In the eighteenth century, terrible plagues and maladies often swept Europe. Poor masses were packed into the filthy tenements and basements of large cities, but nowhere was the crowd thicker than in the army billets and tents, where the troops were reaped in bountiful crops of thousands every year.

In theory, one of the paramount purposes of 18th century troops was to defend a sovereign and his or her honor. If lives were to be lost, the preference would be to die in battle, illuminating the Prince's glory; unfortunately it was pestilence which took the lion's share of lives. There are scores of examples: the fate of the Russian army during the campaigns against Turkey in the 1730's, or the hard-hit Hanoverian regiments at Malplaquet who suffered even greater losses in Winter quarters earlier that year.

The British troops in Flanders and Germany during the Fredrician Wars didn't suffer greatly by eighteenth century standards, but they still experienced far more sickness than their modern counterparts would.

Although medical knowledge made great strides during the Age of Reason, it was not enough to make major changes in annual mortality rates for the armies as the century progressed. Some statistics are given below as an example:

British Troops in the Irish War (1689-1694)

killed in action: 2177
murdered: 80
died from illness or starvation 7320 (=76%)
(Cantile p49)

Hessian Troops in the American Revolution (1776-1782)

killed in action: 535
died from other causes: 4050 (=89%)
(Atwood P255)

A commander never knew when disease might strike. This predicament seriously affected unit musters already understrength due to recruiting problems, lack of funds, dishonest payroll reports, desertions or establishments designed by ministers living in fantasy land. The chart below represents the average percentage of troops in hospitals during the various wars of the era. These figures should be read with caution, for they are extremely generalized and do not portray individual campaigns.

Event	W.A.S (1740-48)	SYW (1756-63)	American Rev. (1775-83)
Hospitalized per day avg.	15%	18%	5% (north) 28% (Georgia)
Percent of admits who died	25% (author est)	30% (Cantlie)	26% (Frey)

Stepping into this sickly arena are British Physician Generals Pringle and Monro, to the relief of many who would have died without them. If one listed the most outstanding features of the British army in this period, firepower would be one and the accomplishments of these two men another. Pringle came first, serving in the War of Austrian Succession. Monro followed in the Seven Years War, greatly influenced by Pringle and building upon his work.

The abstracted descriptions of medical events as written by doctors Pringle and Monro will be given in this article as an insight into the influence disease had in these wars. An assumption that these written records could reflect the conditions prevailing for non-British armies as well can be based on two things.

First, the rationalization that troops in the same area, with similar living conditions and medical technology, would suffer similar living conditions and medical technology, would suffer similar afflictions.

Secondly, French accounts reflect similarities. It should be surmised, however, that Pringle and Monro enabled the British troops to enjoy better care than their French counterparts, for the said doctors were able to work in a British Medical Department consisting of a centralised hospital system run by physicians, surgeons, and apothecaries, while the French contracted services in a system of charnel houses run by profiteers.

Influence of Disease on the Mid-18th Century British Expeditions Flanders and Germany

Introduction
Sir John Pringle
Donald Monro