DescriptionThis thesis revisits the question of why a heated debate broke out in Boston in 1721-22 over smallpox inoculation, by exploring how emotions were integral to this eruption and decisions to be either for or against inoculation. Employing recent work on affect by Sara Ahmed and others, I examine how smallpox affected fear in the general public. I assert that as smallpox became epidemic, a climate of fear consumed Boston, and that these fears were a significant factor causing a debate to form over the new procedure of inoculation. Further, as smallpox impressed fears through circulation, these fears were predicated on individual histories, knowledge, and accepted truths. Decisions regarding whether or not to inoculate were dependent on these factors, on how smallpox impressed fear individually. Inoculators, those who would choose to inoculate themselves and their loved ones during the 1721-22 epidemic, did so for fear of smallpox’s deadliness and to avoid its ravages. However, since inoculation transmitted smallpox and was yet unproven infallible, anti-inoculators feared inoculation because smallpox’s affective economy easily slid onto inoculation. Inoculation, therefore, could not be fully accepted until it impressed widespread confidence instead of fear.