Introduction, p. lxxvi.

[103] _Ibid._ (_Annales Paulini_), p. 238. [104] _Ibid._ p. 304. [105] _Epistolae Cantuarienses_, Rolls series, No. 38, II. Introduction by Stubbs, p. xxxii. [106] _Epistolae Cantuarienses_, Rolls series, No. 38, II. Introduction by Stubbs, p. cxix. [107] Ralph of Coggeshall, Rolls series, No. 66, p. 156. [108] He might have been, and probably was, the prototype of the physician Nathan Ben Israel, in the 35th Chapter of _Ivanhoe_. [109] Adam de Marisco to Grosseteste, _Mon. Francisc._ ed. Brewer, I. 113. [110] I have not succeeded in finding this in the author’s writings, and quote it at second hand. [111] Quoted, without date, by Marchand, _Étude historique et nosographique sur quelques épidémies et endémies du moyen âge_. Paris, 1873. [112] I give this account of the obvious characters of spurred rye from a recent observation of a growing crop of it. [113] One of the greatest epidemics was in Westphalia and the Cologne district in 1596 and 1597. It fell to be described by two learned writers, Sennert and Horst, of whose accounts a summary is given by Short, _Air, weather, seasons, etc._ I. 275-285. [114] Translated into the _Philosophical Transactions_, No. 130, vol. XII. p. 758 (14 Dec. 1676) from the _Journal des Sçavans_. [115] _Studien über den Ergotismus_, Marburg, 1856. [116] Simeon of Durham and Roger of Howden have the following, under the year 1048: “Mortalitas hominum et animalium multas occupavit Angliae provincias, et ignis aereus, vulgo dictus sylvaticus, in Deorbensi provincia et quibusdam aliis provinciis, villas et segetes multas ustulavit.” [117] “Je crois qu’ils ont voulu indiquer l’ignis sacer ou de St Antoine, qui dans ces années et surtout 1044 sévit en France.” _Recherches de Pathologie Comparée_, vol. II. p. cxlviii. [118] On the other hand, Short, in his _General Chronological History of the Air, Weather, Seasons, Meteors etc._ (2 vols. London, 1749) says that the epidemic of 1110 consisted of “especially an epidemic erysipelas, whereof many died, the parts being black and shrivelled up;” and that in 1128, “St Anthony’s fire was fatal to many in England.” He gives no authority in either case. But the one error is run to earth in a French entry of 1109, “membris instar carbonum nigrescentibus” (Sig. Gembl. auctar. p. 274, Migne); the other, most likely, in the _ignis_ around Chartres, 1128 (Stephen of Caen, Bouquet, xii. 780). Perhaps this is the best place to express a general opinion on the work by Short, which is the only book of the kind in English previous to my own. It is everywhere uncritical and credulous, and often grossly inaccurate in dates, sometimes repeating the same epidemic under different years. It appears to have been compiled, for the earlier part, at least, from foreign sources, such as a Chronicle of Magdeburg, and to a large extent from a work by Colle de Belluno (fl. 1631). Many of the facts about English epidemics are given almost as in the original chronicles, but without reference to them. English experience of sickness is lost in the general chronology of epidemics for all Europe, and is dealt with in a purely verbalist manner. So far as this volume extends (1667) I have found Short’s book of no use, except now and then in calling my attention to something that I had overlooked. His other work, _New Observations on City, Town and County Bills of Mortality_ (London, 1750) shows the author to much greater advantage, and I have used his statistical tables for the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. [119] The facts were communicated to the Royal Society by Charlton Wollaston, M.D., F.R.S., then resident in Suffolk, and by the Rev. James Bones. They were referred by Dr G. Baker to Tissot of Lausanne, who replied that they corresponded to typical gangrenous ergotism. See _Phil. Trans._ vol. LII. pt. 2 (1762) p. 523, p. 526, p. 529; and vol. LX. (1768) p. 106. [120] An erroneous statement as to an epidemic of gangrenous ergotism, or of Kriebelkrankheit, in England in 1676, has somehow come to be current in German books. It has a place in the latest chronological table of ergotism epidemics, that of Hirsch in his _Handbuch der historisch-geographischen Pathologie_, vol. II. 1883 (Engl. Transl. II. p. 206), the reference being to Birch, _Philos. Transact._ This reference to ergotism in England in 1676 is given also in Th. O. Heusinger’s table (1856), where it appears in the form of “Schnurrer, nach Birch.” On turning to Schnurrer’s _Chronik der Seuchen_ (II. 210), the reference is found to be, “Birch, _Phil. Trans._ vols. XI. and XII.”; and coming at length to the _Philosophical Transactions_, it appears that vols. X., XI. and XII. are bound up together, that vol. XII. (1676) p. 758, contains an extract from the _Journal des Sçavans_ about ergot of rye in certain parts of France, and that there is nothing about ergotism in England in either vol. XI. or vol. XII. So far as concerns Dr Birch, he was secretary to the Royal Society in the next century. [121] Knighton, _De Eventibus Angliae_ in Twysden, col. 2580: “In aestate scilicet anno Gratiae 1340 accidit quaedam execrabilis et enormis infirmitas in Anglia quasi communis, et praecipue in comitatu Leicestriae adeo quod durante passione homines emiserunt vocem latrabilem ac si esset latratus canum; et fuit quasi intolerabilis poena durante passione: ex inde fuit magna pestilentia hominum.” [122] _Phil. Trans._ XXIII. p. 1174 (June 26, 1702). [123] _Op. cit._ I. pt. 2, p. 366. [124] _Phil. Trans._ XXII. (1700-1701), p. 799, a Letter in Latin from Joh. Freind dated Christ Church, Oxford, 31 March. [125] The earliest religious hysterias of Sweden fall in the years 1668 to 1673, which do not correspond to years of ergotism in that country, although there was ergotism in France in 1670 and in Westphalia in 1672. The later Swedish psychopathies have been in 1841-2, 1854, 1858, and 1866-68, some of which years do correspond closely to periods of ergotism in Sweden. [126] “Moriebantur etiam plures morbo litargiae, multis infortunia prophetantes; mulieres insuper decessere multae per fluxum, et erat communis pestis bestiarum.” Walsingham, _Hist. Angl._, _sub anno_; and in identical terms in the _Chronicon Angliae_ a Monacho Sancti Albani. [127] “Magna et formidabilis pestilentia extemplo subsecuta est Cantabrigiae, qua homines subito, prout dicebatur, sospites, invasi mentis phrenesi moriebantur, sine viatico sive sensu.” Walsingham, _Hist. Angl._ II. 186. Under the same year, 1389, the continuator of Higden’s _Polychronicon_ (IX. 216) says that the king being in the south and “seeing some of his prostrated by sudden death, hastened to Windsor.” [128] For example in the Sloane MS. 2420 (the treatise by Constantinus Africanus of Salerno), there are chapters “De Litargia,” “De Stupore Mentis,” and “De Phrenesi.” [129] Th. O. Heusinger, _Studien über den Ergotismus_, Marburg, 1856, p. 35: “Es werden freilich in den Beschreibungen einiger früheren Epidemieen öfter typhöse Erscheinungen erwähnt; die Beschreiber behaupten aber auch dann meist die Contagiosität der Krankheit, und es liegt die Vermuthung nahe, dass die Krankheit dann eigentlich ein Typhus war, bei dem die Erscheinungen des Ergotismus ebenso constant vorkommen, wie sie sonst in vereinzelteren Fällen dem Typhus sich beigesellen” (cf. ‘Dorf Gossfelden,’ in Appendix). [130] _History of Agriculture and Prices_, I. 27. [131] “Sed in fructibus arborum suspicio multa fuit, eo quod per nebulas foetentes, exhalationes, aerisque varias corruptiones, ipsi fructus, puta poma, pyra, et hujusmodi sunt infecta; quorum esu multi mortales hoc anno [1383] vel pestem letalem vel graves morbos et infirmitates incurrerunt.” Walsingham, _Hist. Angl._ II. 109. The continuator of Higden records under the same year, in one place a “great pestilence in Kent which destroyed many, and spared no age or sex” (IX. 27), and on another page (IX. 21) a great epidemic in Norfolk, which attacked only the youth of either sex between the ages of seven and twenty-two! [132] Walsingham, II. 203; Stow’s _Survey of London_, p. 133. [133] The spelling, and a few whole words, have been altered from Skeat’s text, so as to make the meaning clear. [134] Simpson, _Edin. Med. and Surg. Journ._ 1842, vol. LVII. p. 136. [135] Ralph of Coggeshall (Rolls ed. p. 156) describes the death of Hubert on 13 July, 1205, but does not mention the name of his physician. [136] Gilberti Anglici _Compendium Medicinae_, ed. Michael de Capella. Lugduni, 1512, Lib. VII. cap. “De Lepra,” pp. 337-345. [137] Bernardi Gordonii _Lilium Medicinae_. Lugd. 1551, p. 88. [138] _Compend. Med._ _Ed. cit._ p. 344. [139] _Lilium Medicinae._ Lugd. 1551, p. 89. [140] _Ibid._ p. 89. [141] For fuller reference, see p. 103. [142] _Philos. Trans. of Royal Society_, XXXI. 58: “Now in a true leprosy we never meet with the mention of any disorder in those parts, which, if there be not, must absolutely secure the person from having that disease communicated to him by coition with leprous women; but it proves there was a disease among them which was not the leprosy, although it went by that name; and that this could be no other than venereal because it was infectious.” He then quotes from Trevisa’s translation of Bartholomew Glanvile, _De proprietatibus rerum_, passages which he thinks relate to syphilis, although they are obviously the distinctive signs of lepra taken almost verbatim from Gilbertus Anglicus. He implies that the later so-called leper-houses of London were really founded for syphilis when it became epidemic. In the will of Ralph Holland, merchant taylor, mention is made of three leper-houses, the Loke, Hackenay and St Giles beyond Holborn Bars, as if these were all that existed in the year 1452. But in the reign of Henry VIII. there were six of them besides St Giles’s,--Knightsbridge, Hammersmith, Highgate, Kingsland, the Lock, and Mile End; and these, says Beckett, were used for the treatment of the French pox, which became exceedingly common after 1494-6. [143] Martin, _Histoire de France_, VII. 283. [144] One of Gascoigne’s references was copied by Beckett (_Phil. Trans._ XXXI. 47), beginning: “Novi enim ego, Magister Thomas Gascoigne, licet indignus, sacrae theologiae doctor, qui haec scripsi et collegi, diversos viros, qui mortui fuerunt ex putrefactione membrorum suorum et corporis sui, quae corruptio et putrefactio causata fuit, ut ipsi dixerunt, per exercitium copulae carnalis cum mulieribus. Magnus enim dux in Anglia, scil. J. de Gaunt, mortuus est ex tali putrefactione membrorum genitalium et corporis sui, causata per frequentationem mulierum. Magnus enim fornicator fuit, ut in toto regno Angliae divulgabatur,” etc. In the _Loci e Libro Veritatum_, printed by Thorold Rogers (Oxford, 1881), the following consequences are mentioned: “Plures viri per actum libidinosum luxuriae habuerunt membra sua corrupta et penitus destructa, non solum virgam sed genitalia: et alii habuerunt membra sua per luxuriam corrupta ita quod cogebantur, propter poenam, caput virgae abscindere. Item homo Oxoniae scholaris, Morland nomine, mortuus fuit Oxoniae ex corruptione causata per actum luxuriae.” p. 136. [145] _A most excellent and compendious method of curing woundes in the head and in other partes of the body; translated into English by John Read, Chirurgeon; with the exact cure of the Caruncle, treatise of the Fistulae in the fundament, out of Joh. Ardern, etc._ London, 1588. [146] MS. Harl. 2378:--No. 86 is: “Take lynsed or lynyn clothe and brēne it & do ye pouder in a clout, and bynd it to ye sore pintel.” Also, “Take linsed and stamp it and a lytel oyle of olyf and a lytl milk of a cow of a color, and fry them togeder in a panne, and ley it about ye pyntel in a clout.” No. 87 is “for bolnyng of pyntel.” No. 88 is “For ye kank’ on a mānys pyntel.” On p. 103 is another “For ye bolnyng of a mānys yerde.... Bind it alle abouten ye yerde, and it salle suage.” On folio 19: “For ye nebbe yt semeth leprous ... iii dayes it shall be hole.” “For ye kanker” might have meant cancer or chancre. The prescriptions in Moulton’s _This is the Myrour or Glasse of Helth_ (? 1540) correspond closely with these in the above Harleian MS. The printed book gives one (cap. 63), “For a man that is Lepre, and it lake in his legges and go upwarde.” There is also a prescription for “morphewe.” [147] Nicolas Massa, in Luisini. [148] Freeman, _The Reign of William Rufus_. App. vol. II. p. 499. [149] _L. c._ V. 679, “Episcopus Herefordensis polipo percutitur.--Episcopus Herefordensis turpissimo morbo videlicet morphea, Deo percutiente, merito deformatur, qui totum regnum Angliae proditiose dampnificavit;” and again V. 622. [150] _Compend. Med._ _Ed. cit._ p. 170. [151] _Lilium Med._ _Ed. cit._ p. 108. [152] Brassac, Art. “Elephantiasis” (p. 465) in _Dict. Encycl. des Sciences Médicales_. [153] _Rosa Anglica._ Papiae, 1492. [154] That Baldwin IV.’s disease excited interest in him is clear from the reference of William of Newburgh, who calls him (p. 242) “princeps Christianus lepram corporis animi virtute exornans.” [155] Chronicon de Lanercost (Bannatyne Club, p. 259): “Dominus autem Robertus de Brus, quia factus fuerat leprosus, illa vice [anno 1327] cum eis Angliam non intravit.” The rubric on folio 228 of the MS. has “leprosus moritur.” [156] The original account is by Gascoigne, _Loci etc._ ed. Rogers, Oxon. p. 228. [157] “Item matrimonium inter dominum regem et quandam nobilem mulierem nequiter impedivit, dum clanculo significavit eidem mulieri et suo generi, quod rex strabo et fatuus nequamque fuerat, et speciem leprae habere, fallaxque fuerat et perjurus, imbellis plusquam mulier, in suos tantum sacvientem, et prorsus inutilem complexibus alicujus ingenuae mulieris asserendo.” Matthew Paris, _Chron. Maj._, Rolls ed., III. 618-19. [158] _Chronicon Angliae_ in Twysden, col. 2600. [159] _Chronicle of Geoffrey le Baker_, edited by E. Maunde Thompson. Oxford, 1889, p. 100. [160] Professor Robertson Smith has kindly written for me the following note: “The later Jews were given to shorten proper names; and in the Talmud we find the shortening _La‘zar_ (with a guttural, which the Greeks could not pronounce, between the _a_ and the _z_), for Eliezer or Eleazar. Λάζαρος is simply _La‘zar_ with a Greek ending, and occurs, as a man’s name, not only in the New Testament but in Josephus (_B. Jud._ V. 13, 7). This was quite understood by early readers of the Gospels; the Syriac New Testament, translated from the Greek, restores the lost guttural, and uses the Syriac form, as employed in _1 Macc._ viii. 17 to render the Greek ’Ελάζαρος. Moreover the Latin and Greek _onomastica_ explain Lazarus as meaning ‘adjutus,’ which shows that they took it from (Hebrew) ‘to help’--the second element in the compound Eliezer. The etymology ‘adjutus’ (or the like) ‘helped by God,’ would no doubt powerfully assist in the choice of the designation lazars (for lepers). Suicer, in his _Thesaurus_, quotes a sermon of Theophanes, where it is suggested that every poor man who needs help from those who have means might be called a Lazarus.” Hirsch (_Geog. and Hist. Path._ II. 3) says that the Arabic word for the falling sickness comes from the same root (meaning “thrown to the ground”) as the Hebrew word “sâraat,” which is the term translated “leprosy” in Leviticus xiii. and xiv. In Isaiah liii. 4, the Vulgate has “et nos putavimus eum quasi leprosum,” where the English Bible has “yet we did esteem him stricken.” [161] Roger of Howden. Edited by Stubbs. Rolls series, No. 51, vol. I. p.