1873. (Transact. Camb. Antiq. Soc. 8vo. series, vol. XIV.)

[362] Cited by Jessopp, _l. c._ [363] See p. 141. [364] Clutterbuck, _History of Hertfordshire_. [365] Seebohm, for the Manor of Winslow, _op. cit._, p. 34. [366] Thorold Rogers, _Fort. Rev._ III. (1865), p. 196. In his _History of Agriculture and Prices_, IV., the same learned and sagacious student of English developments thus sums up the agrarian consequences of the Black Death:--“The indirect effects of this great event were even more remarkable. The great landowner ceases to carry on agriculture with his own capital, and farmers’ rents of a fixed and almost invariable amount take the place of the lord’s cultivation by bailiffs. Attempts were made for varying periods of time to continue the old system, especially by corporations. It is possible that the system of stock and land leasing, which became very general after the change commenced, may have been suggested by the hope that the old state of things might be restored.... In the end all the great landowners conformed to the inevitable change, and let their land on short leases, and as a rule at low and almost fixed rents, to capitalist farmers.” [367] Thorold Rogers, _op. cit._, I. 376. [368] _Rot. Parl._, II. 260. a. [369] Seebohm, _l. c._ _Fort. Rev._, II. (1865), p. 157. [370] Blomefield, III. _sub anno_. [371] Blomefield, III. _sub anno_. [372] Camden’s _Britannia_. Gough’s ed. II. 9. [373] _Hist. MSS. Commission_, VI. 299. Register of Ely Priory, in Lord Leconfield’s MSS. [374] Seebohm, “The Black Death and its Place in English History.” _Fort. Rev._ II. (1865), p. 278. [375] These and other labour-statutes are collected in _A History of the English Poor Law_, by Sir George Nicholls, 2 vols. London, 1854, I. 37-77. [376] G. Poulett Scrope, _op. cit._ [377] From 1416 to 1424, three different persons were fined at the manor court for keeping a common brothel in their houses. Forestalling of butter, cheese and eggs, on the way to market, came before the court in 1418. [378] At the manor court in 1417, Thomas Selwin, a butcher, was convicted of throwing offal and other offensive matters into the common street and of making his dung-heap there, to the common hurt; also the said Thomas Selwin “tarde et de novo erexit unam latrinam foetidam in shopa sua ad commune nocumentum. Ideo ipse in misericordia.” The next entry of nuisances, so far as extracts are given, is as late as 1590--various offences in the street and churchyard, and the glover washing his skins in the stream or otherwise befouling the water running by his house. [379] Cited in Owen and Blakeway’s _History of Shrewsbury_, II. 524: “per advenas qui in dicta villa post ultimam pestilenciam de novo sunt inhabitati ... at regimen dictae ville ad se attrahere ... machinantes.” By the “ultima pestilencia” could hardly have been meant the pestis secunda of 1361, the year of the patent, as the learned antiquaries suppose. [380] _Rotul. Parl._ IV. 60. 7. The petition of Chesterton, near Cambridge: “And also they seiden that there was made gret waste in the same Manor of Chesterton of Housing, that is to say of Halles and of Chambers, and of other houses of office, that were necessary in the same Manor, and none housinge left standing therein, but gif it were a Shepcote or a Berne or a Swynsty and a few houses byside to putte in bestes.” [381] “After the cessation of the Black Plague a greater fecundity in women was everywhere remarkable--a grand phenomenon which, from its occurrence after every destructive pestilence, proves to conviction, if any occurrence can do so, the prevalence of a higher power in the direction of general organic life. Marriages were almost without exception prolific,” etc. [382] _Eulogium Historiarum_, III. 213. [383] _Fasciculi Zizan._ Rolls series, No. 5, ed. Shirley, p. 263: “Dimitto alias rationes palpabiles: quod exhinc regnum nostrum sensibiliter depauperetur pecunia; quod, praetextu subtractionis hujus thesauri, qui expenderetur in Anglia, decrescit populus;” etc. [384] _Political Songs and Poems, Ed. II.-Ric. II._ Rolls series, No. 14, ed. T. Wright, I. 2. 53. [385] The only monograph that I know is Peinlich’s _Pest in Steiermark_, 2 Bde. Graz, 1877-78. From 1349 to 1716, seventy years are marked in the annals of Styria as plague-years. Corradi gives the plague-years in Italy in his _Annali_. [386] Guy de Chauliac for Avignon, in Häser, III. 176. Other foreign references in the same work. [387] _Political Songs and Poems. Ed. II.-Ric. II._ Rolls series, No. 14, ed. T. Wright, I. 173, 190, &c. [388] _Ibid._ I. 229, from a MS. in the library of Cambridge University. [389] The spelling has been modernized, a few old words changed, and the division into verses omitted. [390] _Chronicon Angliae_, by a monk of St Albans. Rolls ed. [391] Harleian MS. No. 1568, “Chronicle of England to A.D. 1419.” (Printed with additions at the St Albans press about 1484.) [392] Skeat, whose great edition of ‘The Vision of Piers the Ploughman,’ has been brought out by the Early English Text Society, thinks that the ironical reference (Passus XIII. 248) to the pope sending a salve for the pestilence applies particularly to the “Fourth Pestilence” of 1375 and 1376, which was the _pestis tertia_ of some chronicles. [393] Flux and fever from famine are alone mentioned in the poems of John of Bridlington, which cover the period from the Black Death to the reign of Richard II. [394] Egerton MS. No. 2572, Sloane MS. 443 (“xiv. cent.”), as well as several copies of the 15th century. [395] Lansdowne MS. 285, fol. 220. [396] Mr Warner identifies him with the person who invented “Sir John Mandeville” and the travels of Sir John. See an article in the _Quarterly Review_, April, 1891. [397] Sloane MS. (British Museum) No. 2276, fol. 191-199. [398] ‘A passing gode lityll boke necessarye and behouefull azenst the Pestilence.’ British Museum, case 31, e. 13, 4to, twelve leaves. The MS. begins as follows: “Here begynneth a lytell boke necessary and behouefull azens the pestylence.” [399] Dibdin (_Antiq. Typogr._ II. 19) assigns the printing to Machlinia, and reproduces a page as a sample of his common type. Bliss (_Reliquiae Hearnianae_, II. 117) says that this sample page does not correspond with that of the British Museum copy. He adds that there is a fragment of the printed book in the library of St Peter’s College, Cambridge, “pasted within the wooden covers of the binding of an edition (1499) of _Discipuli Sermones_.” [400] In the earliest printed Latin texts of this work (Antwerp, 1485? Leipzig, 1495? and versified in Albertus Magnus, ‘De Virtute Herbarum,’ 1500?) he is named Kamitus, bishop of Arusia, a city in the realm of Denmark. In the copy of the English version in the British Museum, someone has called him Ramicius, having written on a leaf, “Ramicius Episcopus Arusiensis civitatis Daciae Regimen contra pestem,” with the date 1698. The name of Kamitus, being judged improbable on the face of it, has been changed in the catalogue of the British Museum library into Canutus. But there was no Canutus among the bishops of Aarhus, nor a Kamitus, nor a Ramicius. The two bishops that appear to suit best are Olaus, or Olaf, who was bishop from 1371 to 1388, and Ulricus or Udalricus, or Olric Stycka, who succeeded in 1425 and held the see until 1449. Curiously enough, the latter, when he went to Rome in 1425 to represent Eric, king of Pomerania in a suit with the dukes of Sleswig, figures throughout the records of the suit as “Olaus, episcopus Arosiensis,” although Olaus, bishop of Arusia, belonged to a former generation. It is, of course, the merest guessing; but I am inclined to think that the author of the essay on plague was either bishop Olaus, of 1371-1388, or bishop Udalricus, of 1425-1449, a man of character and ability, who also went by the name of Olaus; and that in any case the manuscript version of the essay in the English tongue is more likely to have been of the early part of the fifteenth century than of the fourteenth. The above facts are collected from various parts of Langbeck’s _Script. Rer. Dan._: the “Series Episcoporum Arhusiorum” is in vol. VII. p. 212. Nothing is there said of any bishop of Aarhus having written a book, or having been a physician at Montpellier. [401] These words (“the impressions”) are contracted in the printed book, exactly as in the manuscript. I have modernised the spelling for the most part. [402] “When a man feeleth himself infect, as soon as he may, let him be let blood plenteously till he swoon: then stop the vein. For a little letting of blood moveth or stirreth venom.... Let him blood on the side of the body where the swelling appeareth. Therefore if a swelling appear under the right arm, let blood in the middle of the same arm, in the vein called _mediana_. If it appear under the left arm, let him blood in midst of the same, or in the vein of the liver which is about the little finger. And if it be about the share, let him blood about the heel upon the same side. If the swelling be in the neck, let him blood in the vein called _cephalica_, about the thumb in the hand of the same side; or in the vein the which is called _mediana_ of the same arm, or in the hand of the same side about the little finger. And, overmore, if the swelling appear about the ear, let him blood in the vein called _cephalica_ of the same side, or in the vein which is between the long finger and the thumb, lest many venomous things go into the brain.” If the swelling is in the shoulders, bleed from the _mediana_: if on the back from _pedica magna_, and so on. [403] Walsingham, _Hist. Angl._ I. 309. Adam of Murimuth, Engl. Hist. Soc. [404] The Stratford bread-carts are explained in Stow’s _Survey of London_ (“Lime Street Ward”). In the famines of 1512 and 1527, they were besieged on the way by hungry citizens and had to be guarded. The same phrase of bread being “gesen” or scarce, occurs in a letter of 4 September, 1535, from Thomas Broke to Cromwell, secretary of State: “never knew good bread so geason in London at this time of the year; it is so musty, and of so evil wheat, that it is rather poisonous than nourishing; what was sold for a halfpenny, when you were here, is now a penny.” (_Cal. State Papers_, Henry VIII. vol. IX. § 274.) [405] Thorold Rogers. _A Short English Chronicle_, Camden Soc. 1880:--“45 Edward III. This yere was called the grete dere yere, and that same yere was a quarter of whete at iiii nobles.” [406] Wilkins, _Concilia_, III. 74: “De orando pro cessatione pestilentiae,” dated Slyndon, 10 Cal. Aug. A.D. MCCCLXVIII. [407] Sharpe, _Cal. of Wills_, vol. II. [408] Otterbourne (ed. Hearne, p. 133) says that the _pestis tertia_ was in 1368, and that it lasted two years. Nicolas (_Chronol. of History_, p. 389) gives from a Lansdowne MS. (no. 863, fol. 107) of the time of Charles I., the duration of the _pestis tertia_ as 2 July--29 Sept., 1369, which should probably read “2 July, 1368--29 Sept. 1369.” [409] _Memorials of London_, etc. from the Council Records. Edited by H. T. Riley. Lond. 1867, p. 339 and p. 356. [410] Walsingham, _Hist. Angl._ I. 319; Adam of Murimuth. [411] The chroniclers are not agreed as to the chronology of the various 14th century plagues from the first (the Black Death) to the fifth. Some of the enumerations are clearly erroneous. Thus in _A Short English Chronicle_ from the Lambeth MS. (ed. Gairdner for the Camden Society, 1880), the plague of 1361 is erroneously called “the threde pestilence,” while the fourth is assigned to 1369 and the fifth to 1377 (for 1375). Otterbourne places the _quarta_ in 1374 (for 1375), and the _quinta_ (as others do) in 1391; but in the _Life of Richard II._, by a monk of Evesham, the pestilence of 1382 is more correctly reckoned the fifth from the Black Death. [412] Walsingham, _Hist. Angl._ I. 409. _Chronicon Angliae_, p. 239. [413] _Rot. Parl._ IV. 806. [414] _Ibid._ III. pp. 139 a, 147 a. [415] Blomefield’s _History of Norfolk_, III. p. 111. [416] Continuator of Higden, IX. 14. [417] _Political Songs and Poems._ Rolls series, No. 14, I. p. 252:-- “The rysyng of the comuynes in londe, The pestilens, and the eorthe-quake-- Theose three thinges I understonde.” [418] Walsingham, _Hist. Angl._ II. 109. [419] Continuator of Higden, IX. 21, 27. [420] _Eulogium Historiarum_, III. 369. Otterbourne, ed. Hearne: “From the nativity of St John Baptist to the feast of St Luke,” 1391. [421] Continuator of Higden, IX. 216. [422] _Ibid._ 237. [423] Walsingham, _Hist. Angl._ II. 186. [424] Blomefield’s _History of Norfolk_, III. 113:--“1390. A great mortality increased in Norfolk and in many other counties in England, and it seemed not unlike the season of the great pestilence: it was occasioned by a great want of victuals, that forced many people to eat unwholesome food, and so brought distempers upon them. This dearth began under the sickle, and lasted to the following harvest [1391], but was not so much for want of corn, as money to purchase it, occasioned by the law made in relation to wool, by which wool became dog-cheap; for a stone of chosen and picked wool of the best sort was sold for 3 sh. and some for 22 pence or 2 sh., so that in these times the woollen manufacture was the great support of the nation.” According to Thorold Rogers, these high prices of wool obtained from 1364 to 1380. [425] Walsingham, II. 203. The Continuator of Higden (IX. 259) says 12,000. These estimates are, of course, the merest guesses, and extreme exaggerations. The whole population of York would have been under 15,000. [426] Higden, _ibid._ [427] Walsingham, II. 213; St Albans Annals of Ric. II. and Hen. IV. [428] Walsingham, II. 276. The Chronicle of William Gregory (Camden Society, ed. Gairdner) enters under the year 1407, a great frost, for twenty-five weeks. It would be of real scientific interest to know the chronology exactly, whether the plague followed or preceded the long cold drought; but the year of the plague is disputable, if any heed be paid to the date of 1406, given by later compilers. [429] Walsingham, II. 297. Otterbourne, under 1411, says plague in Gascony. [430] Annals of Bermondsey, in _Annales Monast._ Rolls ed. III. 485. [431] _Rot. Parl._ IV. 143 a. It is probably under 1420 that the “great plague” at Newcastle, given in so many words in Brand’s _History_ under 1410, should be placed. [432] _Ibid._ 148 b. [433] _Histor. Collec. of a Citizen of London, 15th cent._ Camden Soc. ed. Gairdner, 1876: “They dyde faster every day Thenn men myght them in erthe lay.” [434] _History of Agriculture and Prices in England_, IV. 105. [435] Chronicle of Croyland, in Gale, I. 518; Rogers, IV. 233. [436] Denton. London, 1886, p. 92. [437] Mackay, _The English Poor_. London, 1890, p. 40. [438] W. Cunningham, _Growth of English Industry and Commerce_. 2nd ed. Camb. 1890, p. 105. He reproduces Denton’s statement that “there was chronic typhoid in the towns.” Denton professes to have found this in Hecker, who had certainly no knowledge of English towns in the 15th century, and is, in general, more entertaining as a _philosophe_ than trustworthy for erudition. [439] In 1741, during a prevalence of fever all over England, we hear of bread made of horse-beans, pease, and coarse unsound barley as the chief food of the poor. (_Gent. Magaz._ letters of 27 Nov. 1741 and 11 Jan. 1742). Thorold Rogers (_Agric. and Prices_, v. Preface) thinks that the staple food of the English labourer, wheaten bread, had first been changed, especially in the North, to rye, barley and oat bread, in the 17th century during the Civil Wars. [440] _Paston Letters._ Ed. Gairdner, 1872, II. 254: John Wymondham of Fellbrigg to John Paston, 10th Nov. “And forasmuch as there was a child dead at Asteleys, and one other like to be dead in the same place, what time I rode out about my little livelihood, my lady and I both thought pity on my mistress your wife to see her abide there, and desired her to come to my poor house, unto such time as you should be otherwise avised.” [441] _Histor. MSS. Commission_, IX. 127 b. [442] _Calendar of State Papers._ Venetian, vol. I. § 236. [443] _Proceedings and Ordinances of the Privy Council._ Ed. Nicolas, III. p. xlv. [444] _Rot. Parl._ IV. 420 b. [445] _Arnold’s Chronicle_, p. xxxii. [446] _Proc. and Ord. Privy Council_, IV. p. lxxx. Sir Harris Nicolas, in this connexion, remarks that Fabyan and all other chroniclers (he had overlooked Arnold) omit to mention pestilence, while they mention much less important things; but he is hardly warranted in his inference that plagues were so common-place as to be left unrecorded. A low level of plague would not be noticed, but a great epidemic certainly would. [447] Johannes Amundesham (of St Albans), _Annales_. Rolls ed. II. 127. [448] _Rot. Parl._ V. 31 b. [449] This is the only plague in the first half of the fifteenth century that Anthony Wood records; but he says, under the year 1500, that “no less than about thirty pests, both great and small, happened in this last century”--i.e. in the University of Oxford. I shall speak of their general effects in another chapter. [450] _Paston Letters._ Ed. Gairdner, 1872, I. 302-3. [451] _Three Fifteenth Century Chronicles._ Ed. Gairdner, for the Camden Society, 1880, from the Lambeth MSS., p. 163. [452] Sir J. Paston to John Paston, 30 April, 1465. Another letter, of 18th August, has: “For the pestilence is so fervent in Norwych, that they dare no longer abyde there, so God help!” (_Paston Letters_, ed. Gairdner, II. 226), which probably refers to 1465 also. It is not mentioned by Blomefield. [453] _Chronicle of Croyland_, in Gale, I. 541. [454] Communicated to me by the Rev. W. Hunt, from a new volume of the Camden Society, edited by A. F. Leach, _Visitations and Memorials of Southwell Minster_, p. 11. [455] Tickell, _History of Kingston upon Hull_, 1798. [456] _Warkworth’s Chronicle._ Camden Society, p. 23 (under the year 13 Ed. IV.). [457] _Chronicle of the Greyfriars._ Camden Society, No. 53, 1852, p. 22. [458] Robert Fabyan’s _Chronicle of England_, (editions in 1516 and 1533, and by Ellis, 1808), _sub anno_. [459] _Grafton’s Chronicle_, p. 742. [460] Brand’s _History of Newcastle_. [461] _Visitations and Memorials_, p. 41. [462] Blomefield. [463] Paston, 6 Nov. 1479. [464] Fordoun, _Scotichronicon_, ed. Hearne, Oxon. 1722, p. 1039. [465] _Scotichronicon_, p. 1056: “eadem ... sicut prius jubileo ... in toto regno Scotiae mirabiliter saeviebat.” [466] _Exchequer Rolls of Scotland._ Introduction to vol. II. p. xlviii. [467] _Scotichronicon_, p. 1141. [468] _Exchequer Rolls of Scotland_, III. 650. [469] _Ibid._ III. 310. [470] _Ibid._ III. 553. [471] _Ibid._ III. 579. [472] _Scotichronicon_, p. 1287 and p. 1298. [473] Cited by R. Chambers (_Domestic Annals of Scotland_, I. 57) from the Chronicle as printed by Thomas Thomson. [474] _Scotichronicon_, p. 1565. Hearne’s edition. [475] Ferrerius, f. 393, cited in _Excheq. Rolls of Scot._ VIII. p. lx. [476] _Excheq. Rolls of Scot._ VIII. 364. Accounts of William, bishop of Orkney, from 5 Aug. 1475 to 3 Aug. 1476: “et decem martis liberatis, de tempore pestis, egrotantibus in Incheskeith.” Another item (£30. 13_s._ 4_d._) is for forty-six marts destroyed “propter longam moram” in the lairs at Leith, “anno pestis, videlicet anno ultimo.” [477] But MS. annals are cited for the date 1361, in _The ancient and present State of the County and City of Cork_. By Charles Smith, M.D. 2 vols. Dublin, 1774. 2nd ed. II. p. 23. [478] Thady Dowling [Elizabethan] “1370. Pestilentia magna in Hibernia, adeo quod propter immensitatem mortalitatis vocabatur ab antiquis tertia,” p. 24. [479] Dowling, p. 27. [480] _Angl. Hist._ Basil. 1555, p. 567. [481] In Gale, _Script. Angl._ I. 573. [482] British Museum Addit. MS., No. 27,582. [483] _Materials illustrative of the Reign of Henry VII._ Rolls series, No. 60, s. d. [484] _Tractatus contra pestilentiam thenasmonem et dissinteriam_ [Rouen, 1490]:--“Causae pestilentiae ut alias scripsimus: in quodam opusculo quod composuimus de quadam rabiosa febre pestilentiali, quae in duodecim horis patientes cum calore et sudore continuo interficiebat. Cujus febris adventus incepit sua vexilla extendere in Anglia in civitate Londoniarum decima nova die mensis Septembris 1485, in qua die [planetary signs] posuerunt. Ex qua febre pestilentiali plus quam quindecim millia hominum ab hoc seculo morte repentina, tanquam ex pugnitione divina, recesserunt, multique sine mora per vicos deambulantes absque confessione obierunt.” [485] MSS. Cotton. Vitellius A. XVI. _A Chronicle of England from 1st Henry III. to 1st Hen. VIII._ [486] The Croyland Chronicle (in Gale’s _Script. Angl._ I. 570 and 576) gives the 14th November in one place and the 14th October in another. But it is clear that the latter is the correct date, the letter from the prior of Croyland to Henry VII., announcing the death of the abbot and praying for a _congé d’élire_, being dated the 14th of October. (_Materials illustrative of the Reign of Henry VII._ vol. I. s.d. 21 Oct. 1485, Rolls series, No. 60.) [487] Anthony Wood, I. 462. [488] _The Maire of Bristowe is Kalendar_ (by Robert Ricart, town-clerk of Bristol, 18 Ed. IV.). Camden Society, 1872, p. 46. [489] The Bristol calendar says: “This yere Hary, Erle of Richmond landed at Milford Haven.... And sone after there was a sodeyn sikenes in all places of Englond called the sweting syknes, whereof moche people dyed.” [490] The date of 1506 in Hecker is erroneous, having been taken from the very loose entry in Hall’s chronicle (copied by Grafton), which might equally well belong to the year 1507. Bernard André’s date of 1508 is unmistakeable; his annals go on continuously until the death of Henry VII. in April following. [491] Bernard André’s _Works_. Rolls series, No. 10, pp. 126-8. [492] Hemingway’s _History of Chester_, I. 142. [493] Anthony Wood’s _History and Antiquities of the Univ. of Oxford_. I. 665. [494] Calendared for the Rolls series by Brewer for the greater part of the reign of Henry VIII. (1509-1530), and after him by Gairdner, at present as far as 1538. The facts given in the next few pages may be taken as coming from the Calendar of State Papers, under their respective dates, unless it is otherwise stated in the notes. [495] This appears to have been a common direction. In a letter of 12 August, 1517, dated from the Fleet Prison by Thomas Leeke to his brother sir John Leeke (_Hist. MSS. Commission Reports_, X. pt. 4, p. 447), the writer says he has been sore vexed with the sweat and in danger of life: “If any of you have it, pray you to keep well and close about your breasts and your heart for twenty-four hours and then with God’s grace there is no danger in it: there has been a marvellous great death for so short a time.” [496] In the letter of 12 August from the Fleet Prison, already quoted (_Hist. MSS. Reports_, _l. c._), it is stated that fifteen are dead in the Cardinal’s house, including Mr Cowper, the steward, Talboys, lord of Kyme, young Wastness, and one Grenell. In my lord of Durham’s house, Dr Port and Dr Fysche are dead, with divers others. Of the Court, my lord Clinton, Mr Morgan, steward to the Queen, and one Mat. Jones, of the King’s wardrobe, were buried at Richmond on Friday last, and divers more of the Court are dead. [497] _The Pitiful Life of King Edward the Fifth_: “Considering there is, as physicians say, and as we also find, double the peril in the relapse that was in the first sickness,” p. 230. Camelot edition. [498] Anthony Wood, _Hist. and Antiq._, _sub anno_ 1517. [499] Hemingway’s _History of Chester_, I. 142. [500] The letter bears the date of 8 June, which would make the first of the sweat the same as in Tuke’s letter; but Brewer says the date should be the 18th June. [501] Brewer (_Cal. State Papers_) reads the letter, “On Tuesday one of the ladies of the chamber, Mlle de Boulan, was infected with the sweat.” But P. Friedmann (_Anne Boleyn_, Lond. 1884, I. 72) says the correct reading is a fille-de-chambre of Mlle de Boulan; and it is known that Anne Boleyn did not take the sweat until some days after. [502] In the _History of Cork_ by C. Smith, M.D. (2nd ed., 1774) there is an entry under 1528: “a malignant disorder called the sweating sickness in Cork,” with a reference to “MS. annals.” It has been generally supposed that the sweat did not enter Ireland or Scotland in any of its five outbreaks. [503] The German writers have assumed that the sweat was prevalent abroad really in the same summer or autumn as in England, explaining the discrepant dates by the difference in the English calendar. But it was only the months of January and February, and March to the 24th, that were counted in the old year in England; the months of June, July, August, etc. in which the sweat occurred, are the same in the English and foreign calendar-years. In the English chronology of the sweat, those months belong quite clearly to the year 1528; and, in the German, Swiss, and Netherlands chronology of the sweat, just as clearly to the year 1529. The sweat on the Continent was a year later than in England. [504] Gruner’s _Scriptores de sudore Anglico superstites_ was reprinted by Häser, with additional citations and notes, in 1847. Hecker (_Der Englische Schweiss_, 1834) refers to the work by Gruner, _Itinerarium sudoris Anglici ex actis designatum_, Jena, 1805, which I have been unable to see. The account of the German invasion in the text is accordingly at second-hand. [505] _A boke or counseill against the Sweate_, London, 1552. _De Ephemera Britannica_, London, 1555. [506] “This yere the swetinge sycknes raignyd in England, and began first in this towne of Shrowsbery the xxii of Marche, and ran through the realme, and began in London the ixth of July.” Quoted from MS. Chronicle, in Owen and Blakeway’s _History of Shrewsbury_, p. 345. [507] _Op. cit._ 1552, fol. 10. In the Latin work the date at “Salopia” is “17 Kal. May.” [508] Nichols, _Leicestershire_, III. 891. [509] Edrichus, _In libros aliquot Pauli Æginetae_, &c. London, 1588 (not paged). [510] “Diary of Edward VI.” in Burnet’s _Hist. of Reformation_. Stow (_Annales_) says it began on the 9th July and was most vehement on the 12th. [511] _Calendar of State Papers._ Domestic (under the date). [512] _Machyn’s Diary._ Camden Society, No. 42, edited by J. Gough Nichols, p. 7. Machyn was an undertaker, and records deaths and funerals. [513] Machyn. [514] _Ibid._ p. 8. [515] Letter from London, in Harl. MS. No. 353, f. 107, cited by Nichols in notes to Machyn. [516] Caius, _Boke or Counseill_, 1552, ff. 10-11. [517] The Venetian ambassador (_Cal. S. P._ Venetian, v. 541) says that the sweat was at an end in London in twenty days. He says, also, that children under ten years were not subject “questo influsso.” The excitement caused by the London epidemic is shown in an entry of money in the corporation records of Canterbury: “1551. To one of the King’s servants that brought word how many were dede in the swett.” (_Hist. MSS. Commiss._ IX. 154 b.) [518] Edward VI. to Fitzpatrick. [519] Drake’s _Eboracum_, p. 128. [520] Nichols, notes to Machyn, giving a reference to _Gent. Magaz._ 1825, II. 206. [521] Fuller (ed. Nichols, p. 183) says, under 1551: “Many in Cambridge died of this sweating sickness, patients mending or ending in twenty-four hours.” The death of the two young noblemen was made an occasion for copies of verses by members of the University. [522] Strype, _Memorials_, III. chap. 7 (cited in notes to Machyn). [523] Lysons, _Magna Britannia_, VI. 539. [524] _Calendar of State Papers._ Venetian, V. 541, under the date of 18 Aug. 1554. [525] Thomas Cogan, ‘The Haven of Health: chiefly made for the comfort of students, and consequently for all those that have a care of their health, amplified uppon fiue wordes of Hippocrates, written Epid. 6. Labour, Meate, Drinke, Sleepe, Venus.... Hereunto is added a Preseruation from the Pestilence: with a short Censure of the late sicknesse at Oxford.’ London,