116 • Marc A. Kelley 



century. However, this attrition was not nearly so dramatic or 

 devastating as were the eadier viral epidemics. Conceivably 

 such native American groups eventually would have reached 

 an equilibrium and the population would have begun to grow 

 again. This scenario, however, apparently did not fit into the 

 colonists' larger plan. Those who avoided death from mi- 

 crobes would next contend with guns and swords. It is widely 

 acknowledged that warfare tactics differed for Europeans and 

 Indians. The more ritualistic and symbolic style of warfare 

 often practiced by Native Americans prompted Roger 

 Williams to write: 



Their warres are farre Icssc bloudy. and devouring then the 

 cmell warres of Europe; and seldomc twenty slaine in a 

 pitcht field: partly because when they fight in a wood every 

 tree is a bucklar. When they fight in a plaine. they fight 

 with leaping and dancing, that seldome an arrow hits, and 

 when a man is wounded, unless he that shot follows upon 

 the wounded, they soone retire and save the wounded: and 

 yet having no swords, nor guns, and all that are slaine are 

 commonly slain with great valour and courage: for the con- 

 querour ventures into the thickest, and brings away the 

 head of his enemy. (1643:204) 



The Narragansetts objected to the English warfare style, 

 according to John Underbill (1638), because it "slays too 

 many men." Furthermore, the natives had traditionally 

 spared the lives of women and children, a practice not at all 

 observed by the Dutch and English. While Indians slain dur- 

 ing battle and massacres obviously contributed to population 

 decline, the more profound blow occurred in the aftermath of 

 hostilities — more specifically, the colonial practice of de- 

 stroying com fields and supplies. The result, of course, was 

 famine and more disease — thus providing the rationale for 

 including both disease and warfare in this report. An exam- 

 ination of Cook's tabulation of Indian losses during King 

 Philip's War (1675-1676) illustrates the magnitude of sec- 

 ondary losses (Cook 1973a:21): 



1 ,250 killed in battle 

 625 died of wounds 

 3 ,000 died of exposure and disease 

 1 ,000 sold as slaves 

 2,000 permanent refugees 

 7,875 total lost 

 3,875 remaining 

 1 1 ,600 Total 



For the Narragansetts. who had been relatively fortunate 

 with regard to introduced disease. King Philip's War effec- 

 tively reduced them to a remnant population. Table 4 high- 

 lights the fate of 17th century Narragansetts by comparing 

 them to McElroy and Townsend's (1985) medical model for 

 19th century Canadian Inuit natives. This table lists the 

 stages of contact on one axis and the epidemiologic, demo- 

 graphic, nutritional, and health care subsystems on the other 

 axis. Stage 1 is identical for each group. Stage II remains 



quite similar, but Stage III departs radically. Instead of popu- 

 lation rebound, we see heavy warfare losses and subsequent 

 famine, exposure, and disease. In addition, there was essen- 

 tially no governmental assistance in the 1 7th century. In 

 effect, 17th century natives had to face a deadly double- 

 edged sword of epidemics and warfare. 



To sum, the use of ethnohistorical records can prove en- 

 lightening in our effort to better understand the health pat- 

 terns of early human populations. It is imperative to remem- 

 ber, however, that clinical descriptions can be vague (as well 

 evidenced by the long-enduring controversy of syphilis ori- 

 gins based on written records). Nonetheless, many diseases 

 are much less controversial (e.g. , dysentery, measles, small- 

 pox) and the ethnohistoric record can provide insight in such 

 cases whereas the skeletal remains cannot. Where circums- 

 tances permit, this author recommends careful scrutiny and 

 utilization of these alternate resources. 



Literature cited 



Bartlett, J.R. 1856. Records of the Colony of Rhode Island and 

 Providence Plantations in New England, vol. I (1636-1663). 

 Providence. R.I.: Greene and Brother. 



Bradford, W. 1970. Of Plymouth Plantation 1620-1647. New 

 York: Alfred A. Knopf. 



Brasser, T.J. 1978. Early Indian-European Contacts. In B.C. Trig- 

 ger, ed.. Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 15, North- 

 east. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press. 



Burnet, M., and D.O. White. 1975. Natural History of Infectious 

 Disease. 4th edition. New York: Cambridge University Press. 



Cook, S.F. 1973a. Interracial Warfare and Population Decline 

 among the New England Indians. Ethnohistory. 20:1-24. 



1973b. The Significance of Disease in the Extinction of the 



New England Indians. Human Biology. 45:485-508. 



1 976. The Indian Population of New England in the Seven- 



teenth Century. Publications in Anthropology, vol. 12. San Fran- 

 cisco: University of California Press. 



Cronan. W. 1983. Changes in the Land: Indians. Colonists, and the 

 Ecology of New England. New York: Hill and Wang. 



Cushman, R. 1622. Cushman's Discourse. In A. Young, cd.. 

 Chronicles of the Pilgrim Fathers of the Colony of New Plymouth 

 from 1602-1625. Boston: C.C. Little and J. Brown. 



DeForcst, J.W. 1852. History of the Indians of Connecticut from the 

 Earliest Known Period to IS50. Connecticut Historical Society. 

 Hartford, Conn.: W.J. Hammersley. 



Dermer, T. 1619. Letter to His Worshipfull Friend Samuel Purchas, 

 Preacher of the Word, at the Hurcha a Little within Ludgate. 

 London. In Purchas. vol. 19 (1905-1907). Glasgow: J. Mac- 

 Lehose and Sons. 



Dobyns, H.F. 1983. Their Number Became Thinned: Native Ameri- 

 can Population Dynamics in Eastern North America. Knoxville: 

 University of Tennessee Press. 



File, E.D., and R. Reese. 1965. An Economic History of the United 

 Slates. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 



Gookin, D. 1792 1 16931. Historical Collection of Indians of New 

 England. Massachu.selts Historical Society Collections, scries 1, 

 vol. I. 



Zagreb Paleopathology Symp. 1988 



