1. Biological Warfare from Antiquity to World War I
Lecture No. 2

2. 1. Outline Pre-scientific biological warfare
Slides ( )
Initial use of biological warfare
Slides ( )
The beginnings of scientific biological warfare
Slides ( )
Notes: The aim of this lecture is to begin the process of telling the students about the past misuse of the life sciences for hostile purposes. In short, to reveal the hidden history of their field of study in order that they understand the need for care in the future.
Ref:
Geissler, E., and van Courtland Moon, J. (Eds.), (1999) Biological and Toxin Weapons Research, Development and Use from the Middle Ages to 1945 (SIPRI Chemical & Biological Warfare Studies No. 18). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

3. 2. Historical Allegations of Biological Warfare
The siege of Thun l’Eveque (1340)
It has been suggested that siege engines were used to hurl dead horses into the castle forcing the defenders to evacuate
The siege of Caffa (1346) and the ‘Black Death’
It has been suggested that plague victims were catapulted into the fortified Genoese city of Caffa by Mongol forces and that the fleeing survivors carried the plague into Europe
Notes: These are some of the examples used by Wheelis in Chapter 2 of Geissler and Moon’s Biological and Toxin Weapons: Research, Development and Use from the Middle Ages to1945. They can be used to open the lecture in a lively and interesting way.
Ref:
Other examples in Wheelis’s chapter are available if you want to extend the introduction.
For the second example the events in Caffa are described in the quote on page 14 of Wheelis, M. (1999) “Biological Warfare before 1914”, Geissler, E., and van Courtland Moon, J. (Eds.), Biological and Toxin Weapons Research, Development and Use from the Middle Ages to 1945 (SIPRI Chemical & Biological Warfare Studies No. 18). Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp

4. 3. Criteria to Assess Historical Allegations (i)
It should make political and historical sense
It should be supported with sufficient detail to allow evaluation
The alleged action should be technically feasible in the context of the state of scientific knowledge at the time of the event
Notes: The aim of this and the following slide (4) is to inject a note of caution into the assessment of such allegations through the use of the criteria that Wheelis brought to bear on the subject in his chapter. More importantly, it is to lay the basis for a proper scientific approach to the whole of the lecture series. To that end considerable attention should be placed on the third of the criteria on this slide and students carefully reminded of the pre-scientific state of knowledge (see further information) about infectious diseases at the time of these events.

5. 4. Criteria to Assess Historical Allegations (ii)
The reported outbreak should be a plausible consequence of the alleged action
The source of the allegation should be clearly documented
There should be some evidence to support the allegation
Notes: Wheelis gives references to original studies of the events leading to the allegations he examines. These can be followed up if required for example in student essays.

6. 5. Fort Pitt 1763 (i)
Pontiac Indian rebellion unites tribes from New York to Virginia against British forces that are badly extended. Indian attacks overrun 8 forts and settlers are killed or captured in large numbers.
Smallpox breaks out in Fort Pitt. William Trent commander of the civilian militia makes interesting notes in his journal after a meeting with the Indians.
Notes: By 1763 smallpox was clearly recognised by the English and the great susceptibility to the disease of the Indian population was also understood even if the mechanism of action of the agent was still unknown.
Ref:
Volwiler, A. T. (ed.), ‘Willium Trent’s Journal at Fort Pitt, 1763’, Mississippi Valley Historical Review, vol. 11 (1924), pp
Cited at p. 22 in Wheelis, M. (1999) ‘Biological Warfare before 1914’, In Geissler, E., and van Courtland Moon, J. (2001) Biological and Toxin Weapons Research, Development and Use from the Middle Ages to 1945 (SIPRI Chemical & Biological Warfare Studies No. 18). Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp
Further Inf.

7. 6. Fort Pitt 1763 (ii) Trent’s journal states that:
“…Out of our regard to them, we gave them two Blankets and a Handkerchief out of the Small Pox Hospital. I hope it will have the desired effect…”
Fort Commander’s ledger states that:
“To Sundries got to Replace in kind those which were taken from people in the Hospital to Convey the Smallpox to the Indians Viz:…”
2 Blankets…………. at 20/ £
1 Silk Hndkerchief 10/& 1 linnen do: 3/6 … ”
Notes: Wheelis’ criteria can be used to cast doubt on the two examples in slide 2 and to suggest that there is a strong case for regarding the British actions at Fort Pitt as a genuine example of attempted biological warfare. It is important to stress that this is a very unusual example and for most examples there is nothing like such a conclusive case.
Ref:
Wheelis, M. (1999) ‘Biological Warfare before 1914’, In Geissler, E., and van Courtland Moon, J. (2001) Biological and Toxin Weapons Research, Development and Use from the Middle Ages to 1945 (SIPRI Chemical & Biological Warfare Studies No. 18). Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp at p. 23.

8. 7. Smallpox as a Biological Weapon (i)
Epidemics amongst the American Indians killed more than 50% of many affected tribes
Jenner’s 1796 demonstration that infection with cowpox protected against smallpox led to widespread vaccination
WHO global campaign eradicated the disease and vaccination is no longer ordinarily practiced
Notes: This and the next slide are taken from Henderson, D.A. et al (1999) Smallpox as a Biological Weapon. JAMA,281, The intent here is to show just how serious a biological weapon smallpox would be today. The data should be linked forward to Lecture 4 and the Soviet offensive biological weapons programme during the Cold War when tons of smallpox are said to have been weaponised.

9. 8. Smallpox as a Biological Weapon (ii)
The infectious dose is low and as many as second generation cases were often infected from a single case
There would be an incubation period of days plus several days before the rash was distinctive enough to suggest smallpox
The population today would be largely lacking immunity

10. 9. Koch’s Postulates
The microbe must be present in every case of the disease and absent from healthy organisms
The suspect microbe must be isolated and grown in pure culture
The disease must result when the microbe is inoculated into the healthy host
The same microbe must then be isolated again from the diseased host
Notes: At the end of the 19th Century application of rigorous scientific methods (encapsulated in Koch’s famous postulates) enabled the elucidation of the agents causing a series of infectious diseases.

11. 10. The ‘Golden Age of Bacteriology’
Some infectious diseases linked to microbial causes in the ‘Golden Age’
Anthrax, 1876
Glanders, 1882
Brucellosis, 1887
Plague, 1894
Botulinum toxin, 1896
Tularemia, 1912
Note: The bacteria that caused the various diseases elucidated in this period had a number of different characteristics such as infectious dose, stability in the environment, ease of production and storage and contagiousness. Some of these characteristics made some of these bacteria and their products suitable for use as biological weapons agents.

12. 11. Biological Warfare in World War I (i)
Germany carried out an extensive sabotage campaign using agents such as glanders and anthrax in an attempt to prevent valuable cavalry and draft animals such as horses being delivered to the opposing Allied Powers. The Campaign was:
Directed by the General Staff who probably saw earlier agreements as only restricting anti-personnel biological warfare
Biological sabotage in the USA was part of a larger campaign aimed at interrupting the flow of valuable war material
The central figure in the campaign was a physician Anton Dilger, born in the USA of German parents, but who had spent much of his life in Germany
Cultured agents were administered to horses in eastern seaboard ports by German seamen trapped in the US because of the British blockade
Notes: Anthrax and glanders were brought from Germany and then grown in quantity in the USA by Dilger . His expertise was clearly essential for the whole operation. Much is known about this campaign of biological sabotage because of later US investigations.

13. 12 Biological Warfare in World War I (ii)
The German sabotage campaign also extended to Romania. When Romania joined the Allied Powers in 1916 some of the cultures were discovered
Also operations were carried out in Norway to attack horses and reindeer draft animals. Anthrax was in capillary tubes embedded in sugar cubes to be fed to the animals. Amazingly, one of the sugar cubes was discovered recently in a police museum and Bacillus anthracis identified by modern PCR methods
Attempts were also made to sabotage supplies from Argentina
Less is known about it, but France also carried out a similar anti-animal campaign on the western front
Notes: It is clear that very soon after scientific analysis had demonstrated the causes of some infectious diseases this knowledge was put to use by both sides in World War I. This is the key point for students to grasp. Knowledge obtained for benign purposes was applied in serious ways in warfare.
Ref:
Redmond, C., Pearce, M. J., Manchee, R. J., and Berdal, B. P., (1998) Deadly Relic of the Great War’, in Nature 393. pp Available from

14. 13. Anthrax as a Biological Warfare Agent (i)
Bacillus anthracis is an aerobic, gram-positive spore-forming nonmotile species with very special characteristics for the bioweaponeer:
The life cycle involves vegetative growth in the victim – normally a herbivore – until the toxins produced cause death
Then when the animal dies the bacterium forms very environmentally resistant spores that protect the organism until it enters the next victim
The fact that the spores are so resistant to environmental degradation and the lethality is so high means that anthrax is an ideal biological weapons agent
Notes: Anthrax can cause disease if the spores are eaten or if they enter through the skin. However, an aerosolised anthrax attack on humans would cause infection through the lungs which is particularly deadly.

15. 14. Anthrax as a Biological Warfare Agent (ii)
The accidental release of aerosolised anthrax spores from a military facility in Sverdlovsk in 1979 resulted in some 79 cases of anthrax and 68 deaths thus emphasising the dangerous nature of inhalation anthrax
Spores deposited in the lungs are injested by macrophages and transported to lymp nodes. Germination can take up to 60 days but once germination starts disease onset is very rapid
Notes: The Sverdlovsk incident has been carefully investigated by US and Russian scientists and gives a vivid example of what might happen in a real biological warfare attack using anthrax.
Ref:
Meselson, M., Guillemin, J., Hugh-Jones, M., Langmuir, A., Popova, I., Shelokov, A and Yampolskaya, O. (1994) ‘The Sverdlovsk Anthrax Outbreak of 1979’, Science 266, pp Available from

16. 15. Anthrax as a Biological Warfare Agent (iii)
It is estimated from primate data that the LD 50 (dose sufficient to kill 50% of people exposed to it) is between 2,500 and 55,000 inhaled anthrax spores
Virulence requires the presence of an antiphagocytic capsule and three toxin components (protective antigen, lethal factor and oedema factor)
Notes: A huge amount of work has been carried out on anthrax and much is known about the organism even if we know less about how to treat it because there are few natural examples of inhalation anthrax.

17. 16. Anthrax as a Biological Weapons Agent (iv)
Spores grow easily on ordinary media at 37 degrees and have a very characteristic appearance. Although identification should therefore be simple, few modern microbiologists will have encountered anthrax. Early signs of the disease are nonspecific complicating diagnosis
Given the very rapid course of the infection once the spores have germinated early administration of effective antibiotics is essential to save victims
Vaccination against anthrax is possible but not a practical proposition for the whole population
Decontamination after an attack with aerosolised anthrax is a daunting proposition as demonstrated after the ‘anthrax letters’ attack with small quantities of anthrax in the USA in 2001
Notes: The anthrax letters attack in the USA in 2001 are another example that students need to study to understand the dangers properly. In particular, dissemination of a very small amount of anthrax, probably from the US biodefence programme, caused millions of dollars of cleanup costs.

18. 17. The 1925 Geneva Protocol
Prior to World War I a series of international agreements had placed some restrictions on poisoned weapons
Following the war there was discussion within the League of Nations of further restrictions
These restrictions naturally concentrated on chemical weapons because of the large-scale use of chemical weapons in the war
In 1925 arguments put forward by Poland ensured that the use of biological weapons was also covered in the 1925 Geneva Protocol
Notes: The students might be asked to look carefully at the arguments put forward by Poland so soon after the ‘Golden Age of Bacteriology’.
Ref:
League of Nations, Report of the Temporary Mixed Commission for the Reduction of Armaments, League of Nations document A IX, Geneva, 30 July 1924, p. 29 cited at Mierzejewski, J. W., and van Courtland Moon, J. E. (Eds (1999) ‘Poland and Biological Weapons’, in Geissler, E., and van Courtland Moon, J. E. (Eds,). (1999) Biological and Toxin Weapons Research, Development and Use from the Middle Ages to 1945 (SIPRI Chemical & Biological Warfare Studies No. 18). Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp

19. 18. French Biological Warfare Preparations After the War (i)
Concern over biological warfare led to the Trillant Report of 1922 on “The use of bacteriological weapons in war”. This:
“…not only enables a detailed understanding of the motivation and reasoning behind the rapid expansion of the French programme, but also provided a scientific basis for the work.”
“…suggested that they [biological weapons] would be appropriate, especially during the period of mobilization, against such targets as civilian populations, urban centres, troop assembly points, barracks, stations, factories or industrial sites…”
Notes: With the Trillant report we see clearly the scientific analyses that support military analyses of the use of biological agents in warfare. Presumably some such analyses were carried out before the use of biological agents during World War I but no record of them has been found. So the French analysis is the first we have to date.
Ref:
Lepick, O. (1999) French activities related to biological warfare, In: Geissler, E. and van Courtland Moon, J. (eds.) Biological and Toxin Weapons: Research, Development and Use from the Middle Ages to SIPRI Chemical & Biological Warfare Studies, no.18. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cited at p

20. 19. French Biological Warfare Preparations After the War (ii)
The Trillant report:
“…evaluated microbial diseases that could have a military role and listed those which appeared useable…yellow fever, plague…brucellosis…and foot-and-mouth disease…”
“The section of the report on experimental work presented Trillant’s findings on the aerial transmission of bacteriological agents and the influence of various factors on their dissemination…”
“…Trillant stressed that laboratory trials had shown that it was possible to create artificial microbial clouds with all the physical properties of natural clouds…”
Notes: We see here the move from analysis of the possibilities to experimental work to discover what is actually possible in the laboratory. The next slide takes the student through the final stage of weaponisation.

21. 20. French Biological Warfare Preparations After the War (iii)
“In the autumn of 1925 the War Ministry:
“…decided to direct research towards the development of ‘explosive bombs with special charges (microbial cultures) carried by aircraft’. The aim was to develop a device whose burst on ground impact would…produce clouds consisting of …microorganisms…with the capability…of producing pathogenic effects…”
“…Full-scale trials were carried out in October 1926….Nine bombs were dropped from a Navy Goliath seaplane….The results of these tests were not only ‘favourable’ but they also enabled validation of the most important theoretical data…”
Notes: So here we can clearly see the beginnings of the application of science to the perfection of biological warfare. In the inter-war years other countries such as the Soviet Union, Hungary and Japan are known to have pursued such offensive programmes. The next lecture follows these programmes through the second world war.

22. Sample Questions
1. Critically analyse the view that there are many examples of biological warfare in the historical record prior to the “scientific understanding” of the “microbial” causes of infectious diseases.
2. How dangerous would smallpox would be if it was used as a biological weapon today?
3. Describe the main phases of either the German anti-personnel biological sabotage campaign in World War I or the French offensive biological warfare programme between World War I and World War II.
4. What is the 1925 Geneva Protocol? How did it come to cover biological warfare and what is its status today?

23. References
(Slide 1)
Geissler, E., and van Courtland Moon, J. (Eds.), (1999) Biological and Toxin Weapons Research, Development and Use from the Middle Ages to 1945 (SIPRI Chemical & Biological Warfare Studies No. 18). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
(Slide 2)
Horrox, R. (ed.), The Black Death (Manchester University Press: Manchester, 1994), pp p. 17.
Cited at pp. 14 in Wheelis, M. (1999) ‘Biological Warfare before 1914’, In Geissler, E., and van Courtland Moon, J. (2001) Biological and Toxin Weapons Research,Development and Use from the Middle Ages to 1945 (SIPRI Chemical & BiologicalWarfare Studies No. 18). Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp

24. (Slide 3)
Barnes-Svarney, P. (1995) The New York Public Library Science Desk Reference, New York: Macmillan
(Slide 5)
Volwiler, A. T. (ed.), ‘Willium Trent’s Journal at Fort Pitt, 1763’, Mississippi Valley Historical Review, vol. 11 (1924), pp
Cited at p. 22 in Wheelis, M. (1999) ‘Biological Warfare before 1914’, In Geissler, E., and van Courtland Moon, J. (2001) Biological and Toxin Weapons Research, Development and Use from the Middle Ages to 1945 (SIPRI Chemical & Biological Warfare Studies No. 18). Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp
(Slide 6)
Wheelis, M. (1999) ‘Biological Warfare before 1914’, In Geissler, E., and van Courtland Moon, J. (2001) Biological and Toxin Weapons Research, Development and Use from the Middle Ages to 1945 (SIPRI Chemical & Biological Warfare Studies No. 18). Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp

25. (Slide 7)
Henderson. D. A., Inglesby, T. V., Bartlett, J. G., Ascher. M. S., Eitzen, E. M. Jr., Jahrling, P. B., A. M., Hauer, J., Layton, M., McDade, J., Osterholm, M. T., Toole, T. O’., Parker, G., Perl, T. M., Russel, P. K., and Tonat, K. (1999) ‘Smallpox as a Biological Weapon Medical and Public Health Management’, in JAMA 281(22), pp
(Slide 10)
Inf.1
Inglesby, T. V., Dennis, D. T., Henderson. D. A., Bartlett, J. G., Ascher. M. S., Eitzen, E. M. Jr., Fine, A. D., Friedlander, A. M., Hauer, J., Koerner, J. F., Layton, M., McDade, J., Osterholm, M. T., Toole, T. O’., Parker, G., Perl, T. M., Russel, P. K., Schoch-Spana, M., and Tonat, K. (2000) ‘Plague as a Biological Weapon: Medical and Public Health Management’, in JAMA 283(17), pp

26. Inf.2
Arnon, S. S., Schecter, R., Inglesby, T. V., Henderson. D. A., Bartlett, J. G., Ascher. M. S., Eitzen, E. M. Jr., Fine, A. D., Hauer, J., Layton, M., Lillibridge, S., Osterholm, M. T., Toole, T. O’., Parker, G., Perl, T. M., Russel, P. K., Swerdlow, D. L., and Tonat, K. (2001) ‘Botulinum Toxin as a Biological Weapon: Medical and Public Health Management’, in JAMA 285(8), pp
Inf.3
Dennis, D. T., Inglesby, T. V., Henderson. D. A., Bartlett, J. G., Ascher. M. S., Eitzen, E. M. Jr., Fine, A. D., Friedlander, A. M., Hauer, J., Layton, M., Lillibridge, S., McDade, J., Osterholm, M. T., Toole, T. O’., Parker, G., Perl, T. M., Russel, P. K., and Tonat, K. ‘Tularemia as a Biological Weapon: Medical and Public Health Management’, in JAMA 285(21), pp

27. (Slide 11)
NAS Record Group 76, Records of the Mixed Claims Commission, Entry 29 (Record Relating to the Sabotage Claims Filed with the Commission), Box 3, ‘Memorandum re Carl Dilger with specific respect to the records as it existed at the time of the decision of October ’, 12 Nov. 1935, p. 4.
Cited at pp in Wheelis, M. (1999) ‘Biological Sabotage in World War I’, In Geissler, E., and van Courtland Moon, J. (2001) Biological and Toxin Weapons Research, Development and Use from the Middle Ages to 1945 (SIPRI Chemical & Biological Warfare Studies No. 18). Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp

28. (Slide 12)
Redmond, C., Pearce, M. J., Manchee, R. J., and Berdal, B. P., (1998) Deadly Relic of the Great War’, in Nature 393. pp Available from
(Slide 13)
Inglesby, T. V., Henderson. D. A., Bartlett, J. G., Ascher. M. S., Eitzen, E. M. Jr., Friedlander, A. M., Hauer, J., McDade, J., Osterholm, M. T., Toole, T. O’., Parker, G., Perl, T. M., Russel, P. K., and Tonat, K. (1999) ‘Anthrax as a Biological Weapon: Medical and Public Health Management’, in JAMA 281(18), pp

29. (Slide 14)
Meselson, M., Guillemin, J., Hugh-Jones, M., Langmuir, A., Popova, I., Shelokov, A and Yampolskaya, O. (1994) ‘The Sverdlovsk Anthrax Outbreak of 1979’, Science 266, pp Available from
(Slide 15)
Inglesby, T. V., Henderson. D. A., Bartlett, J. G., Ascher. M. S., Eitzen, E. M. Jr., Friedlander, A. M., Hauer, J., McDade, J., Osterholm, M. T., Toole, T. O’., Parker, G., Perl, T. M., Russel, P. K., and Tonat, K. (1999) ‘Anthrax as a Biological Weapon: Medical and Public Health Management’, in JAMA 281(18), pp
(Slide 16)
Los Angels Times (2002) Contractors’ Cost Overruns from Anthrax Cleanup: $50 Million, 11 September. p. A-33 in printed edition [Online] Available from

30. (Slide 17)
Mierzejewski, J. W., and van Courtland Moon, J. E. (Eds (1999) ‘Poland and Biological Weapons’, in Geissler, E., and van Courtland Moon, J. E. (Eds,). (1999) Biological and Toxin Weapons Research, Development and Use from the Middle Ages to 1945 (SIPRI Chemical & Biological Warfare Studies No. 18). Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp
(Slide 18)
Lepick, O. (1999) French activities related to biological warfare, In: Geissler, E. and van Courtland Moon, J. (eds.) Biological and Toxin Weapons: Research, Developmentand Use from the Middle Ages to SIPRI Chemical & Biological Warfare Studies, no.18. Oxford: Oxford University Press.