^{page 1 note a} See also the Diaries of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn. For the best scientific notices of the Plague see the works of Dr. Nathaniel Hodges' Loimologia, sive Pestis Londinensis Historia, 1665. Lond. 1671; an English translation was published in 1720; Dr. Thomas Sydenham's Practical Method for the Cure of the Plague, 1665; Dr. Hodgson's Journal of the Plague Year; London's Eemembrancer, by John Bell, Clerk to the Company of Parish Clerks, 1665; and Dr. K. Brookes's History of Pestilential Distempers, 1720.

^{page 2 note a} Calamy's Life of Baxter, vol. ii. p. 693, where he is called Thomas.

^{page 2 note b} Jeake's MS. Schemes of One Hundred and Fifty Nativities.

^{page 2 note c} Searches, endeavouring to identify his father, have been made for me in Boston by the Hon. Judge (C. H.) Warren and the zealous antiquary Mr. James Savage. John Allin, the first minister of the church of Dedham, in Massachusetts, went over to New England in 1637, after being disquieted by Bishop Wren when he preached in his diocese. According to Cotton Mather (Book iii. p. 133) he was appointed to Dedham in 1638, and continued minister till his death, 26th August, 1671. Mr. Savage states that his first wife, Margaret, died in April, 1653, and that he married in November following the young widow of old Governor T. Dudley, and had three children by her; but Mr. Savage thinks he had no son John.

^{page 3 note a} In a letter in the State Paper Office from Sir Thomas Peyton, dated from Knowlton, 7th August, 1665, to Joseph Williamson, lie says, “At Canterbury there were four houses shut up, but are all upon opening againe, there dying but one person of all diseases in that citty the last weeke. At Dover I hope the danger is ended, the family infected being removed to the hills, where the remnant is become sound agen. One parish in the countrey, being the minister's owne house, is infected, about three weekes since, which standing alone will I hope prevent the spreading, and wee have taken all the care possible wee can in it, but being harvest time wee find it difficult without good watches to keepe people in good order. God I hope will stay it here. That one parish of St. Giles at London hath done us all this mischiefe:” and Mr. Carew writing to Mr. Williamson from Dover on 12th August, 1665, hopes the Court as free from infection as they are there; “only one house wee keep shutt upp, yet not one dead out of itt these three weekes, nor sickness neer us but at Sandw^ch; one house shutt upp at Eastey near Sandw^ch; one house at the Earle of Winchelsees Park, called East Well House; and West Well one house; and att Canterbury seven houses shutt up, yet but a few dead out of them.”

^{page 4 note a} Janaes's Med. Diet. (1725), vol. ii. title, Cœlifolium: Merat and Lens' Dict. Mat. Med. (1835), title Nostock; Notes and Queries, vol. xi. pp. 219, 294.

^{page 4 note b} This was the Usnia barbata.

^{page 5 note a} On 24th February, 1664–5, he gives an illustration of the strange stories then afloat. “Some strange appearances have beene lately in Scotland. At a greate towne within this month appeared a greate army of men, w^ch came to the towne and demanded free quarter. Y^e officers of y^e towne demanded of the soldjers to shew why y^ey came and what order they had for free quarter, to w^ch they replied, ‘Yey^d neither shew y^m one nor the other, ’ but worded it so w^th y^m that free quarter was granted them; but before morning about 2 of y^e clocke appeared a light as large as the sun (y^e reports say y^e sun itselfe), and continued a greate while together, till at last both light and soldjers together at y^e same time vanished. Since y^t, at Northampton, w^re the walls are taken downe, y^e castle remayning, in y^e night, many being upon y^e watch, the castle-gates opened of themselves without hands; at w^ch they all admired and endeavoured all they could to shutt the gates agayne, but all the strength they could make was not able to prevayle for the shutting the gates;—after sometime that were thereby, as it were, p'pared for w^t might follow, there came this voice, itterated three times over, ‘Warr—warr—warr, such as never was yet;’ after that y^e gates were pliant to open and shutt as at other times. On Monday last was sennight, at night was seene by (some say) hundreds for about an houre together flames of fire as it were throwne from W. H. (Whitehall) to St. James, and thence backe againe to W. H. and then disappeared. Upon y^e top of this came yesterday the sudaine newes of the Dutch tyeing, as tis s^d, about 1, 500 tyed backe to backe and throwne over board.”

^{page 5 note b} Autobiography of Dr. Symon Patrick, Oxford, 1839, p. 51.

^{page 5 note c} See note post, p. 8.

^{page 6 note a} MS. State Paper Office, Domestic, June 1665.

^{page 6 note b} A form of prayer was issued. The fasts were kept regularly, except on All Souls' Day, 1666, till the Plague was stayed.

^{page 6 note c} This was a favourite preventative.

^{page 7 note a} On 14th June a proclamation was issued not to hold Barnwell Fair on 24th, for fear of infection at Cambridge, which was then free and clear. Proclamation was likewise issued at Salisbury on 7th August, prohibiting Bartholomew Fair, London; Stourbridge Fair, Cambridge; and all other fairs within fifty miles of London; all citizens and inhabitants of London were also prohibited from attending any fairs till the infection should cease; and, to prevent a concourse to places yet free, Howden Fair, and all other fairs in the county of York, were prohibited as well; as also on 21st September was Wantage Fair, in Berks, “to which there was usually extraordinary resort;” and on 26th December Saint Paul's Fair, Bristol.

^{page 8 note a} No less than 2, 500 died in Yarmouth of the Plague in this year, including both ministers of the church. —Swinden, p. 950. One of these ministers was another John Allin, who came over from New England, having taken his bachelor's degree in Harvard University in 1643.—Ex inf. Mr. James Savage. The disease had abated at the end of November, and on 4th December the Oxford Gazette announced that the whole bill of Yarmouth was thirteen, and only one of the Plague.

^{page 8 note b} In consequence of the loss of the registers the Eev. Edmund Kell, M.A. has not been able to give me the mortality in Southampton. Mr. John Buller's Hist. Particulars of Southampton (1820) states that the tradition was that the disease was introduced through infected child-bed linen. The poor were nearly starving; the King on being petitioned for pecuniary and medical relief promoted a subscription to which he gave 50l.; the Earl of Southampton 5l.; Salisbury and Bristol cities also contributed; in the whole nearly 2, 000l. were raised.

^{page 8 note c} It was brought to Dover by a young person who had been in service in London, and 900 at least died of it.—Hasted's Kent, iv. 97. See also note, ante, p. 3.

^{page 9 note a} He had three children, John, Elizabeth, and Hannah.

^{page 10 note a} Both reprinted by Pickering in his Christian Classics, 1847.

^{page 10 note b} Wife of Dr. J. Gauden, minister of Booking, Essex.—Add. MS. 5810, fol. 289, &c. see also his Autobiography.

^{page 11 note a} Tim. Long was rector.

^{page 16 note a} State Paper Office, Domestic, October, 1665.

^{page 16 note b} It began to appear at Colchester 14th August, 1665, and continued till 7th December, 1666, during which time there died 4, 731 persons, of whom 195 died in the week between 15th and 22nd June, 1666. —Morant's Essex, vol. i. p. 74. In the London Gazette, No. 70, 12th to 16th July, 1666, it is said that the infection was spreading extremely in Suffolk and Essex, and with such violence “as to leave many of those places fit objects for the charitable relief of other parts of the kingdom.” This was liberally afforded: 59l. 5s. 9d. had been collected by the Mayor of Exeter for the relief of Colchester, and the sum of 1, 311l. 10s.. was raised from weekly collections in the churches of the metropolis.—Cromwell's Colchester, p. 163. And, in consequence of the certificate of the justices of Essex that many other places besides Colchester were visited by the sickness, the assizes appointed to be holden at Brentwood on 9th August were directed not to be holden.—Gazette, No. 70.

^{page 16 note c} In consequence of the pestilence no fair was held at Ipswich on 14th September, 1666. So many inhabitants left the town that the rates oould not be collected. All public funerals were prohibited, and the bell was to toll only a quarter of an hour before any burial.—Clarke's Ipswich, p. 50.

^{page 16 note d} From 3rd October, 1665, to 3rd October, 1666, there died in Norwich 3, 012 persons; of the Plague, 2, 251. In one week, 22nd to 29th August, 1666, there died 203.—Blomefield's Norwich, i. 410. The returns of deaths in 1666 appeared regularly in the London Gazette, in which (No. 81) in August it was stated that Anthony Mingaye, merchant, at the sign of the Sun, in the Poultry, was authorised to receive subscriptions in aid of the town, which, on the 26th September (No. 91) was declared to be in a deplorable condition by reason of the continued raging of the sickness. The deaths from the Plague had decreased to fifteen on 28th November, 1666, and the last notice which appeared was on 2nd January, 1667, (No. 119, ) when eight only had died from the pestilence.

^{page 16 note e} Other parts of the south-western counties suffered considerably. At Winchester the school of the college was closed and not re-opened till 1st December, 1666, when “in all human appearance the sickness in that city and the suburbs was extinguished.”—London Gazette, No. 109. It had broken out at Salisbury on 6th September, 1665, without great virulence (Additional MS. 5810, fo. 287), but it re-appeared in June, 1666, and continued till December, 1666; the election of the mayor on 27th September taking place at an assembly in the close of the cathedral on account of the pestilence.—Hoare's City of Salisbury, p. 455. On 12th October, 1665, it had extended itself into other parts of Wiltshire. (Additional MS. 5810, fol. 291.) At'the end of October, 1665, it had also broken out in four houses at Sherburn, Dorset, but it soon ceased; and in a letter dated 5th December it is said that only one person had died of the Plague during twenty days, so that on the last Saturday they had a plentiful market of corn and other provisions, and several who had left the town had come home, and others were preparing for their return.—Oxford Gazette, Nos. 5, 8.

^{page 17 note a} According to the returns, the disease was very fatal in many parishes on the low sides of the Thames. At Lambeth, 537 died of Plague, mostly between July and December, 1665. At St. George the Martyr, Southwark, 1, 260, or one-fourth of the population; St. Olave's, 2, 785; St. Saviour's, 3, 446. At Bermondsey 1, 363 died, of whom there died in July 108, August 121, September 263, October 278 (of which number 185 were males), and November 111. In Stepney 8, 598 died in the year, of whom the Plague destroyed 6, 583, and on one day, 11th September, 1665, no less than 154 were buried. The population of the parish was so thinned that it became a difficulty to man the navy. At Deptford and Greenwich the disease raged with greater violence in 1666 than in the first year. At Deptford, 374 died of the pestilence in 1665, and 522 in the next year. In Greenwich, 416 died in the first year, and 423 in the next year of the Plague. In the upper part of the river it was not so bad. At Chelsea only 78 died of it; at Battersea only 113; at Wandsworth there were 245 in 1665, and 99 in 1666; at Putney, though the traffic was large, only 74 died of Plague; at Mortlake it was more fatal, 197 dying, of whom 122 died in September and October, 1665; at Barnes it was light, 19 only; at Brentford, 108; at Isleworth, 149; and Twickenham, only 21.

^{page 18 note a} Additional MS. 5810, fol. 295.

^{page 19 note a} Stowe gives this number, Book i. p. 226; but does not mention the total number of deaths. The whole population of the metropolis was under 600, 000, and many of these had removed out of town.

^{page 19 note b} Oxford Gazette, No. 16.

^{page 19 note c} London Gazette, No. 114.

^{page 19 note d} The registers of this date are lost.

^{page 19 note e} With the exception of these river-side parishes, the disease did not appear in a very fatal form in the villages round the metropolis. In Middlesex we find at Hampstead indeed that 214, or seven times the average number of deaths, occurred in 1665, but at Hackney 225 persons only died and the pestilence was less fatal than on the former visitation. At Hornsey 43 died of Plague; at Finchley only 38 deaths occurred; at Ealing 224 died between June and December; at Enfield 176 in the year; at Heston only 48 died in 1665; and 61 at Bromley St. Leonard's. It was light at Norwood; and at Kensington only 25 died of the pestilence. In the Essex villages the mortality was not so great as might have been anticipated since the towns suffered so much. At Stratford-le-Bow 139 died in the year; at Walthamstow only 68 were buried; at Woodford only 33; and at Chigwell only 6 died of the Plague in 1666.

The Surrey villages were comparatively free. At Newington the pestilence was very fatal; the registers are now lost, but the returns give 1, 004 deaths of Plague; beyond that place the disease was not virulent. At Camberwell 100 died in the year, and 33 at its hamlet Dulwich, being less than in 1603: at Croydon, between 27th July, 1665, and 22nd March, 1666, there were 141 deaths: but Clapham, Streatham, West Wickham, Carshalton, and Cheam wholly escaped.

In the Kent villages nearly the same exemption occurred. Lewisham was visited slightly, there being only 56 burials in 1665 and 52 in 1666; at Charlton only three or four deaths from the Plague; at Beckenham only 18 deaths in the year; at Chiselhurst only 21; at Eltham only 32 deaths from the pestilence; and at Bromley only 7.—Lysons.

^{page 20 note a} The town of Derby so severely suffered that it was almost forsaken, and to procure the necessaries of life the inhabitants erected at Nun's Green, outside the town, a market-stone or headless cross, where the market people, having their mouths primed with tobacco, left the provisions. The stone, with an inscription from Hutton, is now in the Derby Arboretum. In the villages of Derbyshire the disease appeared at one place, Eylam, from whence it did not spread. Archæologia, vol. VI. p. 82. But according to Bailey it was exceedingly bad at Newark, where one-third of the inhabitants died, and the grass grew in the streets.

^{page 20 note b} The northern and western counties almost escaped. The disease did not reach Lancashire (Baines), nor Sheffield (Hunter, p. 6). The last outbreak at Leeds was in 1645 (Whitaker), and at York in 1604 (Drake). The towns, however, on the Tyne were slightly infected. It appeared at Gateshead on 30th July, 1665 (Surtees, ii. p. 122); and on 11th November, 1665, it is stated from Newcastle, “When the sickness appeared first here (which is but of young date) we were not without the apprehension of a severe mortality, but it hath pleased God already to put a stop to its progress, there being not one person sick in the whole town, and those that were sent in the fields well recovered.”—Oxford Gazette, No. 2.

^{page 20 note c} Richards, Lynn, p. 1203.

^{page 20 note d} C. H. Cooper's Annals, iii 517, 20.

^{page 21 note a} London Gazette, No. 72.

^{page 21 note b} Ib. No. 124.

^{page 21 note c} Ib. No. 91, Annals of Camb. iii. 520.

^{page 21 note d} Bridges’ North, i. p. 399. He does not mention the Plague at Peterborough.

^{page 21 note e} The population is only 5, 000 at the present day.

^{page 21 note f} London Gazette, No. 98.

^{page 21 note g} Ib. No. 103.

^{page 21 note a} Ex inf. Mr. Thomas Close, F.S.A.