[12]

New London, CT (?)

–? Coss, Stephen. The Fever of 1721. NY: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks, 2016, p. 165.[13]

Narrative Information

Beeson and Troesken: “During the seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth centuries, American cities were subjected to sporadic outbreaks of epidemic disease. These epidemics were far more severe than anything that has been observed during the past one hundred years. For example, in 1721 a smallpox epidemic in Boston killed 1 of every 10 city residents (Blake 1959, pp. 73-75).”[14] (Beeson and Troesken. When Bioterrorism Was No Big Deal. 10-13-2006, p. 1.)

Celebrate Boston: “In 1721, 5759 persons had it…and that number was a large half of the whole population. 844 died.” (Celebrate Boston. Boston Disasters. “Smallpox Epidemics.”)

Childs: “The small-pox devastated Boston and vicinity, attacking nearly six thousand people. Inoculation for that disease was now first introduced into New England, and met with violent opposition.” (Childs, Emery E. A History of the United States… 1886, p. 22.)

Fitz: “Towards the end of April, 1721, Boston for the sixth time was invaded by this disease. It had then a population of about 11,000. Aeneas Salter, at the close of the epidemic, was employed by the selectmen to make a scrutiny of the inhabitants and found’ “that the number of persons who continued in Boston (many fled into the country) were 10,567, whereof about 700 escaped; the small-pox decumbitents [cases] had been 5,989, whereof 891 died, which is nearly one in seven”….

“It was announced in the Boston News-Letter of April 13-17, 1721, No. 89, that twenty or thirty deaths from smallpox were taking place daily at Barbados. In the following week it was stated ‘ that the Saltertudas fleet had arrived bringing the disease to the town. Sewall writes in his diary:

‘April 15th Hold another Council about giving Liberty to Mr. Frizzle’s Ship from Salt-Tartuda (Tortugas) to come up.

“On the 8th of May it is learned:

…. whereas a Certain Negro man is now Sick of the Small pox in the Town who came from [Tortugas] in His Majesties Ship Seahorse[15] which renders it very likely that that distemper may now be on board that Ship.[16] Therefore for the preservation of the Inhabitants of this Town,

Voted that John Clark, Esq., be Desired to go on board his Majesties Ship Seahorse and Report in what State of health or Sickness the Ship’s Company are in, Especially with respect to the Small Pox or other Contagious Sickness.

“There being a negro servant sick with smallpox at the house of Captain Paxton, near the South Battery, the first infected, a nurse was ordered to attend the patient and a watch was placed at the door. On the 12th of May it is recorded that the Seahorse is infected with smallpox and the greater part of its company were on a cruise. “Sundry other Sick on Shore, So that there is not above ten or fifteen Effective men on Board.” The ship was ordered to Bird Island to prevent the spread of the infection. A town-meeting was held on this day and it was voted “to seek the advice of the Governor and Council with reference to sending the Seahorse with its two or three cases of smallpox to Spectacle Island,” Pursuant to a Law of this Province to prevent (God willing) the Spreading of the Small Pox in this Town & Province.”

“By the middle of May, when the ship Francis left for London, she carried the report that the disease was rife…. The epidemic increased in severity and raged throughout the fall and winter till the following January. The disease extended also to the neighboring towns, especially to Roxbury, Charlestown and Cambridge. In Charlestown it was reported ” that there were ” lately ” 100 deaths and that there were not more than ten or twelve families which had not suffered from smallpox….

“Of…280 inoculated persons only six died, a mortality of one in forty-six, in contrast to one in six or seven of those who had become diseased through contagion.” (Fitz. “Zabdiel Boylston…Smallpox…Boston…1721,” J. Hopkins Hosp. Bul., V22/N9, Sep 1911, 316 & 322.)

Harper’s: “Small-pox breaks out in Massachusetts Apr. 1721. (Out of 5889 persons who were attacked in Boston, 844 died).”[17] (Harper’s Book of Facts. “Massachusetts.” 1895, p. 488.)

Harvard Univ. Library: “Between April and December 1721, 5,889 Bostonians had smallpox, and 844 died of it. October was the worst month, with 411 deaths. Smallpox caused more than three–quarters of all the deaths in Boston that year….

“Despite the promise that inoculation seemed to hold for controlling smallpox, the Boston smallpox epidemic of 1721 is known for the passionate controversy over inoculation that erupted in the city, most visibly between Reverend Cotton Mather and Boston physician William Douglass. Mather had learned about the procedure from the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society and from one of his slaves. After inoculating his own son, Mather advocated strongly for inoculation as the Boston epidemic grew.

“Most Boston physicians, as well as the general public, however, argued with equal passion against inoculation on the grounds that it could spread the disease rather than prevent it; that it could cause a fatal case of smallpox in the inoculated subject; and that it could make the subject susceptible to other diseases. These fears were not groundless: inoculation could indeed cause fatal cases of smallpox, and because inoculation proceeded by the direct transmission of bodily matter from one person to another through an open cut, diseases like syphilis could be spread by the procedure as well. Feelings ran high, and one protestor threw a lighted bomb through the window of Mather’s house.

“Douglass, with his medical degree from Edinburgh, was Boston’s only university–trained doctor. He argued that Mather’s inoculations undermined legitimate medical authority and contended that inoculation without regulated quarantine of the inoculated afterwards would only make the epidemic worse. Given that Mather was neither carrying out his inoculations in an organized manner nor isolating newly inoculated patients appropriately, Douglass’s criticism was legitimate.

“Only one physician, Zabdiel Boylston, publicly supported Mather’s efforts after trying out the procedure on his own son and two slaves. Boylston would eventually inoculate around 180 people, including many prominent Bostonians.

“The religious debate was also important. Mather, who had lost his wife and three youngest children in a measles epidemic, argued that inoculation was a gift from God. Those opposed to inoculation argued that epidemic diseases afflicted the people for a divine reason, and that to attempt to prevent them was to oppose God’s will. Others argued that inoculation, with its roots in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East, was a heathen practice not suitable for Christians..” (Harvard University Library Open Collections Program. “The Boston Smallpox Epidemic, 1721.” Contagion: Historical Views of Diseases and Epidemics. Accessed 1-8-2018.)

Henry: Not inoculated : 5,759 cases, 844 deaths (14.6%).

Inoculated: 347 cases, 6 deaths (2.4%)/

(Henry, Jonathan. “Experience in Massachusetts and a Few Other Places with Smallpox and Vaccination.” Boston Medical and Surgical Journal, Vol. 185, No. 8, pp. 221-228, 8-25-1921.)

Lamb: “…Duffy (1953) describes what happened when the 1721 smallpox epidemic was sweeping through Boston: ‘For the next few months, business was at a standstill. All intercourse was shunned, and the streets were deserted with the exception of wagons carrying the dead and of a few doctors of wagons carrying the dead and of a few doctors and nurses visiting the victims.” (Lamb. “Historical and Epidemiological Trends in Mortality in the United States,” p. 187 in Bryant (ed.). Handbook of Death & Dying. 2003; citing Duffy, John. 1953. Epidemics in Colonial America. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press.)

Woodward: “….the British fleet from the Barbados brought smallpox again to Boston [1721] where it spread, even for those times, with unexampled rapidity. Before it subsided, a year later, 5,759 of the 12,000 inhabitants of Boston had been stricken, 844 of whom died, while the surrounding towns and very likely those more distant were in equally bad case.

“Roxbury, Cambridge and Charlestown were particularly affected, 100 dying in the latter small settlement alone, and so many were ill that by Christmas the selectmen ordered that the sexton do not on any account whatsoever, without an order from them, toll above three bells in one day for the burial of any person, lest it be a discouragement to those that were ill with the smallpox.

“The prosperity if not the very existence of the Colony was most seriously threatened. Mather fresh from his reading and mindful of the fact that in 1702 several of his children were desperately ill of the disease wasted no time. On the fourteenth of May the selectmen instructed by the freeholders had waited on the Governor with the request that the pest-ridden ship Seahorse be sent down to Governors Island. On the twenty-sixth Mather wrote in his diary, “The practise of conveying smallpox by inoculation has never been used in our nation, but how many lives might be saved by it if it were practised: I will procure a consult of physicians and lay the matter before them.” On the sixth of June he issued an address calling the attention of the physicians to the new method embodying in it the two letters from the Transactions previously referred to. He requested them to meet and consult whether inoculation should be tried in the emergency then present.

“The immediate result of this address was the demand of Douglas for the return of his pamphlets and his refusal to again lend them for use or comparison, but its perusal pleased Dr. Zabdiel Boylston, a practitioner of the town and as he later says in his account of what happened, “I resolved in my own mind to try the experiment, well remembering the destruction the smallpox made in Boston 19 years before and how narrowly I escaped with my life. It may make a strange figure in New England especially when one or two have made the discovery how the practise could produce the plague. As they also say that Mather did not make a fair transcribe of the observations from the Levant, I prayed that they might be read but Dr. Douglas, who owned them, refused to allow this.”

“It is perhaps no wonder that medical men in general paid little attention to Mather’s letter. He inextricably mixed piety and medicine in many of his publications, thought disease the result of sin, sickness Flagellum Dei pro peccato Mundi, advised the scattering of wens by the laying on of a dead hand and eulogized the healing virtues of a solution of sowbugs. He believed in witch marks and the application of the water ordeal…

“But Boylston then 42 years of age, a physician of some prominence, impressed as he says by what Mather had communicated probably talked the matter over with him and no doubt personally interviewed the slave Onesimus, who had been inoculated in Africa where he said it was done to everybody and “nobody died any more of the smallpox”. In fact, as Mather himself says in the appendix to Variolae Triumphatae, he was informed of the wonderful new practise by this Garamantic servant some years before he was “enriched with the communications of the learned foreigners, whose accounts I found agreed with what I received from my servant, and thus in Africa where the poor creatures died like rotten sheep, a merciful God has taught them an infallible preservation. ‘Tis a common practise attended with a constant success.’

“On the twenty-fourth of June, Mather wrote to Boylston a personal letter in which among other things he tells him, “If you should think it advisable to be proceeded in, it may save many lives that we set great value upon.” Two days later Boylston inoculated his son Thomas, aged 6, and not long afterwards John, aged 13, and seven other persons.

“The inspiration for inoculation in Massachusetts came then from Cotton Mather and from Cotton Mather only, but had Zabdiel Boylston not been the man he was, bold, determined, deterred by no obstacles, even Mather’s whole-souled advocacy of the new practice, the prodigious energy with which his views were promulgated and the influence of his undoubted standing in the community would never have been enough to lead so many to submit to the operation, that Boylston became in a few months the leading inoculator not only in the New World, but in the Old as well. English physicians had waited seven years before acting. Boylston, with no knowledge of what was happening there, less than three times as many days.

“The storm broke; the other physicians would have no part in the matter; the mob, believing that inoculation was simply giving smallpox to those who might otherwise escape, were roused to fury. A legion of incendiary pamphlets appeared. Men declared that it was impious to interfere between the Creator and his creatures, that multiplying smallpox by artificial means was a wilful tampering with death. An anonymous writer did not hesitate to say that “the ministers have generally revolted from the good old days and set up a way that their fathers knew not of”. “Most of them are for it which induces me to think that it is from the devil.” The clergy almost unanimously supported Boylston. The physicians almost as unanimously derided his efforts. There were times when Boylston was truly in great peril.

“Thatcher declares that before the excitement subsided men patrolled the town with halters threatening to hang him to the nearest tree, that he once remained secreted in a “private place” in his own house for 14 days, while parties entered by day and by night in search of him and that even after the madness of the multitude had to some degree subsided he was forced to visit his patients by night and in disguise.

“A certain Dr. Dalhonde, who had a considerable reputation for his knowledge of smallpox, gave it as his opinion that the practise was attended with the most pernicious consequences. By order of the selectmen he made a deposition concerning cases he claimed to have seen in Italy 25 years before and in Flanders and in Spain, all of which went to prove that the practise was nothing better than murder. This deposition, later shown to be false as inoculation was unknown in those countries at that time, was by authority published and even reprinted in England and caused, says Boylston, “a melancholy day to inoculation in its infancy and almost set the whole town against me and my methods”….

“Boylston was called before the selectmen and ordered to discontinue the practice, but he went calmly on inoculating all who came to him, nor was he estopped when later in the year the physicians of the town, probably at the instigation of Douglas, agreed as they said, “after mature deliberation, that inoculation had moved the death of many persons and had brought distemper upon many others which in the end proved deadly to them and that the natural tendency of infusing such malignant filth into the mass of the blood is to corrupt and putrify it”. One hears much of “malignant filth” from the antivaccinationists of the present day. By October, 60 persons had passed through his hands, and by November 18, when smallpox was present in every street and almost in every house, 110. The town was by this time in a panic. Work was generally suspended. Many families moved away and the selectmen, when they later made up the statistics of the epidemic, declared that but 700 of the 12,000 inhabitants had proved immune to the disease. Such was smallpox 200 years ago.

“Before the epidemic was over Boylston had inoculated some 247 persons, some say 282, but a few were treated by Doctors Thompson and Roby, who took up the work in Cambridge and Charlestown. Despite the statements of the physicians but six of Boylston’s patients died and if any one of these particular persons had recovered, he thinks it would have been a miracle. After reading the detailed histories of these six, I am inclined to agree with him….

“The death rate after inoculation in this 1721 epidemic had been 2.4%, after natural smallpox 14.8%….” (Woodward, Samuel B., M.D. “The Story of Smallpox in Massachusetts — Annual Oration 1932.” Massachusetts Medical Society, 11-14-2016.)

Sources:

Beeson, Patricia and Werner Troesken. When Bioterrorism Was No Big Deal. University of Pittsburgh, Department of Economics, 10-13-2006. Accessed 2-18-2013 at: http://www.econ.yale.edu/seminars/echist/eh06/troesken-061108.pdf

Behbehani, Abbas M. “The Smallpox Story: Life and Death of an Old Disease.” Microbiological Reviews (American Society for Microbiology), Vol. 47, No. 4, Dec 1983, pp. 455-509. Accessed 1-8-2017 at: http://pubmedcentralcanada.ca/pmcc/articles/PMC281588/pdf/microrev00019-0005.pdf

Benson, William H. The Parallel Lives of the Noble American Religious Thinkers and Believers: Roger Williams vs. Cotton Mather (Volume One). Xlibris.com, 12-2-2014 revision. Accessed 1-8-2018 at: https://books.google.com/books?id=95nHBQAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

Celebrate Boston. Boston Disasters. “Smallpox Epidemics.” Accessed 12/06/2008 at: http://www.celebrateboston.com/disasters/epidemics/smallpox.htm

Chandler, George. The Chandler Family. The Descendants of William and Annis Chandler, Who Settled in Roxbury, Mass. 1637. Worcester, MA: Press of Charles Hamilton, 1883. Google Preview accessed 1-8-2018 at: https://books.google.com/books?id=h2JmAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

Childs, Emery E. A History of the United States In Chronological Order From the Discovery of America in 1492 to the Year 1885. NY: Baker & Taylor, 1886. Google digitized at: http://books.google.com/books?id=XLYbAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

Christianson, Eric H. “Medicine in New England,” in Leavitt, Judith Walzer & Ronald L. Numbers. Sickness and Health in America: Readings in the History of Medicine and Public Health (3^rd Ed., Revised). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 1997. Partially Google digitized: http://books.google.com/books?id=6eOlhNkjXaAC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_atb#v=onepage&q&f=false

Coss, Stephen. The Fever of 1721. NY: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks, 2016. Google preview accessed 1-8-2018 at: https://books.google.com/books?id=-ZpvDgAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

Fitz, Reginald H. “Zabdiel Boylston, Inoculator, and the Epidemic of Smallpox in Boston in 1721,” pp. 315-326 in Bulletin of The Johns Hopkins Hospital (Vol. 22, No. 9, Sep 1911, Baltimore, MD). Digitized by Google at: http://books.google.com/books?id=zGtNAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_atb#v=onepage&q&f=false

Harvard University Library Open Collections Program. “The Boston Smallpox Epidemic, 1721.” Contagion: Historical Views of Diseases and Epidemics. 2018. Accessed 1-8-2018 at: http://ocp.hul.harvard.edu/contagion/smallpox.html

Krawczynski, Keith. Daily Life in the Colonial City. Santa Barbara, CO and Denver: Greenwood (An Imprint of ABC-CLIO, LLC), 2013. Google preview accessed 1-8-2018 at: https://books.google.com/books?id=E_QgVyPcmIAC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

Lamb, Vicki L. “Historical and Epidemiological Trends in Mortality in the United States.” Pp. 185-197 in Bryant, Clifton D. (Ed.). Handbook of Death & Dying. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2003. Partially digitized by Google at: http://books.google.com/books?id=3z9EpgisKOgC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_atb#v=onepage&q&f=true

Lindgren, J. Ralph. The Lindgren/Tryon Genealogy: The Ancestry of John Ralph Lindgren and Shirley Ann Tryon (Revised Edition). Victoria, BC: Trafford Publishing, 2007. Google preview accessed 1-8-2018 at: https://books.google.com/books?id=eyeJAgAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

Massachusetts Historical Society. Collections of the Massachusetts Historical Society, Vol. II. — Sixth Series. Boston. The Society (University Press), 1888. Accessed 1-8-2018 at: https://books.google.com/books?id=hhPVAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

New York Times. “Boston’s ‘Grievous Calamity of the Small Pox’.” 12-17-2002. Accessed 1-8-2018 at: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/17/health/boston-s-grievous-calamity-of-the-small-pox.html

Purvis, Thomas L. Colonial America to 1763. NY: Facts On File, Inc., 1999. Google digital preview: http://books.google.com/books?id=BZRJSx3uMYEC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

Willsey, Joseph H. (Compiler), Charlton T. Lewis (Editor). Harper’s Book of Facts: A Classified History of the World. New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers, 1895. Accessed at: http://books.google.com/books?id=UcwGAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=&f=false

Woodward, Samuel B., M.D. “The Story of Smallpox in Massachusetts — Annual Oration 1932.” Massachusetts Medical Society, 11-14-2016. Accessed 1-7-2018 at: http://www.massmed.org/About/MMS-Leadership/History/The-Story-of-Smallpox-in-Massachusetts/#.WlJ10zdG2nI

[1] While using the number of 899 deaths in Boston as part of the high-range, we do not consider this to be ill-advised in that we do not have estimates for Cambridge and Roxbury (or other nearby locations for that matter). It is noted below that there were about 100 deaths in Charlestown. It seems reasonable to assume that there were smallpox deaths outside Boston not recorded herein — thus making the range we use probably conservative.

[2] Cites as source: John B. Blake, Public Health in the Town of Boston, 1630-1822 (1959), p. 244. Shows 842 deaths out of 5,759 cases, and 6 inoculated smallpox deaths. Total Boston population is listed as 10,700.

[3] Notes this was 14.1% of 5,980 stricken population.

[4] Under total deaths for Boston residents only, shows 844, though in column above shows 842 “natural” and 6 “inoculated” smallpox deaths.

[5] Notes he had had removed to Roxbury for several months in attempt to avoid smallpox, but went back to Boston, and “catches it.”

[6] Collections of the Massachusetts Historical Society, Vol. II. — Sixth Series. Boston. The Society, 1888.

[7] Notes the death location as Brooklin, which we speculate as Brookline, MA.

[8] From Boston “The disease extended also to the neighboring towns, especially Roxbury, Charlestown and Cambridge.”

[9] “In Charleston it was reported that there were ‘lately’ 100 deaths and that there were not more than ten or twelve families which had not suffered from smallpox.”

[10] Lindgren. The Lindgren/Tryon Genealogy…(Revised Edition). Victoria, BC: Trafford Publishing, 2007, p. 185.

[11] “The disease extended also to the neighboring towns, especially Roxbury, Charlestown and Cambridge.”

[12] Notes “Roxbury, Cambridge and Charlestown were particularly affected, 100 dying in the latter small settlement alone…”

[13] “The stories from Boston were so horrible that when the epidemic spread to New London, Connecticut, partly, at least, by way of an infected man named John Rogers, and when Rogers and his family refused to remain quarantined in their home, authorities not only posted armed guards at their door but summarily rounded up and destroyed their dogs for good measure.”

[14] Blake, John B. Public Health in the Town of Boston 1630-1822. President and Fellows of Harvard College, 1959.

[15] Coss notes that the HMS Seahorse was a British warship. (p. xii.)

[16] The NYT notes that on April 22, the British vessel Seahorse, arrived in Boston harbor from the Caribbean. “It passed the customary quarantine inspection and proceeded then to its dock. Within a day, one of its crew was stricken with smallpox and forcibly confined to a house near the docks. A red flag was implanted in front of the dwelling with the emblazoned words, ‘God have mercy on this house.’” Benson (p. 515) writes: “Boston officials warned those from the ship that they ere to remain quarantined on Spectacle Island and not venture into Boston, but on May 8, a dark-skilled man from the Seahorse was seen waling on Boston’s streets. By the last week of May, eight people in Boston had smallpox…”

[17] Cites: Barry. History of Massachusetts.

1721 — May-Apr 1722, Smallpox, Mass. Bay Colony, esp. Boston & Charlestown–957-1,004