Martial music
Martial music or military music is a specific genre of music intended for use in military settings. Much of the military music has been composed to announce military events as with bugle calls and fanfares, or accompany marching formations with drum cadences, or mark special occasions as by military bands. However, music has been employed in battle for centuries, sometimes to intimidate the enemy and other times to encourage combatants, or to assist in organization and timing of actions in warfare. Depending on the culture, a variety of percussion and musical instruments have been used, such as drums, bugles, trumpets or other horns, triangles, cymbals, as well as larger military bands or full orchestras. Although some martial music has been composed in written form, other music has been developed or taught by ear, such as bugle calls or drum cadences, relying on group memory to coordinate the sounds; the notion of march music began to be borrowed from the Ottoman Empire in the 16th century.
The Ottomans were believed to have introduced the first military bands in the thirteenth century, called mehter or Janissary bands. The music is characterized by an shrill sound combining bass drums, bells, the triangle and cymbals and several other traditional instruments; the sound associated with the mehterân exercised an influence on European classical music, with such composers as Joseph Haydn, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Ludwig van Beethoven all writing compositions inspired by or designed to imitate the Ottoman music. See also: American march music. Marching songs with patriotic and sometimes nostalgic lyrics, are sung by soldiers as they march; the songs invariably feature a rhythm timed to the cadence of the march. There are many examples from the American Civil War, such as "Marching Song of the First Arkansas" and "John Brown's Body". "P'tit quinquin was popular during the Franco Prussian War of 1870. The Boer War generated numerous marching songs among. "It's a Long Way to Tipperary" was a marching song of World War I that became a popular hit.
One of the most enduring marching songs from that war is the "Colonel Bogey March", popular in World War II as "Hitler Has Only Got One Ball". The "Dadao March" was a patriotic song sung in China during the Second Sino-Japanese War. "White Army, Black Baron" was written as a combat hymn for the Red Army of Russia in 1920, while "Erika" was sung by the German army during World War II. See Songs of the Spanish Civil War; the bugle call is a short tune announcing scheduled and certain non-scheduled events on a military installation, battlefield, or ship. These short music pieces are played from an instrument called the bugle, it has been used by militaries as means of communication.. This instrument can be heard from a far and in noisy environments, it is a effective way of giving orders and communicating. Although no longer required by armies for communicating, these music pieces are still played for tradition and during ceremonies. Well-known bugle calls include "Taps", "The Last Post", "Reveille".
See also: El Degüello. Ruffles and flourishes are fanfares for ceremonial music for distinguished groups. Ruffles are played on drums, flourishes are played on bugles. Commissioned officers receive one ruffle and flourish, major generals get two, lieutenant generals three, four-star generals and the President receive four, they are played in the United States. The Vietnam war produced a hit song in 1966, "Ballad of the Green Berets" which has a martial rhythm. Curtis Mayfield's 1963 hit "Amen" features a marching rhythm, as does the US Top 40 hit, "Burning Bridges" by The Mike Curb Congregation. In Vietnam and in particular in the Second Gulf War and in Afghanistan, recorded music has been used by some soldiers as they travel, prepare for and engage in battle. Performers such as Eminem have written songs with specific reference to the current wars including "Bagpipes From Baghdad". See: "Soundtrack to War". Trumpets, cymbals and other loud musical instruments were used for clear communication in the noise and confusion of a battlefield.
They are carried while the instrumentalist is in motion, i.e. marching. Modern additions include the upright glockenspiel and several brass instruments including trombone and sousaphone, which are used by military bands. Chinese troops used tàigǔ drums to motivate troops, to help set a marching pace, to call out orders or announcements. For example, during a war between Qi and Lu in 684 BC, the effect of drum on soldier's morale is employed to change the result of a major battle. In the late fourteenth century the first timpani arose in Ottoman military ensembles known as Janissary bands. During the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries janissary bands began to influence European court musicians with new percussion instruments such as the timpani known as Kös, rattle. Fife-and-drum corps of Swiss mercenary foot soldiers used drums, they used an early version of the snare drum carried over the player's right shoulder, suspended by a strap. During the English Civil War rope-tension drums would be carried by junior officers as a means to relay commands from senior officers over the noise of battle.
These were hung over the shoulder of the drummer and played with two drum sticks. Different regiments and companies would have distinctive and unique drum beats which only they would recognize. See Drum and bugle corps; the earliest trumpets were signaling in
Medieval warfare
Medieval warfare is the European warfare of the Middle Ages. Technological and social developments had forced a dramatic transformation in the character of warfare from antiquity, changing military tactics and the role of cavalry and artillery. In terms of fortification, the Middle Ages saw the emergence of the castle in Europe, which spread to Western Asia. Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus wrote De re militari in the late 4th century. Described by historian Walter Goffart as "the bible of warfare throughout the Middle Ages", De re militari was distributed through the Latin West. While Western Europe relied on a single text for the basis of its military knowledge, the Byzantine Empire in Southeastern Europe had a succession of military writers. Though Vegetius had no military experience and De re militari was derived from the works of Cato and Frontinus, his books were the standard for military discourse in Western Europe from their production until the 16th century. De re militari was divided into five books: who should be a soldier and the skills they needed to learn, the composition and structure of an army, field tactics, how to conduct and withstand sieges, the role of the navy.
According to Vegetius, infantry was the most important element of an army because it was cheap compared to cavalry and could be deployed on any terrain. One of the tenets he put forward was that a general should only engage in battle when he was sure of victory or had no other choice; as archaeologist Robert Liddiard explains, "Pitched battles in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, were rare."Although his work was reproduced, over 200 copies and extracts survive today, the extent to which Vegetius affected the actual practice of warfare as opposed to its concept is unclear because of his habit of stating the obvious. Historian Michael Clanchy noted "the medieval axiom that laymen are illiterate and its converse that clergy are literate", so it may be the case that few soldiers read Vegetius' work. While their Roman predecessors were well-educated and had been experienced in warfare, the European nobility of the early Medieval period were not renowned for their education, but from the 12th century, it became more common for them to read.
Some soldiers regarded the experience of warfare as more valuable than reading about it. While it is uncertain to what extent his work was read by the warrior class as opposed to the clergy, Vegetius remained prominent in the literature on warfare in the medieval period. In 1489, King Henry VII of England commissioned the translation of De re militari into English, "so every gentleman born to arms and all manner of men of war, soldiers and all others would know how they ought to behave in the feats of wars and battles". In Europe, breakdowns in centralized power led to the rise of a number of groups that turned to large-scale pillage as a source of income. Most notably the Vikings raided significantly; as these groups were small and needed to move building fortifications was a good way to provide refuge and protection for the people and the wealth in the region. These fortifications evolved over the course of the Middle Ages, the most important form being the castle, a structure which has become synonymous with the Medieval era in the popular eye.
The castle served as a protected place for the local elites. Inside a castle they were protected from bands of raiders and could send mounted warriors to drive the enemy from the area, or to disrupt the efforts of larger armies to supply themselves in the region by gaining local superiority over foraging parties that would be impossible against the whole enemy host. Fortifications were a important part of warfare because they provided safety to the lord, his family, his servants, they provided refuge from armies too large to face in open battle. The ability of the heavy cavalry to dominate a battle on an open field was useless against fortifications. Building siege engines was a time-consuming process, could be done without preparations before the campaign. Many sieges could take months, if not years, to demoralize the defenders sufficiently. Fortifications were an excellent means of ensuring that the elite could not be dislodged from their lands – as Count Baldwin of Hainaut commented in 1184 on seeing enemy troops ravage his lands from the safety of his castle, "they can't take the land with them".
In the Medieval period besieging armies used a wide variety of siege engines including: scaling ladders. Siege techniques included mining in which tunnels were dug under a section of the wall and rapidly collapsed to destabilize the wall's foundation. Another technique was to bore into the enemy walls, however this was not nearly as effective as other methods due to the thickness of castle walls. Advances in the prosecution of sieges encouraged the development of a variety of defensive counter-measures. In particular, Medieval fortifications became progressively stronger – for example, the advent of the concentric castle from the period of the Crusades – and more dangerous to attackers – witness the increasing use of machicolations, as well the preparation of hot or incendiary substances. Arrow slits, concealed doors for sallies, deep water wells were integral to resisting siege at this time. Designers of castles paid particular attention to defending entrances, protec
Area denial weapon
An area denial weapon or Anti Access/Area Denial weapon system is a device or a strategy used to prevent an adversary from occupying or traversing an area of land, sea or air. The specific method used does not have to be effective in preventing passage as long as it is sufficient to restrict, slow down, or endanger the opponent; some area denial weapons pose long-lasting risks to anyone entering the area to civilians, thus are controversial. In medieval warfare and sturdy stakes were buried at the bottom of long lines of ditches, pointed end up diagonally, in order to prevent cavalry charges in a given area. If the stakes were spotted, soldiers would be forced to dismount and give up their advantage as cavalry as well as becoming easier targets; the correct layout of these extensive lines of ditches and the quality control of stake size and placement was part of the craft of war. A more modern version, allowing quicker dispersal and providing the advantage of being hidden more are caltrops, though items bearing close similarity had been in use for most of antiquity.
Many variants were used, such as boards with metal hooks, as described during battles of Julius Caesar. Passive fortification—ditches and obstacles such as dragon's teeth and Czech hedgehogs—were used as anti-tank measures during World War II. Simple rows or clusters of sharpened sticks, the use of small caltrops have been a feature of anti-infantry warfare since antiquity. However, due to the difficulty of mass-producing them in the pre-modern age, they were used except in the defense of limited areas or chokepoints during sieges, where they were used to help seal breaches. Increasing ease of production still did not prevent these methods from falling out of favor from the late Middle Ages onward. Caltrops are still sometimes used in modern conflicts, such as during the Korean War, where Chinese troops wearing only light shoes, were vulnerable. In modern times, special caltrops are sometimes used against wheeled vehicles with pneumatic tires; some South American urban guerrillas such as the Tupamaros and Montoneros, who called them "miguelitos," have used caltrops to avoid pursuit after ambushes.
The most common planted by hand or dispersed by artillery. Some modern prototypes experiment with automatic guns or artillery-delivered ammunitions that are fired only after remote sensing detects enemies. Booby traps or improvised explosive devices in sufficient concentration qualify as area denial weapons, though they are much easier to clear and pose less long-term danger. During an armed conflict there are several methods of countering land mines; these include using armoured vehicles to negate the effects of anti-personnel land mines. Land mines can be cleared either by hand, or by using specialised equipment such as tanks equipped with flails. Explosives can be used to clear mine fields, either by artillery bombardment, or with specialised charges such as Bangalore torpedoes, the Antipersonnel Obstacle Breaching System and the Python Minefield Breaching System. 156 states are parties to the Ottawa Treaty under which they have agreed not to use, produce or transfer anti-personnel mines. Anti-ship missiles are a modern method of stopping a potential adversary from attacking by sea.
China, North Korea and Iran all have developed or imported such weapons in an effort to develop a modern anti-access or A2/AD strategy to counter modern United States weaponry. In response to China’s pursuit of such A2/AD capabilities, the United States has developed the AirSea Battle doctrine. Amitai Etzioni of the Institute for Communitarian Policy Studies has suggested that AirSea Battle is an escalatory military posture that entails restructuring United States military forces and ordering additional weapons systems, that AirSea Battle could “lead to an arms race with China, which could culminate in a nuclear war.”Other methods of area denial at a strategic level include aircraft carriers, surface-to-air missiles, ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, electronic warfare and interceptor aircraft. Various CBRNE weapons can be used for area denial, as long. Fallout from nuclear weapons might be used in such a role. While never employed in this form, its use had been suggested by Douglas MacArthur during the Korean War.
Anthrax spores can contaminate the ground for long periods of time, thus providing a form of area denial. However, the short-term effects are to be low - the psychological effects on an opponent would be more significant; the massive use of defoliants such as Agent Orange can be used as an interdiction measure because they leave areas empty of any form of vegetation cover. In the desert-like terrain that ensues, it is impossible for the enemy to travel without being seen, there is little cover in case of an attack from the air. Many chemical weapons produce toxic effects on any personnel in an affected area. However, this has no tactical value, as the effects of indirect exposure do not develop fast or enough - though again, the psychological effect upon an enemy aware of the chemical usage may be considerable. There are however some chemical agents that are by design non-degrading, such as the nerve agent VX. Sulfur mustard was extensively used by both German and allied forces on the west front in World War I as an effective area-denial weapon through contaminating large land stripes by extensive shelling with HD/Gelbkreuz ordnance
Amphibious warfare
Amphibious warfare is a type of offensive military operation that today uses naval ships to project ground and air power onto a hostile or hostile shore at a designated landing beach. Through history the operations were conducted using ship's boats as the primary method of delivering troops to shore. Since the Gallipoli Campaign, specialised watercraft were designed for landing troops and vehicles, including by landing craft and for insertion of commandos, by fast patrol boats and from mini-submersibles; the term amphibious first emerged in the UK and the USA during the 1930s with introduction of vehicles such as Vickers-Carden-Loyd Light Amphibious Tank or the Landing Vehicle Tracked. Amphibious warfare includes operations defined by their type, purpose and means of execution. In the British Empire at the time these were called combined operations which were defined as "...operations where naval, military or air forces in any combination are co-operating with each other, working independently under their respective commanders, but with a common strategic object."
All armed forces that employ troops with special training and equipment for conducting landings from naval vessels to shore agree to this definition. Since the 20th century an amphibious landing of troops on a beachhead is acknowledged as the most complex of all military maneuvers; the undertaking requires an intricate coordination of numerous military specialties, including air power, naval gunfire, naval transport, logistical planning, specialized equipment, land warfare and extensive training in the nuances of this maneuver for all personnel involved. An amphibious operation is similar to but in many ways different from land and air operations. At its basic, such operations include phases of strategic planning and preparation, operational transit to the intended theatre of operations, pre-landing rehearsal and disembarkation, troop landings, beachhead consolidation and conducting inland ground and air operations. Within the scope of these phases a vital part of success was based on the military logistics, naval gunfire and close air support.
Another factor is the variety and quantity of specialised vehicles and equipment used by the landing force that are designed for the specific needs of this type of operation. Amphibious operations can be classified as tactical or operational raids such as the Dieppe Raid, operational landings in support of a larger land strategy such as the Kerch–Eltigen Operation, a strategic opening of a new Theatre of Operations, for example the Operation Avalanche; the purpose of amphibious operations is always limited by the plan and terrain. Landings on islands less than 5,000 km2 in size are tactical with the limited objectives of neutralising enemy defenders and obtaining a new base of operation; such an operation may be prepared and planned in days or weeks, would employ a naval task force to land less than a division of troops. The intent of operational landings is to exploit the shore as a vulnerability in the enemy's overall position, forcing redeployment of forces, premature use of reserves, aiding a larger allied offensive effort elsewhere.
Such an operation requiring weeks to months of preparation and planning, would use multiple task forces, or a naval fleet to land corps-size forces, including on large islands, for example Operation Chromite. A strategic landing operation requires a major commitment of forces to invade a national territory in the archipelagic, such as the Battle of Leyte, or continental, such as Operation Neptune; such an operation may require multiple naval and air fleets to support the landings, extensive intelligence gathering and planning of over a year. Although most amphibious operations are thought of as beach landings, they can take exploit available shore infrastructure to land troops directly into an urban environment if unopposed. In this case non-specialised ships can offload troops and cargo using organic or facility wharf-side equipment. Tactical landings in the past have utilised small boats, small craft, small ships and civilian vessels converted for the mission to deliver troops to the water's edge.
Preparation and planning the naval landing operation requires the assembly of vessels with sufficient capacity to lift necessary troops employing combat loading. The military intelligence services produce a briefing on the expected opponent which guides the organisation and equipping of the embarked force. First specially designed landing craft were used for the Gallipoli landings, armoured tracked vehicles were available for the Guadalcanal Campaign. Helicopters were first used to support beach landings during Operation Musketeer. Hovercraft have been in use for naval landings by military forces since the 1960s. Recorded amphibious warfare goes back to ancient times; the Sea Peoples menaced the Egyptians from the reign of Akhenaten as captured on the reliefs at Medinet Habu and Karnak. The Hellenic city states resorted to opposed assaults upon each other's shores, which they reflected upon in their plays and other expressions of art; the landing at Marathon by the ancient Persians on 9 September 490 BC, was the largest amphibious until eclipsed by the landings at Battle of Gallipoli.
In 1565, the island of Malta was invaded by the Ottoman Turks during the Great Siege of Malta, forcing its defenders to retreat to the fortified cities. A strategic choke point in the Mediterranean Sea, its loss would have been so menacing for the Western European kingdoms that forces were urgently raised in order to relieve the island, but it took four months to train and move a 5,500-man amphibious force to lift the siege. Philip II, King of Spain de
Counter-insurgency
A counter-insurgency or counterinsurgency is defined by the United States Department of State as "comprehensive civilian and military efforts taken to defeat and contain insurgency and address its root causes". An insurgency is a rebellion against a constituted authority when those taking part in the rebellion are not recognized as belligerents, it is "the organized use of subversion and violence to seize, nullify or challenge political control of a region. As such, it is a political struggle, in which both sides use armed force to create space for their political and influence activities to be effective." Counter-insurgency campaigns of duly-elected or politically recognized governments take place during war, occupation by a foreign military or police force, when internal conflicts that involve subversion and armed rebellion occur. The most effective counterinsurgency campaigns "integrate and synchronize political, security and informational components that reinforce governmental legitimacy and effectiveness while reducing insurgent influence over the population.
COIN strategies should be designed to protect the population from insurgent violence. According to scholars, it is crucial to know what this strategy was designed for to understand it comprehensively. COIN strategy aims to achieve the support of local population for the government created by host nation; the main point of the modern counterinsurgency campaign is not kill and capture insurgents, but to improve living conditions, support government in providing services for people and eliminate any support for insurgency. Counter-insurgency is conducted as a combination of conventional military operations and other means, such as demoralization in the form of propaganda, psy-ops, assassinations. Counter-insurgency operations include many different facets: military, political, economic and civic actions taken to defeat insurgency. To understand counter-insurgency, one must understand insurgency to comprehend the dynamics of revolutionary warfare. Insurgents capitalize on societal problems called gaps.
When the gaps are wide, they create a sea of discontent, creating the environment in which the insurgent can operate. In The Insurgent Archipelago John Mackinlay puts forward the concept of an evolution of insurgency from the Maoist paradigm of the golden age of insurgency to the global insurgency of the start of the 21st-century, he defines this distinction as'Maoist' and'post-Maoist' insurgency. William B. Caldwell wrote: The law of armed conflict requires that, to use force, "combatants" must distinguish individuals presenting a threat from innocent civilians; this basic principle is accepted by all disciplined militaries. In the counterinsurgency, disciplined application of force is more critical because our enemies camouflage themselves in the civilian population. Our success in Iraq depends on our ability to treat the civilian population with humanity and dignity as we remain ready to defend ourselves or Iraqi civilians when a threat is detected; the third Marques of Santa Cruz de Marcenado is the earliest author who dealt systematically in his writings with counter-insurgency.
In his Reflexiones Militares, published between 1726 and 1730, he discussed how to spot early signs of an incipient insurgency, prevent insurgencies, counter them, if they could not be warded off. Strikingly, Santa Cruz recognized that insurgencies are due to real grievances: "A state rises up without the fault of its governors." He advocated clemency towards the population and good governance, to seek the people's "heart and love". The majority of counter-insurgency efforts by major powers in the last century have been spectacularly unsuccessful; this may be attributed to a number of causes. First, as B. H. Liddell Hart pointed out in the Insurgency addendum to the second version of his book Strategy: The Indirect Approach, a popular insurgency has an inherent advantage over any occupying force, he showed as a prime example the French occupation of Spain during the Napoleonic wars. Whenever Spanish forces managed to constitute themselves into a regular fighting force, the superior French forces beat them every time.
However, once dispersed and decentralized, the irregular nature of the rebel campaigns proved a decisive counter to French superiority on the battlefield. Napoleon's army had no means of combatting the rebels, in the end their strength and morale were so sapped that when Wellington was able to challenge French forces in the field, the French had no choice but to abandon the situation. Counter-insurgency efforts may be successful when the insurgents are unpopular; the Philippine–American War, the Shining Path in Peru, the Malayan Emergency in Malaya have been the sites of failed insurgencies. Hart points to the experiences of T. E. Lawrence and the Arab Revolt during World War I as another example of the power of the rebel/insurgent. Though the Ottomans had advantages in manpower of more than 100 to 1, the Arabs' ability to materialize out of the desert and disappear again left the Turks reeling and paralyzed, creating an opportunity for regular British forces to sweep in and finish the Turkish forces off.
In both the preceding cases, the insurgents and rebel fighters were working in conjunction with or in a manner complementary to regular forces. Such was the case with the French Resistance during World War II and the National Liberation Front during the Vietna
Biological warfare
Biological warfare —also known as germ warfare—is the use of biological toxins or infectious agents such as bacteria and fungi with the intent to kill or incapacitate humans, animals or plants as an act of war. Biological weapons are living organisms or replicating entities that reproduce or replicate within their host victims. Entomological warfare is considered a type of biological weapon; this type of warfare is distinct from nuclear warfare and chemical warfare, which together with biological warfare make up NBC, the military initialism for nuclear and chemical warfare using weapons of mass destruction. None of these are considered conventional weapons, which are deployed for their explosive, kinetic, or incendiary potential. Biological weapons may be employed in various ways to gain a strategic or tactical advantage over the enemy, either by threats or by actual deployments. Like some chemical weapons, biological weapons may be useful as area denial weapons; these agents may be lethal or non-lethal, may be targeted against a single individual, a group of people, or an entire population.
They may be developed, stockpiled or deployed by nation states or by non-national groups. In the latter case, or if a nation-state uses it clandestinely, it may be considered bioterrorism. Biological warfare and chemical warfare overlap to an extent, as the use of toxins produced by some living organisms is considered under the provisions of both the Biological Weapons Convention and the Chemical Weapons Convention. Toxins and psychochemical weapons are referred to as midspectrum agents. Unlike bioweapons, these midspectrum agents do not reproduce in their host and are characterized by shorter incubation periods; the use of biological weapons is prohibited under customary international humanitarian law, as well as a variety of international treaties. The use of biological agents in armed conflict is a war crime. Offensive biological warfare, including mass production and use of biological weapons, was outlawed by the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention; the rationale behind this treaty, ratified or acceded to by 170 countries as of April 2013, is to prevent a biological attack which could conceivably result in large numbers of civilian casualties and cause severe disruption to economic and societal infrastructure.
Many countries, including signatories of the BWC pursue research into the defense or protection against BW, not prohibited by the BWC. A nation or group that can pose a credible threat omass casualty has the ability to alter the terms on which other nations or groups interact with it. Biological weapons allow for the potential to create a level of destruction and loss of life far in excess of nuclear, chemical or conventional weapons, relative to their mass and cost of development and storage. Therefore, biological agents may be useful as strategic deterrents in addition to their utility as offensive weapons on the battlefield; as a tactical weapon for military use, a significant problem with a BW attack is that it would take days to be effective, therefore might not stop an opposing force. Some biological agents (smallpox, have the capability of person-to-person transmission via aerosolized respiratory droplets; this feature can be undesirable, as the agent may be transmitted by this mechanism to unintended populations, including neutral or friendly forces.
While containment of BW is less of a concern for certain criminal or terrorist organizations, it remains a significant concern for the military and civilian populations of all nations. Rudimentary forms of biological warfare have been practiced since antiquity; the earliest documented incident of the intention to use biological weapons is recorded in Hittite texts of 1500–1200 BC, in which victims of tularemia were driven into enemy lands, causing an epidemic. Although the Assyrians knew of ergot, a parasitic fungus of rye which produces ergotism when ingested, there is no evidence that they poisoned enemy wells with the fungus, as has been claimed. In 1346, the bodies of Mongol warriors of the Golden Horde who had died of plague were thrown over the walls of the besieged Crimean city of Kaffa. Specialists disagree over whether this operation may have been responsible for the spread of the Black Death into Europe, Near East and North Africa, resulting in the killing of 25 million Europeans.
The British Army commanders approved the use of smallpox as a biological weapon in the French and Indian War to target Native Americans during the Siege of Fort Pitt in 1763. Correspondence between General Jeffrey Amherst and Colonel Henry Bouquet provides further evidence that the English army planned for the use of biological weapons to kill Native Americans, as detailed in Native American disease and epidemics. A smallpox outbreak was reported in the Ohio Valley and Great Lakes area through 1763 and 1764; the spread of smallpox weakened the French and Native American resistance to the British troops led by Bouquet. The smallpox outbreak was considered a direct result of two blankets and a scarf taken from a Small Pox Hospital gifted by William Trent and others English army representatives to leader Maumaultee and warrior Turtle Heart of the Delaware people during their visit to Ft Pitt. Amherst and Bouquet discussed other biological weapon deployments as a result. Apologists pose questions as to whether the outbreak was the result of the Fort Pitt incident or the virus was present among the Delaware people.
It is that the British Marines used smallpox in New S
