Quarantine Page Menu:    1      2      3      4      5      6      7      8      9      10      11      12       <<First

Quarantining Ships In the Golden Age of Piracy, Page 16

History of Quarantine - Yellow Fever: New World

Like its name, the origins of yellow fever are murky. Writing in 1955, Dr. Pedro Nogueira said,
Artist: Ridolfo Ghirlandaio - Chrisopher Columbus, (16th Century)
"The first accurate description of yellow fever seems to be the one written in the year 1495, after the battle known as Vega Real or Santo Cerro, fought by Columbus in Hispaniola against the Indians."¹ In his Historie, Ferdinand Columbus explained that the illness contracted by his father "was something between a pestilential fever and a drowsiness or supreme stupor which totally deprived him of all his forces and senses, so that he was believed to be dying and none believed he would last out the day."² This is not nearly enough detail to distinguish this as yellow fever from among a number of other possible fevers the explorer may have contracted. Henry Rose Carter says that the accounts given by the men returning to Spain of this illness "indicate malaria, not yellow fever."³

Nongueira goes on to point to several other early Spanish expeditions where he suggests yellow fever may have played a role, including those of "[ Nicolás de] Ovando, [Serrano and Diego] Nicueza, [Alonso de] Hojeda et al... Santo Domingo was scourged in 1495 and later in 1554, 1560, 1567, 1580, 1583 and 1588... According to the Spanish writers Hernandez Morejon and Hurtado de Mendoza, Cadiz and Malaga were visited in 1507 and 1582."⁴ However, it is not clear that all these attributions are correct.

Artist: after J. Aurego
People Suffering During a Yellow Fever Outbreak (1821) Writing decades before Nogueira, Carter warned that many febrile illnesses were "simply classed as 'una peste', 'una fiebre pestilencial' etc. These are the most common terms used, although 'la modorra,' (the lethargy, the stupor, the sleepiness)... was common in early Spanish writing, and evidently covered more than one disease. "El contagio" is also used, implying the opinion that the disease in question was communicable, and 'la epidemia,' implying its high prevalence."⁵ Carter provides an extensive examaination of the Spanish sources in his book which is beyond the scope of this article. Modern authors S. L. Kotar and J. E. Gessler note, "Symptoms of yellow fever, although thoroughly described in the medical and popular print of the time, were nonspecific, leading to confusion over precise diagnosis. Even today, clinical diagnosis ...ends only by advanced laboratory identification. It is therefore impossible, at present, to state with certainty the time of its first appearance."⁶

Although the period descriptions are inexact and make absolute identification of the virus difficult, a number of Caribbean and colonial locations have been suggested to have had yellow fever outbreaks during the 17th and early eighteenth centuries, an assortment of which can be
Artist: Gustav Dore (1898)
Suggested Yellow Fever Outbreaks in the 17th
& Early 18th Centuries in America and the WI
found in the chart at left. Some of the dates and locations included in this table cannot be positively identified as referring to yellow fever. For example, John Blake points out, "it has often been said that New York had a yellow fever epidemic in 1668, and possibly it did. However, the universal source for this statement appears to be Noah Webster's Brief History of Epidemic and Pestilential Diseases."⁷ Webster's entry reads in full: "In New-York the epidemic was so fatal, that a fast was appointed in September, on that account. This was undoubtedly the autumnal bilious fever in its infectious form."⁸ (Webster does seem to be referring back to a widespread fever raging in the West Indies in 1647 - a year when many historians agree that there was a widespread outbreak of yellow fever in the Caribbean.⁹ However, this is very thin evidence indeed.) To indicate the uncertainy of a source, dates with a * after them should be regarded as possible, but uncertain yellow fever outbreaks.

Today, researchers believe yellow fever did not originate South America and the West Indies, but arrived with the slaves and the establishment of sugar plantations in the 17th century. Using viral samples taken from a number of different places and years from the twentieth century, molecular biologists determined that "isolates [samples] from West Africa are most closely related to those from the Americas" with the data suggesting the virus arrived in the New World "within the last three to four centuries and provide compelling support for an initial introduction during the period of the slave trade and first contact between the two continents."¹⁰

Neither the West Indies nor American Colonies have any formal maritime lazarettos like those of the Mediterranean or long-standing quarantine locations like those used in England. Most of quarantine regulations created by governing bodies used in this region during the golden age of piracy were of short duration. Examples of such rules are found between the years 1647 and 1722, all of which come Massachusetts (primarily around Boston), Philadelphia and Charleston.¹¹

¹ Dr. Pedro Nogueira, “The Early History of Yellow Fever”, Yellow Fever, a symposium in commemoration of Carlos Juan Finlay, 1955, p. 2; ² John Boyd Thacher, Christopher Columbus - His Life, His Work, His Remains, Vol. 2, 1903, p. 338; ⁴ Henry Rose Carter, Yellow Fever - An Epidemiological and History Study of Its Place of Origin, 1931, p. 157; ⁴ Nogueira, p. 2; ⁵ Carter, p. 49; ⁶ S.L Kotar and J. E. Gessler, Yellow Fever: A Worldwide History, 2017, p. 5; ⁷ John B. Blake, "Yellow Fever in Eighteenth Century America", Bulletin of New York Academy of Medicine, June 1968, p. 673; ⁸ Noah Webster, A Brief History of Epidemic and Pestilential Diseases, Vol. 1, 1799, p. 203; ⁹ Webster, p. 188; ¹⁰ Julie Bryant, Edward Holmes and Alan Barrrett, "Out of Africa: A Molecular Perspective on the Introduction of Yellow Fever Virus into the Americas", PLOS Pathogens website, gathered 2/17/19; ¹⁰ Susan Wade Peabody, "Historical Study of Legislation Regarding Public Health in the States of New York and Massachusetts, The Journal of Infectious Diseases, Supplement No. 4, Feb. 1909, p. 145

History of Quarantine in Massachusetts, 17th and Early 18th Centuries

The first quarantine procedure was instituted in Boston in 1647. Colonial lawyer John Withrop recorded in his journal that following a 'plague, or pestilential fever' which killed people within three days in Barbados and St. Kitts, "the court published an order, that all vessels, which
Castle William in Boston Harbor, From Massachussetts Magazine (1789)
should come from the West Indies, should stay at the castle [Castle William, on an Island in Boston Harbor], and not come on shore, nor put any goods on shore, without license of three of the council, on pain of one hundred pounds, nor any to go aboard, etc., except they continued there, etc., on like penalty."¹ Withrop adds that Salem and some other enacted similar orders. This order was repealed two years later by the court.²

The ruling doesn't seem to have been followed very consistently. Withrop mentions a ship coming from St. Kitts ignoring the rule, lying to the officials on the boat sent to meet them saying that they hadn't come from the West Indies. The crew told the council the next day that the illness there had ceased three months before and so there was no danger of the crew being afflicted, which the council apparently believed. So "they gave them [the crew] liberty to continue on shore; but for cotton and such goods as might retain the infection, they ordered them to be laid in an house remote, and for [the ship's master Goodman] Dell, he was bound over to the next court to answer his contempt."³

Another ship arriving from Barbados was stopped at Castle William resulting in the ship's master and two sailors were brought to Boston, something Winthrop notes should have happened. "Four magistrates examined them upon oath, and finding they were all well, save two, (who had the flux [diarrhea],) and no goods from Barbados but three bags of cotton, which were ordered to be landed, etc., at an island, the ship was suffered to come up, but none to come on shore for a week after, etc."⁴

A quarantine was issued in Boston on October 11, 1665, although this one was directed primarily at preventing the plague. Issued by a warrant of the court against William Foster's ship in particular and other ships like his, it ordered, that no one was to aboard such ships "w[i]thout such like licence, on pœnalty of imprisonment, that so the dainger of the pæstilence may be prevented as much as maybe & that the captain of the Castle stop all vessells coming from England"⁵. Similar to
Cartographer: Joseph Des Barres - Castle Island (in red box) in Boston Harbor (1789)
the 1647 order, quarantined vessels were once again to anchor by the castle in Boston Harbor and bring their goods up, presumably to be aired. This order was repealed two years later.⁶

Another quarantine law, 'An Act For The Better Preventing Of The Spreading Of Infectious Sicknesses', was passed in July of 1699. It was composed of three distinct sections. The first section addressed the responsibility of a ship's captain:

That no Master or Commander of any Ship or Vessel arriving to any Port or Harbour within this Province, in which Ship or other Vessel, any person, Passenger or Seaman upon their Passage shall be visited with the Small Pox, or any other contagious Sickness; Or shall come from any Port or Place where any such Sickness is Epidemical and prevailing, may presume to Sail, or bring his Ship or Vessel within or above the Castle or Fort (where any such is) or within the space of half a mile next unto any Peer,Wharf, or Landing place in such Harbour where no Fortification is, without Licence first had for so doing from the Governour or Commander in Chief of this Province for the time being, or from the two next Justices of the Peace. Nor shall permit or suffer any of his Passengers or Seamen to be Landed or brought on Shore; or any person or persons to come on Board without Licence as aforesaid first had and obtained for the same, on pain that every Master or Commander of any Ship or other Vessel offending against this Act, shall forfeit unto His Majesty the Sum of One Hundred Pounds⁷

Boston Harbor, From The Atlantic Neptune marine atlas (CA. 1777)
The second section explained how the law was to be communicated to ship's captains and responsibilities of the officers at fortifications which were responsible for overseeing its application. The last act discussed punishment for those flaunting the law. They, their clothing and bedding, were to be put back aboard their vessel, or the officers were "to confine them to such other place or places as such justice shall judge most suitable for preventing of infection; and all the cost and charges arising thereupon to be answered and paid by the passenger or seaman so offending as aforesaid, who also shall forfeit the sum of twenty pounds"⁸.

While expanded, this law similar in many ways to the order of 1647 including the 100 pound penalty. Yet the law was disallowed by the Privy Council at the request of the Lords of Trade. They explained:

Artist: Paul Bril - Ship in Port (1611)

There is no such act as this (that we know of) in any other of his Majesty's plantations; And by the uncertain interpretation that may be put upon the terms Contagious, Epdemical. and Prevailing Sickness, we think it may be liable to great abuses; The penalties thereby inflicted seem to us too high. And we are therfore humbly of opinion that the inconvenience thereby intended to be prevented may be better provided against by order of the Governor and Council from time to time than by any standing Act of the General Assembly.⁸

As a result, Massachusetts passed another, modified act in 1701 called 'An Act Providing in Case of Sickness.' This consisted of four parts, the first two of which dealt with contagious illness on land, the third was procedural and the fourth addressed maritime quarantine. It much more brief than the 1699 law, although the scope was wider. It applied to "any person or persons, seamen or passengers, belonging to or transported in any ship or vessel, arriving to any port or harbour within this province, [who] happen to be visited with the plague, small pox, pestilential or malignant fever, during the voyage, or to come from any place where such sickness prevails and is common"⁹. However the teeth of the previous bill had been removed. As in the previous act, those coming ashore before quarantine expired were to be put back on their ship, and then the governor or 'commander-in-chief' was "impowred, with the advice and consent of the council, to take such further order therein as they shall think it for preventing the spreading of the infection."¹⁰ That was apparently vague enough for the Privy Council and the Lord of Trades; the law remained in effect until 1797.

The closest the colonies got to establishing a lazaretto was the establishment of a committee "to investigate a suitable place for a hospital for contagious diseases, and that in August, 1717, a part of Spectacle Island was bought for that purpose and a 'province hospital' erected.¹¹ The Council noted that the purpose of this "Hospitall or Pest House there [was] for the reception and entertainment of sick persons comeing from beyond sea, and in order to prevent the Spreading of Infection."¹²

Photo: MrPanyGoff - Spectacle Island (Foreground) in Boston Harbor

Pirate William Coward used Boston quarantine measures to his advantage in 1689. The ketch Elinor came into Boston Harbor from Nevis in the West Indies, where captain William Shortrigs "was obliged to anchor as most of his men were sick or disabled with the cold. ...Provisions were also running short. The next day his owner, Mr. Thomas Cooper, was unable to secure a permit to bring her up because there had been smallpox on board but on the 22d he told the captain that she might be brought up as far as the Castle, so four men were sent down the harbour."¹³

¹ John Withrop, Winthrop's Journal, Vol. 2, James Kendall Hosmer, ed, 1903, p. 329; ² Susan Wade Peabody, "Historical Study of Legislation Regarding Public Health in the States of New York and Massachusetts, The Journal of Infectious Diseases, Supplement No. 4, Feb. 1909, p. 41; ³ Withrop, p. 329; ⁴ Withrop, p. 329-30; ⁵ Legislature of Massachusetts, Records of the governor and company of the Massachusetts bay in New England, v.4:2, p. 280; ⁵ Massachusetts State Board of Health, Manual for the Use of Boards of Health of Massachusetts, 1886, p. 5; ⁶ Laura K. Donohue, "Pandemic Disease, Biological Weapons, and War", Law and War, Austin Sarat & Lawrence Douglas, eds., 2014, p. 135; ⁷ Massachusetts, Acts Relating to the Establishment of Quarantine, 1881, p. 9-10; ⁸ Massachusetts, Acts Relating..., p. 10; ^9,10 Massachusetts, Acts Relating..., p. 11; ¹¹ Peabody, p. 43; ¹² Massachusetts, Acts Relating..., p. 13; ¹³ George Francis Dow and John Henry Edmonds, The Pirates of the New England Coast 1630-1730, 1996, p. 32;

History of Quarantine in South Carolina, 17th and Early 18th Centuries

The earliest example of the regulation of maritime quarantine for South Carolina is from 1698, when a yellow fever epidemic identified as a 'plague' broke out. It is identified as a 'regulation of pilots and for quarantine'. This was identifed as a 'resolution of the inhabitants' of Charleston South Carolina.¹ It read,

Artist: Claude Lorrain
Boats Calling on Ships at Anchor, From
Porto de Mar con Grande Torre (c. 1637-42)

And be it further enacted, that the pylott aforesaid, shall enquire of every Master or Commander of every vessel whether any contagious disease be on his vessel, and the Master or Commander of every vessel shall give a true account thereof; and if there be any contagious sickness on board, the pylott shall acquaint the Master not to come above one mile to the Westward of Sullivan's Island on penalty of Tenn Pounds on the pylott so neglecting; and the penalty of Fifty Pounds on every Master or Commander of any vessel, and not coming to an anchor as aforesaid, after notice given him.²

However, Susan Wade Peabody notes that this this regulation does not appear in the published statutes of South Carolina.

In 1712, South Carolina passed 'An Act for the more effectual preventing the spreading of Contagious Distempers'. It explained that the act was to prevent the 'Province' from being "destroyed by malignant, contagious dieases, brought here from Africa and other parts of America". It first noted that Gilbert Guttery was in charge of "the state of health of all such personas as shall be aboard any ship or vessell arriving in this Province."³ He was

impowered and required to go on board of all ships and other tradeing vessels as soon as they come over the barr, and make strict and diligent enquiry into the state of health of that place from whence such vessel last came, as likewise of all those persons who are now on board, and into the causes of the death of such as have died on board the said ship (if any) during the voyage, and shall make such searches betwixt decks or in other places of the vessel as is necessary for finding out the truth, and shall likewise order all the men to be brought upon deck the better to be viewed and observed for the same purpose.⁴

The act further explained that when

any person on board the said ship is sick [or had died] of the plague, small pox, spotted fever, Siam distemper, Guinea fever, or any other malignant contagious disease... all sick persons then on board, or who may after that become sick on shore, to the pest house on Sullivant's Island, and shall order the master or commander aforesaid to lie with his ship at anchor, without sending his boat ashore, except to Sullivant's Island nor suffer any to come on board his said vessell from any place of this Province, during the space of twenty days after those orders are given⁵

Various penalties were to be assessed for those who didn't follow the rules of the act and the
Artist: Ed Jackson - Colonial Charles Town, South Carolina
commissioner. Ship's captains, sailors and other individuals on the ship who did not follow the commissioner's orders were fined a hunded pounds for each offense committed. Pilots who suspected 'any distemper' on a ship were to wash themselves and their clothes before coming back to shore and to pay twenty pounds. People from Charlestown who boarded ships before the commissioner examined the vessel were also to pay a hundred pounds. If they could not, "they shall be forthwith publickly whipt through the streets of Charlestown"⁶. Ship's masters who sent a boat ashore before being inspected was fined fifty pounds. People serving quarantine at the 'pest house' on Sullivant's Island were to pay their own way, while those who could not pay were to be covered by the ship's master.⁷

This act was only to be in place for two years, but it was reinstated in 1714 and 1719.⁸ A new act was passed in 1721 entitled 'An Act for the more preventing, as much as may be, the spreading of Contagious Distempers'. It specified the same list of illnesses as the previous South Carolina act, but it changed the location of the quarantine and person in charge of overseeing it. Local pilots were to have the ship "come to an anchor or lye by at a convenient place within the command of the guns of Johnson's fort... and shall direct the said master or commander of the said vessel to make immediate application to the commander of the said fort, as hereinafter is directed"⁹. There, the ship's captain was swear to the health of the ship's crew, passengers and any incoming slaves under oath. It then gave a role to the ship's surgeon in the process.

Quarantine Locations in Charleston Harbor, (Map c. 1776)

...the doctor, if any do belong to the said vessel, with another officer, or an officer and common sailor where there is no doctor, shall apply themselves to the commanding officer of the said fort, and answer to the following questions on oath, that is to say, Whether the place from whence the said vessel came last was healthy? Whether all the persons, passengers and negroes, imported in the said vessel, are in health, and free from small-pox, plague, fevers and all other malignant distempers? Whether any died in the voyage and if so, What distempers they died of, and how long since?¹⁰

This is one of the few regulations which specifically identifies the ship's surgeon as necessary to the process. This may have been because the surgeon, belonging to the ship, was sometimes willing to cheat the quarantine system in the ship's favor, as we shall see.

The act went on to order ships designated as being unhealthy were tp perform quarantine, apparently on their ship under the guns of the fort. It also specified punishment and fines for those who refused to swear to the ship's health, lied about it, tried to skip the process by not hiring a pilot to guide them into port and didn't stop at the fort or left the ship while it was under quarantine. The most striking penalty was for lying under oath, for which the captain was to pay 500 pounds, the surgeon or other officers 100 pounds and
Artist: Bernard Lepice
'Courtyard of the Customs House' (1775)
regular sailors 50 pounds. In addition, the lying master was jailed for twelve months, the surgeon and officers for six and regular sailors for three "without bail or mainprize [having someone provide surety for the prisoner]"¹¹.

No one was permitted to board a ship under quarantine and, if they did board, were required to stay and serve the quarantine with the rest of the ship. This act also mentioned how quarantined ships 'in want of provisions' (something not all that uncommon due to the difficulties of sailing long distances) were to be handled as well as what they were to do when there was "extremity of weather, or in hurricanes, when vessels cannot without apparent danger ride at anchor in their prescribed roads, under quarantine"¹². In the first case, "the merchant to whom such vessel is consigned, or any other person as the said master shall request, to supply the same, but in such manner, and with such care and caution, as shall be directed by the Governour
or commander-in-chief"¹³. In the second, the vessels was "permitted to weigh or slip anchor, and make the best of their way to the most commodious river or creek above Charleslown, for their security, until the said hurricane or extream storms be over, and shall then immediately weigh, and if possible return to and come to an anchor at the respective roads whence the said vessel weighed"¹⁴. It was quite a well thought-out act for this period.

¹ Susan Wade Peabody, "Historical Study of Legislation Regarding Public Health in the States of New York and Massachusetts, The Journal of Infectious Diseases, Supplement No. 4, Feb. 1909, p. 145; ² Peabody, p. 123; ^3,4,5 The Statutes at Large of South Carolina: Acts from 1682 to 1716, Vol. 2, Thomas Cooper & David James McCord, eds., 1837, p. 382; ^6,7 The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, Vol. 2, p. 383-4; ⁸ Peabody, p. 123; ^9,10 The Statutes at Large of South Carolina: Acts from 1716 to 1752, Vol. 3, Thomas Cooper ed., 1838, p. 128; ¹¹ The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, Vol. 3, p. 129; ¹² The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, Vol. 3, p. 130; ¹³ The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, Vol. 3, p. 129; ¹⁴ The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, Vol. 3, p. 130

History of Quarantine in Pennsylvania, 17th and Early 18th Centuries

In 1700, William Penn, 'Absolute Proprietary and Governor-in-Chief of the provinces of Pennsylvania', passed 'An Act to prevent Sickly Vessels coming into this Government' . This act explained that because "the coming and arriving of unhealthy vessels at
Artist: Jean Leone Gerome Ferris
William Penn (1932) the ports and towns of this province and territories, and the landing of their passengers and goods, before they have lain some time to be purified, have proved very detrimental to the health of the inhabitants of this province", such vessels had to be quarantined.¹⁴ The act ordered that

no unhealthy or sickly vessels, coming from any unhealthy or sickly place whatsoever, shall come nearer than one mile to any of the towns or ports of this province or territories without bills of health; nor shall presume to bring to shore such vessels, nor to land such passengers or their goods at any of the said ports or places, until such time as they shall obtain a license for their landing at Philadelphia, from the Governor and Council, or from any two justices of the peace of any other port or county of this province or territories, under the penalty of ONE hundred pounds for every such unhealthy vessel so landing, as aforesaid¹⁵

How, or even if, this act was carried out when it was passed is not specified. However, in March of 1720, Pennsylvania Governor William Keith and his Council stated that a commission was to be prepared which followed this act, and

whereby Patrick Baird of Philadelphia, Chirurgeon, is authorized and required to go on Board all vessels arriving from Sea, in any port of this Province, and to examine the State of the Health of the Mariners & Passengers aboard, and upon reasonable Cause of Suspicion of any pestilential or Contagious Distemper being aboard, to warn and require the master or Commander of such Sickly Ship or Vessel not to presume to land, or suffer to be lauded any Goods or passengers from aboard the said Vessel be fore such master or Commander has obtained the Governours Licence for so doing¹⁶

This suggests that the law was not just been passed and forgotten.

 

^14,15 Proceedings and debates of the Third Annual Meeting of the Quarantine and Sanitary Convention, Baltimore, 1858, p. 280; ¹⁶ State of Pennsylvania, Minutes Of The Provincial Council Of Pennsylvania, Vol. III, p. 112;

 

³ John Atkins, The Navy Surgeon, 1742, p. 131
³ Philip Ashton, Ashtons Memorial Strange Adventures and Signal Deliverance, 1726, p. 1;
⁴ Thomas Aubrey The Sea-Surgeon or the Guinea Man’s Vadé Mecum. 1729, p. 74-89;
³ Edward Barlow, Barlow’s Journal of his Life at Sea in King’s Ships, East and West Indiamen & Other Merchantman From 1659 to 1703, p. 508;
³ Joel Baer, British Piracy in the Golden Age, Vol. 1, 2007, p. 307;
¹ Elizabeth Bennion, Antique Medical Instruments, 1979, p. 156;
⁶ Nathaniel Boteler, Boteler's Dialogues, 1929, p. 66;
¹ Stephen Bradwell, Helps For Suddain Accidents Endangering Life, 1633, p.43;
² Kevin Brown, Poxed and Scurvied: The Story of Sickness and Health at Sea, 2011, p. 66;
² William Clowes, Selected Writings of William Clowes, 1948, p. 84-5;
² William Clowes,A Profitable and Necessarie Booke of Observations, for all those that are burned with the flame of Gun powder &c., 1588. p. 8;
² Emily Cockayne, Hubbub: Filth, Noise, and Stench in England, 1600-1770, 2007, p. 95;
¹⁴ Edward Cooke, A Voyage to the South Sea and Round the World in the Years 1708 to 1711, 1969, p. 11;
¹ James Cooke, Mellificium Chirurgiae, 1704, p. 389;
⁴ Edward Coxere, Adventures by Sea of Edward Coxere, 1946, p. 107;
⁴ William Ambrosia Cowley, "Cowley’s Voyage Round the Globe", A collection of original voyages, William Hacke, ed., 1993, p. 2
² Nicholas Culpeper, Pharmacopœia Londinesis, 1720, p. 32;
¹ John Covel, "Extracts from the Diaries of Dr. John Covel, 1670-1679," Early Voyages and Travels in the Levant, edited by J. Theodore Bent, 1893, p. 129
⁷ William Dampier, Memoirs of a Buccaneer, Dampier’s New Voyage Round the World -1697-, 1968, p. 214;
⁷ William Dampier, A New Voyage Round the World, 1699, p. 124;
³ William Dampier. A Supplement of the Voyage Round the World, 1700, p. 153;
⁷ William Dampier, A New Voyage Round the World, Vol III, 1703 p. 124;
² Jonathan Dickinson, Jonathan Dickinson's Journal or God's Protecting Providence, 1945, p. 47;
¹ Johann Dietz, Master Johann Dietz, Surgeon in the Army of the Great Elector and Barber to the Royal Court, 1923, p. 409-10;
⁴ Pierre Dionis, A course of chirurgical operations: demonstrated in the royal garden at Paris. 2nd ed., 1733, p. 409-10;
⁴ George Francis Dow and John Henry Edmonds, The Pirates of the New England Coast 1630-1730, 1996, p. 123;
⁴ Alexandre Exquemelin, The Buccaneers of America, 1856, p. 120;
⁴ Clement Downing, A Compendious History of the Indian Wars, 1737, p. 43;
¹ Ed Fox, "47. John Fillmore's narrative", Pirates in Their Own Words, 2014, p. 229;
⁹ Zachary B. Friedenberg, Medicine Under Sail, 2002, p. 35;
⁹ William Funnell, A Voyage Round the World, 1969, p. 226;
⁹ Eric J. Graham, Seawolves: Pirates & the Scots, 2005, p. 120;
⁹ Charles Grey, Pirates of the Eastern Seas (1618-1723), 1933, p. 120;
⁹ Jacques Guillemeau, The French Chirurgerie, 1597, p. 40;
² Alexander Hamilton, British sea-captain Alexander Hamilton's A new account of the East Indies, 17th-18th century, 2002, p. 404;
⁵ Guliielm. Fabritius Hildanus aka William Fabry, His Experiments in Chyrurgerie, 1643, p. 3;
² Guliielm. Fabritius Hildanus aka. William Fabry. Cista Militaris, Or, A Military Chest, Furnished Either for Sea or Land, 1676, p. 31;
¹ Hippocrates, Hiipocratic Writings, Translated and Edited by Francis Adams, 1952, p. 82;
² Bruce S. Ingram, Three Sea Journals of  Stuart Times, 1936, p. 121;
³ Robert James, Pharmacopœia universalis, 1747, p. 306-7;
³ John Franklin Jameson, Privateering and Piracy in the Colonial Period - Illustrative Documents, 1923, p. 269;
¹ Captain Charles Johnson, A general history of the pirates, 3rd Edition, 1724, p. 270;
¹ Captain Charles Johnson, The History of the Pirates, 1829, p. 183;
¹ Daniel Defoe  (Captain Charles Johnson), A General History of the Pyrates, Manuel Schonhorn, ed., 1999, p. 270-1
¹ John J. Keevil, Medicine and the Navy 1200-1900: Volume II – 1640-1714, 1958, p. 25;
¹ John Kirkup, The Evolution of Surgical Instruments; An Illustrated History from Ancient Time to the Twentieth Century, 2005, p. 407;
³ Pere Jean-Baptiste Labat, The Memoirs of Pére Labat 1693-1705, 1970, p. 29;
³ Edward E. Leslie, Desperate Journeys, Abandoned Souls, 1988, p. 1,
² Rory W. McCreadie, The Barber Surgeon's Mate of the 16th and 17th Century, 2002, p. 58;
¹ Raymund Minderer, A Body of Military Medicines Experimented, Volume 4 of Paul Barbette's, Thesaurus Chirurgiæ, The Fourth Edition, p. 73;
² John Moyle, Abstractum Chirurgæ Marinæ, 1686, p. 24;
¹ John Moyle, Chirugius Marinus: Or, The Sea Chirurgeon, 1693, p. 2;
¹ John Moyle, The Experienced Chirugion, 1703, p. 2;
⁶ John Moyle, Memoirs: Of many Extraordinary Cures, 1708, p. 119;
² Domingo Navarrete, The Travels and Controversies of Friar Domingo Navarrete 1618-1686, 1962, p. 40;
³ Ambroise Paré, The Apologie and Treatise of Ambroise Paré, 1952, p.585;;
³ Ambroise Paré, The Workes of that Famous Chirurgion Ambrose Parey, 1649, p.585;
⁷ Pierre Pomet, The Compleate History of Druggs, 3rd Edition, 1737, p. 260;
⁵ John Pechey, The Compleat Herbal of Physical Plants, 1707, p. 159;
⁶ Matthias Gottfried Purmann, Churgia Curiosa, 1706, p. 209;
² John Quincy, Lexicon Physico-Medicum, 1726, p. 409;
² John Quincy, Pharmacopoeia Officinalis & Extemporanea, 1719, p. 409;
⁹ James Rennie, A New Supplement to the Pharmacopœpias of London, Edinburgh, Dublin and Paris, Baldwin and Cradock, 1833, p. 263;
⁹ George Roberts, The four years voyages of Capt. George Roberts, 1726, p. 58;
³ Francis Rogers. from Bruce S. Ingram's book Three Sea Journals of Stuart Times, 1936, p. 230;
⁸ Woodes Rogers, A Cruising Voyage Round the World, 2004, p. 61;
⁸ Woodes Rogers, A Cruising Voyage Round the World, 1712, p. 82;
¹ Hugh Ryder, New Practical Observations in Surgery Containing Divers Remarkable Cases and Cures, 1685, p. 82-3;
⁴ Bartholomew Sharp, "Captain Sharp's Journal of His Expedition," from William Hacke's A collection of original voyages, 1993, p. 44;
⁴ Captain William Snelgrave, A New Account of Some Parts of Guinea and the Slave Trade, 1971, p. 272;
⁴ Captain William Snelgrave, A New Account of Some Parts of Guinea and the Slave Trade, 1734, p. 272;
¹ Henry Teonge, The Diary of Henry Teonge, Chaplain on Board H.M.’s Ships Assistance, Bristol, and Royal Oak, 1675-1679, 1927, p. 190
¹ Henry Teonge, The Diary of Henry Teonge, Chaplain on Board H.M.’s Ships Assistance, Bristol, and Royal Oak, 1675-1679, 1825, p. 200;
⁴ Nathaniel Uring, A history of the voyages and travels of Capt. Nathaniel Uring, 1928, p. 242;
⁴ Lionel Wafer, A New Voyage and Description of the Isthmus of America, 1903, p. 103;
;⁴ Vice-Admiral Sir James Watt, "The burns of seafarers under oars, sail and steam", Injury: the British Journal of Accident Surgery, Vol. 12, p
;⁴ Vice-Admiral Sir James Watt, "Some forgotten contributions of naval surgeons", Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, Vol. 78, September 1985, p.
² Guy Williams, The Age of Agony, 1986, p. 81;
¹ Richard Wiseman, Of Wounds, Severall Chirurgicall Treatises, 1686, p. 454;
¹ Richard Wiseman, Eight Chirurgicall Treatises, 3rd Edition, 1696, p. 430;
³ John Woodall, the surgions mate, 1617, p. 202;
³ John Woodall, Woodalls Viaticum, 1628, p. 116;
¹ James Yonge, Currus Triumpalis, é Terebinthô.,1679, p. 110-1
⁴ James Yonge, The Journal of James Yonge [1647-1721] Plymouth Surgeon, 1965, p. 41-2;

Quarantine Page Menu:    1      2      3      4      5      6      7      8      9      10      11      12       <<First