What do you think?
Rate this book
America's First Plague: The Deadly 1793 Yellow Fever Epidemic That Crippled a Young Nation
As disease spread, the national government was slow to react. Soon, citizens donned protective masks and the authorities ordered quarantines. The streets emptied. Doubters questioned the science and disobeyed. The 1793. The young America from Baltimore to Boston but especially in Philadelphia, the nation’s largest city and seat of the federal government. For 3 long months yellow fever, carried by mosquitoes let loose from a ship from Africa, ravaged the eastern seaboard The federal government abandoned the city and scattered, leaving a dangerous leadership gap. By the end of the pandemic, ten percent of Philadelphians had died. America's First Plague offers the definitive telling of this long-forgotten crisis, capturing the wave of fear that swept across the fledgling republic, and the numerous unintended but far-reaching consequences it would have on the development of the United States and the Atlantic slave trade. It is an intriguing tale of fear and human nature, a tragic lesson of how prejudice toward blacks was so easily stoked, an examination of the primitive state of medicine and vulnerability to disease in the eighteenth century, and a story of the struggle to govern in the face of crisis. With eerie similarities to the Covid pandemic, historian Robert P. Watson tells the story of a young nation teetering on the brink of chaos.
- GenresHistoryNonfiction
318 pages, Hardcover
First published June 1, 2023
13 people are currently reading
131 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews
April 24, 2023
2 stars. Just okay... BARELY. This book had the potential to be three or even more stars, but I found it to be VERY poorly structured, written, and edited. Examples? Too many, I'm afraid. First off, the title pronounces the yellow fever epidemic of 1793 to have been "America's First Plague," yet the author very clearly and somewhat repetitively demonstrates that, in fact, this was not our first epidemic, not even of yellow fever. Next, he keeps talking about this plague as a "pandemic," but almost exclusively centers his story on Philadelphia's experience. The author speaks of a certain ship as the Ground Zero carrier of this plague to Philadelphia, yet also talks about other ships also responsible for bringing plague to our then-capital that year.
The many stops and starts and the constant circling back to previous points and parts of the narrative are part of my criticism of its structuring. In terms of editing? Embarrassing. Was there any?! There are certain people in the narrative that come up again and again because of their roles and/or their accounts. That's fine, to a certain degree, but... you could make a drinking game of how many times he repeats "the diarist Elizabeth Drinker" and "the publisher [I forgot his name]." I mean, I can admit to having a short memory and often appreciating when someone's role or occupation is reintroduced, especially if it's been a while since they figured in a book, but I counted AT LEAST 12 times that the author wrote the above. And don't get me started on the amount of typos!
The people of Philadelphia, including, hey, did you hear, "the diarist Elizabeth Drinker" and "the publisher ----," come across as real people, one of the stronger points of this book, and we get some snippets of how this early plague reverberates in our own plague times. So I was glad to read about the diarist Elizabeth Drinker and the publisher so-and-so, along with Dr. Benjamin Rush and others. Oh, hey, did I tell you? Elizabeth Drinker was a diarist and So-and-So was a publisher; I hope you didn't forget if you're still reading this.
Many thanks to #NetGalley for a copy of this book about America's not-first plague and the diarist Elizabeth Drinker and the publisher So-and-So in exchange for my honest review.
The many stops and starts and the constant circling back to previous points and parts of the narrative are part of my criticism of its structuring. In terms of editing? Embarrassing. Was there any?! There are certain people in the narrative that come up again and again because of their roles and/or their accounts. That's fine, to a certain degree, but... you could make a drinking game of how many times he repeats "the diarist Elizabeth Drinker" and "the publisher [I forgot his name]." I mean, I can admit to having a short memory and often appreciating when someone's role or occupation is reintroduced, especially if it's been a while since they figured in a book, but I counted AT LEAST 12 times that the author wrote the above. And don't get me started on the amount of typos!
The people of Philadelphia, including, hey, did you hear, "the diarist Elizabeth Drinker" and "the publisher ----," come across as real people, one of the stronger points of this book, and we get some snippets of how this early plague reverberates in our own plague times. So I was glad to read about the diarist Elizabeth Drinker and the publisher so-and-so, along with Dr. Benjamin Rush and others. Oh, hey, did I tell you? Elizabeth Drinker was a diarist and So-and-So was a publisher; I hope you didn't forget if you're still reading this.
Many thanks to #NetGalley for a copy of this book about America's not-first plague and the diarist Elizabeth Drinker and the publisher So-and-So in exchange for my honest review.
May 5, 2023
Bearing in mind I was reading a DRC, I'm really hoping that the finished product will have undergone another round of editing to eliminate the (very) tedious amounts of repetition that occur pretty steadily throughout. I learned a lot, but it could have been half the length.
February 17, 2024
This is a pretty good book marred by annoying repetition and some claims that feel a little overstated to me. The author does an excellent job of identifying the likely source of a yellow plague epidemic that reached Philadelphia in summer 1793 and chronicling the day-by-day events as it surged through October of that year. He explains how medical knowledge of the time failed to stop the spread, though it came close to bumping into the solution, and he shows how various leaders in the community, as well as regular citizens, either rose to the occasion or were disasters.
It was a bizarre series of events that caused the outbreak, and a great reminder (as the author notes) that much of the world was in contact with each other even in the late 18th century --- that international trade and its consequences are not a new phenomenon. Though this is hard to believe, the yellow plague epidemic in Philadelphia started in England as a way to end slavery in the U.S. Well-meaning British businessmen decided they would start a colony of Black and White Brits on an island off the African coast in order to show that Blacks could build a modern society on the European model, thus undermining inferiority claims made against Blacks. They outfitted two ships like they were Pilgrims going to the New World, and set sail for what turned out to be a marshy island with few resources except for some ultra-violent natives who didn't want settlers. Over a period of months, most of the Europeans were either slaughtered, died of malnutrition or succumbed to disease, and so a handful of them left on a battered boat about 9 months after setting out.
Rather than return to England, they landed in the Caribbean, but with several crew members having died of what was clearly a plague-like disease. Because that was obvious to people in Caribbean ports, they were forced to port-hop, leaving disease in their wake. The plague came from mosquitos carrying the infection from one person to another. The only reason they were allowed to dock in Haiti was because the colony was in total disarray because the revolution had started there and White people were unable to enforce any rules. In fact, despite the dangers of getting on a ship with plague victims, Whites were so desperate to flee Haiti -- they were literally being hacked to death on a daily basis in the slave revolt -- they jumped aboard. That ship wound up in Philadelphia because that's where other Haitian colonists had landed, and thus the disease made a new landfall.
Astonishing, really, that a decision made about slavery in Britain led to pickup up mosquitos in Africa and then human carriers in Haiti, who then started dying on the docks in Philadelphia. But it's true.
Once the disease took hold in Philadelphia, there was really nothing that current medical science could do until cold weather killed the mosquitos. Since it was, unfortunately, an especially wet and hot summer, the mosquitos thrived even more than usual. And also unfortunately, since the most renowned doctor in the entire U.S. lived in Philadelphia, Dr. Benjamin Rush, his preferred method of treatment was imposed on thousands of people. His treatment: bleed people 3-4 times and day and feed them mercury and other substances to make them vomit and crap constantly. These treatments not only made people feel miserable, but they didn't cure anything and likely killed hundreds unnecessarily.
The book does a good job of showing the tensions that arose as the disease reached more and more people, as well as the tensions as a set of younger doctors began to challenge Rush. These other doctors believed that they couldn't cure the disease but just let it run its course -- because many people who were infected didn't die, but reached some type of eventual immunity. They advised to keep people comfortable and hydrated. Interestingly, everyone pretty quickly agreed that the disease probably was not communicable from one person to another even though people in proximity to each other often got it, as they noticed that not everyone got it.
In addition to the medical issues, the book does a nice job of explaining the successful and unsuccessful coping mechanisms of the city. Atop the successful ones was a hospital that often had 100 patients and relied heavily on free Black labor, as the Whites with means had fled the city and left poor people and Blacks behind. (It was believed by Rush that Blacks were immune to the disease, which wasn't true, but is perhaps true that their genetic ancestors from African had left in their DNA relatively more resistance.) On the other side of the ledger, most people who could flee did so, which actually wasn't a bad idea since they were getting out of the mosquito area and weren't contagious themselves.
The other twist -- which I think is overblown in this book -- is that Philadelphia was the nation's capital at the time. Washington, DC had been selected, but construction of key buildings was underway, and so Philadelphia was the capital temporarily. But the leaders couldn't safely meet there, and first put off a congressional session and then met in Germantown, about 10 miles from Philadelphia. This seems prudent to me, and I don't know why the book makes the claim that it brought into question a host of issues such as the legitimacy of a Congress not meeting in the capital or the idea that the nation wouldn't survive. I realize that the refusal of other states to allow Philadelphians to stay there was a tough matter -- ie., what are citizens' rights vs. a state's rights -- but it seemed to last only a few weeks and not seriously impair anything.
Anyway, by late October the weather turned and the crisis abated. Initially, Black citizens were blamed for charging high prices for caring for the sick and burying the dead, and even obliquely accused of spreading the disease intentionally. But their leaders fought back against those perceptions and received an apology of sorts and credit for their selflessness. The author doesn't belabor this point, but it's one of several that stands in contrast to how things are done today. Conservatives make up stuff all the time and don't apologize then their lies are challenged. Another parallel is that religious people refused to wear handkerchiefs, which was considered a measure to protect people from the disease, as they called it an infringement on their rights. They continued to hold large church services, seeking God's deliverance, which just made hundreds of them sick and dead. And again, though the author doesn't say it, we had the same thing happening during Covid because Christians simply can't understand logic or science.
My biggest criticism of the book is that it's repetitive. Elizabeth Drinker, wife of a wealthy civic leader, wrote a detailed diary that is quoted heavily in this book. She is called "diarist Elizabeth Drinker" at least 50 times -- why do we need the word "diarist" over and over? Same with Dr. Benjamin Rush, who is called the "foremost" doctor in the nation at least 30 times. And there are many other examples of the same thing being said a half-dozen times within three pages, as if the readers have ADHD or are barely literate enough to grasp a simple concept.
If you're interested in colonial history or, in this case, events early in the history of the US as an independent nation, this book is worth reading. It covers what was a significant event. But don't expect a wonderful written, deep dive, sophisticated book like the many written in the last 20-25 years about the Founding Fathers, the American Revolution, the writing of the Constitution, and so on. This book fills in a gap, but it's not great.
It was a bizarre series of events that caused the outbreak, and a great reminder (as the author notes) that much of the world was in contact with each other even in the late 18th century --- that international trade and its consequences are not a new phenomenon. Though this is hard to believe, the yellow plague epidemic in Philadelphia started in England as a way to end slavery in the U.S. Well-meaning British businessmen decided they would start a colony of Black and White Brits on an island off the African coast in order to show that Blacks could build a modern society on the European model, thus undermining inferiority claims made against Blacks. They outfitted two ships like they were Pilgrims going to the New World, and set sail for what turned out to be a marshy island with few resources except for some ultra-violent natives who didn't want settlers. Over a period of months, most of the Europeans were either slaughtered, died of malnutrition or succumbed to disease, and so a handful of them left on a battered boat about 9 months after setting out.
Rather than return to England, they landed in the Caribbean, but with several crew members having died of what was clearly a plague-like disease. Because that was obvious to people in Caribbean ports, they were forced to port-hop, leaving disease in their wake. The plague came from mosquitos carrying the infection from one person to another. The only reason they were allowed to dock in Haiti was because the colony was in total disarray because the revolution had started there and White people were unable to enforce any rules. In fact, despite the dangers of getting on a ship with plague victims, Whites were so desperate to flee Haiti -- they were literally being hacked to death on a daily basis in the slave revolt -- they jumped aboard. That ship wound up in Philadelphia because that's where other Haitian colonists had landed, and thus the disease made a new landfall.
Astonishing, really, that a decision made about slavery in Britain led to pickup up mosquitos in Africa and then human carriers in Haiti, who then started dying on the docks in Philadelphia. But it's true.
Once the disease took hold in Philadelphia, there was really nothing that current medical science could do until cold weather killed the mosquitos. Since it was, unfortunately, an especially wet and hot summer, the mosquitos thrived even more than usual. And also unfortunately, since the most renowned doctor in the entire U.S. lived in Philadelphia, Dr. Benjamin Rush, his preferred method of treatment was imposed on thousands of people. His treatment: bleed people 3-4 times and day and feed them mercury and other substances to make them vomit and crap constantly. These treatments not only made people feel miserable, but they didn't cure anything and likely killed hundreds unnecessarily.
The book does a good job of showing the tensions that arose as the disease reached more and more people, as well as the tensions as a set of younger doctors began to challenge Rush. These other doctors believed that they couldn't cure the disease but just let it run its course -- because many people who were infected didn't die, but reached some type of eventual immunity. They advised to keep people comfortable and hydrated. Interestingly, everyone pretty quickly agreed that the disease probably was not communicable from one person to another even though people in proximity to each other often got it, as they noticed that not everyone got it.
In addition to the medical issues, the book does a nice job of explaining the successful and unsuccessful coping mechanisms of the city. Atop the successful ones was a hospital that often had 100 patients and relied heavily on free Black labor, as the Whites with means had fled the city and left poor people and Blacks behind. (It was believed by Rush that Blacks were immune to the disease, which wasn't true, but is perhaps true that their genetic ancestors from African had left in their DNA relatively more resistance.) On the other side of the ledger, most people who could flee did so, which actually wasn't a bad idea since they were getting out of the mosquito area and weren't contagious themselves.
The other twist -- which I think is overblown in this book -- is that Philadelphia was the nation's capital at the time. Washington, DC had been selected, but construction of key buildings was underway, and so Philadelphia was the capital temporarily. But the leaders couldn't safely meet there, and first put off a congressional session and then met in Germantown, about 10 miles from Philadelphia. This seems prudent to me, and I don't know why the book makes the claim that it brought into question a host of issues such as the legitimacy of a Congress not meeting in the capital or the idea that the nation wouldn't survive. I realize that the refusal of other states to allow Philadelphians to stay there was a tough matter -- ie., what are citizens' rights vs. a state's rights -- but it seemed to last only a few weeks and not seriously impair anything.
Anyway, by late October the weather turned and the crisis abated. Initially, Black citizens were blamed for charging high prices for caring for the sick and burying the dead, and even obliquely accused of spreading the disease intentionally. But their leaders fought back against those perceptions and received an apology of sorts and credit for their selflessness. The author doesn't belabor this point, but it's one of several that stands in contrast to how things are done today. Conservatives make up stuff all the time and don't apologize then their lies are challenged. Another parallel is that religious people refused to wear handkerchiefs, which was considered a measure to protect people from the disease, as they called it an infringement on their rights. They continued to hold large church services, seeking God's deliverance, which just made hundreds of them sick and dead. And again, though the author doesn't say it, we had the same thing happening during Covid because Christians simply can't understand logic or science.
My biggest criticism of the book is that it's repetitive. Elizabeth Drinker, wife of a wealthy civic leader, wrote a detailed diary that is quoted heavily in this book. She is called "diarist Elizabeth Drinker" at least 50 times -- why do we need the word "diarist" over and over? Same with Dr. Benjamin Rush, who is called the "foremost" doctor in the nation at least 30 times. And there are many other examples of the same thing being said a half-dozen times within three pages, as if the readers have ADHD or are barely literate enough to grasp a simple concept.
If you're interested in colonial history or, in this case, events early in the history of the US as an independent nation, this book is worth reading. It covers what was a significant event. But don't expect a wonderful written, deep dive, sophisticated book like the many written in the last 20-25 years about the Founding Fathers, the American Revolution, the writing of the Constitution, and so on. This book fills in a gap, but it's not great.
April 25, 2023
I didn't expect to like this as much as I did. It was horrifying but informative. I never really thought about how yellow fever was able to spread around like it did. I didn't consider the water. I thought that since it wasn't spread from person to person, but from mosquitos, it wouldn't be able to infect people like it did. I mean part of my ignorance comes from living in the desert too. We are barely having to deal with heartworms in our dogs and those are brought from dog rescues who bring dogs from other states.
The book also goes into details about the communities and the people around the Americas and what they were doing at the time. Usually I find that uninteresting because it is the history of rich white men. We never hear enough about how women were coping or how things affected the poor or people of color.
I am traumatized and also amazed that we have come all this way as humans and yet we remain just as ignorant of pandemics.
The book also goes into details about the communities and the people around the Americas and what they were doing at the time. Usually I find that uninteresting because it is the history of rich white men. We never hear enough about how women were coping or how things affected the poor or people of color.
I am traumatized and also amazed that we have come all this way as humans and yet we remain just as ignorant of pandemics.
December 30, 2023
Robert P. Watson publishes prolifically and is personable on C-SPAN. These facts led me to borrow two of his books from the library. I fear I read them in the wrong order. America's First Plague, published by Rowman & Littlefield, offers topicality plus a larger and darker font. Watson describes the travails of abolitionists and crew who sailed on the not-so-good-ship Hanky in 1792 from England to West Africa to the West Indies to ports along the East Coast of the fledgling United States, all as a prelude to his chronicle of the yellow fever epidemic in Philadelphia in 1793. Yellow fever is mosquito-borne, but Walter Reed would not prove that until 1900. Meanwhile shipboard water casks and businesses or homes on 18th century wharves provided ideal breeding grounds for aedes aegypti, the specific vector.
Watson does relate interesting anecdotes about Philadelphians during the plague period. Publisher Mathew Carey, notable enough to have a stand alone quote used on a page between the flyleaf and the table of contents, proves ignominious when he spreads a lie that African American Philadelphians were profiting from nursing fever victims who were white. Civic leaders Richard Allen and Absolam Jones rebutted the calumny, so it was good to read more about them. Founding Father and doctor Benjamin Rush endorsed purging and bleeding patients far too long. The rule of thumb for readers of this short but repetitive book is beware the doctrinaire leader.
Now on to George Washington's Final Battle, also by Robert P. Watson.
Watson does relate interesting anecdotes about Philadelphians during the plague period. Publisher Mathew Carey, notable enough to have a stand alone quote used on a page between the flyleaf and the table of contents, proves ignominious when he spreads a lie that African American Philadelphians were profiting from nursing fever victims who were white. Civic leaders Richard Allen and Absolam Jones rebutted the calumny, so it was good to read more about them. Founding Father and doctor Benjamin Rush endorsed purging and bleeding patients far too long. The rule of thumb for readers of this short but repetitive book is beware the doctrinaire leader.
Now on to George Washington's Final Battle, also by Robert P. Watson.
April 15, 2024
Concise but pretty deep covering of the origin of the plague and how it all played out. Written during the 2020 pandemic, it must have been both surprising how similar both pandemics played out or not because history repeating is not surprising to a historian. This pandemic was politized based on how it was treated and how it tied to Philadelphia being the capital and possibly being moved to another location. Benjamin Rush was the most interesting character in here. Egotistical and prickly to perceived criticism not to mention unknowingly was a negative help to his patients, killing many(he never thought those were his fault though). He was a hard worker(unfortunately) and good medical historian whose notes helped a century later connect the dots on the disease. Many areas of how the disease affected the nation and the politics of just post-Revolution were interesting. The story of the origin of the vector is just as amazing and darkly ironic, abolition attempt gone horribly wrong.
February 26, 2026
“Refusing to heed the warnings from government and physicians to refrain from public gatherings, some people complained that it was an infringement on their “freedom” while others claimed the disease was not real and rejected the medical evidence.” That sounds eerily familiar to the COVID-19 pandemic, but it was happening in 1793 in Philadelphia. History truly does repeat itself. Mistrusting medical evidence might have been understandable, considering one of the foremost doctors in the new country prescribed bloodletting and purgatives that were almost as life threatening as the yellow fever itself. There was a lot of false information that added to this outbreak being so deadly. Believing it was a punishment from God, or a partisan issue, or even sabotage by African Americans did not help the situation. The uppermost tiers of society abandoning the city didn’t either. The best part of the book was the selfless African Americans who put themselves into danger to help the city, and of their pastors striking back against those who accused these men and women of being thieves.
August 12, 2023
Very informative but relentlessly repetitive. There were so many awkwardly phrased sentences that required rereading to establish what and who each sentence was about. It was the print version of just about any show on The History Channel - you learn something, go to many commercials and then the first 3 minutes back are spent being retold what just learned before the break. My memory thankfully is not that short that it requires that degree of repetition. A good editor was needed for this book but sadly it was published as is.
Main take away from this book - we as a people just don't seem to learn from the past. COVID played out the same way as the Yellow Fever plague - medically, politically and socially. It's sad.
Main take away from this book - we as a people just don't seem to learn from the past. COVID played out the same way as the Yellow Fever plague - medically, politically and socially. It's sad.
April 11, 2023
I liked this book. The storytelling was quite good and gave a thorough historical context, for example the slave trade. Although I didn’t see how the prologue (as fascinating as it was) was immediately relevant to the story as I read it, as the story unfolded I did see the relevance and I recommend not skipping the prologue. I also liked the style of the epilogue. Sometimes, though, there was too much detail. Thank you to Edelweiss and Rowman & Littlefield for the digital review copy.
September 21, 2023
I was annoyed by the underlying bias represented in this book. I compared his information with what was actually written in the sources and found facts embellished. Not sure I'd read more of this author's work, unless I took it with a grain of salt.
December 18, 2023
I found the book highly repetitive, but I didn't mind since repetition aids memory. Watson approaches the yellow fever epidemic through various topics, so there is a huge amount of repetition. The book could have been a booklet.
That said, I did enjoy reading about the time and the disease.
That said, I did enjoy reading about the time and the disease.
July 3, 2023
Interesting, but even at 200 pages too long.
December 18, 2023
More journalism than history, the book takes a smug “we know better” attitude about the medical insights of the 18th century. The liberal political bias is evident from the introduction.
December 23, 2023
2.5 rounded up. Very slow read for me.
June 7, 2024
Just a nice solid book. It answers the question as to why we read; “gee, I didn’t know that!”
March 17, 2025
Interesting topic and well researched, but repeated the same information about the same people in multiple chapters. Maybe it started as individual articles that were edited together into a book?
October 3, 2023
Given the recent pandemic, and the location of the epicenter of the epidemic referred to in this book, I went into this pretty excited to learn about the scourge of yellow fever in the US. I knew about how deadly this disease was in the southern US and Caribbean Islands, but I (embarrassingly) never knew about the Philly epidemic. It is amazing how alike the reactions of gov’t, politics, racism, and ignorance played a role in both of the 1790s and 2020s. Sadly human beings never learn. The actions and personality of Dr. Benjamin Rush were quite similar of another, more recent prominent physician. Both smart men who wished to help any way they could, but not realizing how their egos got in their respective “ways”. Unfortunately I felt I could only give this book 3 stars as I found the author jumped around topics too often and failed to explain some actions of the individuals involved, or gave a rather short, confusing version…almost as if his editors were forcing him to keep the book under a certain number of pages. In any case, I would still recommend this book for those who have an interest in epidemics and the history of early American government.
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews