Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T14:55:47.093Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Controlling corruption: regulating meat consumption as a preventative to plague in seventeenth-century London

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 2009

MARGARET DOREY
MARGARET DOREY*
Affiliation:
School of Humanities, University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Seventeenth-century medical theory saw epidemic diseases like the plague as being caused by stinking miasmas resulting from putrefying matter polluting the air. The butchers' trade was singled out in London as a major polluter, implicated in both the regulatory literature and popular images as corrupting both the physical and moral health of the City and its citizens. Controlling the food trades, especially the butchers', was therefore an essential part of containing environmental pollution and preventing disease.

Type
Research Article
Information
Urban History , Volume 36 , Issue 1 , May 2009 , pp. 24 - 41
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Cook, H., ‘Policing the health of London: the College of Physicians and the early Stuart monarchy’, Social History of Medicine, 2 (1989), 1–33CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; M. Jenner, ‘Early modern conceptions of “cleanliness” and “dirt” as reflected in the environmental regulation of London c. 1530 – c. 1700’, Oxford University Ph.D. thesis, 1991.

2 Slack, P., The Impact of Plague in Tudor and Stuart England (London, 1985), 4Google Scholar.

3 See ibid., 146, for the relative burial figures. The outbreaks of 1603, 1625 and, to a lesser degree, 1609 and 1636 led to a far greater number of deaths that were attributed to plague than that of 1630.

4 Slack, P., ‘Books of orders: the making of English social policy, 1577–1631’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th ser., 30 (1980), 7CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 Ibid., 2–7.

6 Cook, ‘Policing the health of London’, 30–1.

7 Corporation of London, Remembrancia, vol. VII, letter 56. Consulted on microfilm held at the London Metropolitan Archives. Numbering used is that found on the right-hand side of each document and is consistent with that found in the Corporation of London, Analytical Index, to the Series of Records Known as the Remembrancia. Preserved among the Archives of the City of London A.D. 1579–1664 (London 1878).

8 The Sabbath was a contested term with debates focusing not only on whether the Sabbath should be strictly observed, but also on whether the term ‘Sabbath’ referred to Saturday or Sunday. See Katz, D.S., Sabbath and Sectarianism in Seventeenth-Century England (Leiden, 1988)Google Scholar, ch. 1; and J. Dennison, The Market Day of the Soul: The Puritan Doctrine of the Sabbath in England, 1532–1700 (Lanham, MD, 1983).

9 England and Wales, A Collection of Such Statutes as Are Now in Force and Made in the Reigns of K. Ed. 6, Queen Eliz., K. James 1st, & K. Charles the 1st which Enjoyn the Observation of Lent, and Other Fish Days throughout the Year, with the Reasons for Enjoyning the Same (London, 1685).

10 Godly ministers and parliamentarians called for the strict observance of the Sabbath and for frequent daylong fasts determined by personal conscience and as crises warranted, but argued against the observance of set liturgical fasts. The crown and the bishops, especially under Charles I, disapproved of godly fasting, confining fast days to those officially part of the church calendar or as ordered by the crown during periods of crisis, with Sundays designated a day of rest. While the puritans emphasized personal admonition through sermons to bring about proper humiliation and repentance, and had a far greater belief in providence as first cause, the episcopacy under Laud advocated the use of set prayers as ordained by authority, and Charles I's policies placed greater emphasis on medical explanations of disease. Durston, C., ‘“For the better humiliation of the people”: public days of fasting and thanksgiving during the English Revolution’, Seventeenth Century, 7 (1992), 129–49Google Scholar; Durston, C. and Eales, J., ‘Introduction: the Puritan ethos 1560–1700’, in Durston, C. and Eales, J. (eds.), The Culture of English Puritanism (London, 1996), 21Google Scholar; Walsham, A., Providence in Early Modern England (Oxford, 1999)Google Scholar, especially 156–66; Webster, T., Godly Clergy in Early Stuart England: The Caroline Puritan Movement, c. 1620–1643 (Cambridge, 1997), 60–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11 England and Wales, Statutes at Large, in Paragraphs and Sections or Numbers, from the Magna Carta to the End of the Session of Parliament, March 14 1704 (London, 1706), vol. I, 792. In 5 Eliz. 5 Cap. XI Elizabeth ordered that Wednesdays were to be ‘used and observed as a fish day . . . as the Saturdays in every week be or ought to be observed’ marking both Wednesdays and Saturdays as fast days, though they were kept for different reasons.

12 ‘August 1642: an ordinance for the better observation of the monethly fast’, in C.H. Firth and R.S. Rait (eds.), Acts and Ordinances of the Interregnum, 1642–1660 (1911), 22–4. URL: www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=55738&strquery=fast. Date accessed: 27 Oct. 2008; Durston, ‘For the better humiliation of the people’, 132–4, these fasts were observed by parliament throughout the Civil War, but discontinued after Charles I's execution in 1649. Charles changed the day of fasting for his forces to Fridays.

13 Durston, ‘For the better humiliation of the people’, 130–1; W. Crashaw, Londons Lamentation for her Sinnes and Complaint to the Lord her God . . . Together with a Souereigne Receipt against the Plague (London, 1625), see the ‘Epistle dedicatory’.

14 Corporation of London, Remembrancia, vol. VII, letters 64 and 66.

15 Slack, Impact of Plague, 151 and 213–15.

16 Slack, ‘Books of orders’, 10–11.

17 Slack, Impact of Plague, 213–19; Cook, ‘Policing the health of London’, 22–7; Robertson, J., ‘Persuading the citizens?: Charles I and London Bridge’, Historical Research, 79 (2006), 512–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

18 Slack, ‘Books of orders’, 1–22.

19 Stow, The Survey of London Containing the Original, Increase, Modern Estate and Government of that City, Methodically Set Down . . . Inlarged by the Care and Diligence of A.M. In the Year 1618; and Now Compleatly Finished by the Study & Labour of A.M., H.D. and Others, This Present Year 1633 (London, 1633), 18–25. Slack ‘Books of orders’, 4. The City needed to show effective management, as the dearth orders clearly threatened direct intervention from the crown if the mayor and aldermen did not effectively regulate the market and keep supplies up and prices down.

20 Slack, ‘Books of orders’, 7.

21 Slack, Impact of Plague, 228 and 254.

22 Thomas, K., Religion and the Decline of Magic: Studies in Popular Beliefs in Sixteenth- and Seventeenth-Century England (London, 1971), 114–16Google Scholar.

23 Grell, O.P., ‘Plague, prayer and physic: Helmontian medicine in Restoration England’, in Grell, O. and Cunningham, A. (eds.), Religio Medici: Medicine and Religion in Seventeenth-Century England (Aldershot, 1996), 204–5Google Scholar; Wear, A., ‘Interfaces: perceptions of health and illness in early modern England’, in Porter, R. and Wear, A. (eds.), Problems and Methods in the History of Medicine (London, 1987), 240Google Scholar; Wear, A., Knowledge and Practice in English Medicine, 1550–1680 (Cambridge, 2000), 28–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

24 Slack's comprehensive examination of the plague in Tudor and Stuart England discusses the medical implications but does not include diet in this discussion, nor does he relate plague advice to more generalized contemporary health advice. Slack, Impact of Plague. Wear and Pelling are exceptions. Wear, Knowledge and Practice, gives detailed coverage to the dietary aspects of the plague advice and the contribution of dietary theory to understandings of the causes and treatments of plague. However, he fails to incorporate the food trades, their regulation or fast day enforcement within this framework. M. Pelling, ‘Food, status and knowledge: attitudes to diet in early moden England’, in M. Pelling, The Common Lot: Sickness, Medical Occupations and the Urban Poor in Early Modern England (London, 1998), 42–4, indicates the importance of food regulation to maintenance of social order but does not tie this to plague controls.

25 Slack, Impact of Plague, 28–9.

26 T. Sherwood, The Charitable Pestmaster, or, the Cure of the Plague, Conteining a Few Short and Necessary Instructions How to Preserve the Body from Infection of the Plague, as Also to Cure Those that Are Infected (London, 1641), 1.

27 Proclamations: England and Wales. Sovereign, James I: king of England, By the King. A Proclamation for Restraint of Killing, Dressing, and Eating of Flesh in Lent or on Fish Dayes (London, 1620); England and Wales, A Collection of . . . Statutes. Plague texts: City of London and Court of Aldermen, The Orders and Directions, of the Right Honourable the Lord Mayor and Court of Aldermen, . . . during the Time of the Present Visitation of the Plague (London, 1665), 1; F. Herring, Certaine Rules, Directions, or Aduertisments for This Time of Pestilentiall Contagion (London, 1625); S. Hobbes, A Nevv Treatise of the Pestilence, Containing the Causes, Signes, Preseruatiues and Cure Thereof the Like not before This Time Pubished [sic] (London, 1603); Sherwood, The Charitable Pestmaster; Anon., Londons Lamentation. Or a Fit Admonishment for City and Countrey, Wherein Is Described Certaine Causes of This Affliction and Visitation of the Plague, Yeare 1641 (London, 1641).

28 Slack, Impact of Plague, 228–44; Walsham, Providence, 158–66; see also n. 11 above.

29 Crashaw, Londons Lamentation for her Sinnes. In the ‘Epistle dedicatory’ Crashaw explains the move by Charles I to cut back the days of public fasting and prayer to Sundays only while encouraging private prayers and fasting on the other times outlined in the statutes as fish days as being ‘Out of no dislike for Fasting and Prayer, nor any wearinesse of those holy exercises . . . But out of conscience to his God and care of his subiects lives.’

30 Corporation of London, Remembrancia, vol. III, letters 3, 4, 37, 72, 91, vol. IV, letter 13, vol. V, letter 12, vol. VI, letter 130, vol. VII, letter 86; Corporation of London Records Office (CLRO), Journals of Common Council: COL/CC/01/01/28 fols. 341v, 349v, 351r–351v, /29 fols. 39, 228v, /30 fols. 20v, 176v, /33 fols. 142–4, 202, 239–40; London Metropolitan Archives (LMA), Westminster Sessions Rolls: WJ/SR(NS)1A/2, WJ/SR(NS)8/69–70, WJ/SR(NS)2/104–5, WJ/SR(NS)3/089, WJ/SR(NS)24/117–23, WJ/SR(NS)27/72

31 Taylor, Iack a Lent his Beginning and Entertainment with the Many Pranks of his Gentleman-Vsher Shrove Tuesday that Goes before Him, and his Foot-Man Hunger Attending. With New Additions. Dedicated Both to the Butchers Farewell and the Fishmongers Entrance: Written to Choake Melancholy and to Feed Mirth (London, 1620).

32 Anon., The Lamentable Complaints of Hop the Brewer and Kilcalfe the Butcher as They Met by Chance in the Countrey, against the Restraint Lately Set out by the Parliament, against Tapsters and Cookes, Which Hath Caused Them to Cracke their Credit and Betake Them to their Heeles (1641).

33 C. Barron and V. Harding, Hugh Alley's Caveat: The Markets of London in 1598, London Topographical Society (London, 1988), 23–5.

34 Hobbes, A Nevv Treatise of the Pestilence, A2.

35 T. Cogan, The Haven of Health: Chiefly Gathered for the Comfort of Students, and Consequently of All Those that Have a Care of their Health, Amplified upon Five Words of Hippocrates, Written Epid. 6. Labour, Cibus, Potio, Somnus, Venus. Hereunto Is Added a Preservation from the Pestilence, with a Short Censure of the Late Sicknes at Oxford (London, 1636), 297; Hobbes, A Nevv Treatise of the Pestilence, A3.

36 Cogan, Haven of Health, 309.

37 CLRO CLA/043/01/009 1624: ‘S[outh]walk orders or ordinances and By Lawes made by the Juro[r]s of this Courte to be onserved and kepte by the Inhabitants of this manor.’

38 CLRO CLA/043/01/009 1634: ‘Orders for the market’, 21–6.

39 England and Wales, Certaine Statutes especially Selected, and Commanded by His Maiestie to Be Carefully Put in Execution by All Justices, and Other Officers of the Peace throughout the Realme; . . . Also Certaine Orders Thought Meete by his Maiestie and his Privie Counsell, to Bee Put in Execution, together with Sundry Good Rules, Preservatives, and Medicines against the Infection of the Plague, Set Downe by the Colledge of the Physicians upon His Maiesties Speciall Command (London, 1630); Royal College of Physicians of London, Certain Necessary Directions, Aswell for the Cure of the Plague as for Preuenting the Infection; with Many Easie Medicines of Small Charge, very Profitable to His Maiesties Subiects / Set Downe by the Colledge of Physicians by the Kings Maiesties Speciall Command; with Sundry Orders Thought Meet by His Maiestie, and His Priuie Councell, to Be Carefully Executed for Preuention of the Plague; Also Certaine Select Statutes Commanded by His Maiestie to Be Put in Execution by All Iustices, and Other Officers of the Peace throughout the Realme; Together with His Maiesties Proclamation for Further Direction Therein, and a Decree in Starre-Chamber, concerning Buildings and in-Mates (London, 1636).

40 For 1607 see Guildhall Library (GL) MS 10561, 92–3 orders 50 and 51; and for 1638 see GL MS 09809 ordinances 53, 54, 55. From no. 54 it can be seen that the officers of the Company have failed to enforce the order, as this is an attempt to make observation and enforcement compulsory.

41 Corporation of London, The Lawes of the Markette (London, 1562). This book was reprinted in identical format and wording in 1595, 1620, 1653, 1668 and 1677. Corporation of London, Whereas against Divers Lawes, Orders and Provisions (London, 1657), contained orders to remove the vegetable sellers from the High Street in Cheap Ward, justifying this on the basis of the ‘anoyance thence arising from the unwholsome smells and stenches of the parings of Roots, Plants and other filth continually left and lying scattered and corrupting, in that principal Street and passage of the City’.

42 For Southwark, see CLRO CLA/043/01/009 the Leet Presentments for the Guildable and King's manors 1620–54 and CLA/043/01/010 for the Guildable manor 1660–79.

43 CLRO CLA/043/01/009 ‘Annoyances am[mer]ced’, 19 Oct. 1624.

44 Evelyn, J., Fumifugium, or, the Inconveniencie of the Aer and Smoak of London Dissipated Together with Some Remedies Humbly Proposed by J.E., Esq., to His Sacred Majestie and to the Parliament now Assembled (London, 1661), 20–2Google Scholar. Evelyn's publication had three parts. The first was aimed at those trades that burnt large quantities of sea-coal, from which he excluded the food producers focusing instead on the manufacturing trades. The second, which targeted butchers, tallow-chandlers, burial grounds and charnel houses, identified other activities that corrupted the environment. The fishmongers got only a passing mention in this section. The third part advocated plantings of gardens to cordon off the habitations of the better sort and improve the air with the scent of aromatic plants.

45 Evelyn, Fumifugium, 22.

46 CLRO CLA/009/01/012.

47 CLRO COL/RMD/RM/01/03/003/9.

48 CLRO COL/RMD/RM/01/03/003/9.

49 Jones, P.E., The Butchers of London: A History of the Worshipful Company of Butchers of the City of London (London, 1976), 78–82Google Scholar; Maclachlan, I., ‘A bloody offal nuisance: the persistence of private slaughter-houses in nineteenth-century London’, Urban History, 34 (2007), 227–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

50 Sherwood, The Charitable Pestmaster, 1.

51 Hobbes, A Nevv Treatise of the Pestilence.

52 Cogan, Haven of Health, 307, offered similar advice, urging readers to ‘have always in minde, and practice in your life, this short lesson . . . Ayre, labour, food, repletion, / Sleepe, and passions of the minde, / Both much and little hurt a like. / Best is the meane to finde’ and (308) if ‘excesse be taken in any one of them, there must needes follow great disturbance in our bodies’.

53 Anon., The Plagues Approved Physitian Shewing the Naturall Causes of the Infection of the Ayre, and of the Plague. With Divers Observations to Bee Used, Preserving from the Plague, and Signes to Know the Infected Therewith. Also Many True and Approved Medicines for the Perfect Cure Thereof. Chiefely, a Godly and Penitent Prayer unto Almighty God, for Our Preservation, and Deliverance Therefrom (London, 1665).

54 Cogan, Haven of Health, 160.

55 Ibid., frontispiece.

56 Wear, ‘Perceptions of health’, 241.

57 Herring, Certaine Rules (London, 1636).

58 Anon, Physicall Directions in Time of Plague. Printed by Command from the Lords of Councell (Oxford, 1644).

59 Cogan, Haven of Health, 310.

60 Slack, Impact of Plague, 28.

61 Cogan, Haven of Health, 309.

62 Albala, K., Eating Right in the Renaissance (Berkeley, 2002), 68Google Scholar.

63 Anon., Physicall Directions in Time of Plague. See also Muffett, Thomas, Healths Improvement: Or, Rules Comprizing and Discovering the Nature, Method, and Manner of Preparing All Sorts of Food Used in this Nation (London, 1655), 256Google Scholar.

64 Muffett, Healths Improvement, 257.

65 Pearce, A., The History of the Butchers’ Company (London, 1929), 233Google Scholar, Appendix 2, item 56.

66 CLRO CLA/017/LC/05/001.

67 CLRO CLA/043/01/009 and CLA/043/01/010.

68 For further discussion on the limitations and uses of recognizance and indictment records, see R.B. Shoemaker, ‘Using Quarter Sessions records as evidence for the study of crime and criminal justice’, Archives, 20, no. 90 (1993), 145–57.

69 LMA WJ/SR(NS)1/009 and /011; WJ/SR(NS)3/064, /109, /111; WJ/SR(NS)5/002, /016, /106; WJ/SR(NS) 10/95; WJ/SR(NS)11/36 and /38; WJ/SR(NS)21/133; WJ/SR(NS)25/61.

70 CLRO, Repertories of the Court of Aldermen: COL/CA/01/01/060 fols. 62 and 86b, /063 fols. 69, 81 210, /065 fols. 50 and 93, /068 fol. 63, /069 fol. 259b, /076 fol. 156, /119 fols. 11–15; Journals: COL/CC/01/01/027 e.g. pp. 320v–322, /041 pp. 196v–198v, /044 p. 197, /50 pp. 59–60v and 92–3.

71 LMA WJ/SR(NS)11/38.

72 LMA WJ/SR(NS)11/36.

73 LMA WJ/SR(NS)5/106.

74 LMA WJ/SR (NS)5/002.

75 Taylor, Iack a Lent, 1.

76 Royal College of Physicians of London, Certain Necessary Directions; Worshipful Company of Fishmongers, Records of the Worshipful Company of Fishmongers: Calendar to the Minute Books (1592–1699), e.g. vol. IV: 1646–64, 109–10, 598–9, 991–2, 995, 1005, 1065–7, 1226–7, 1476; vol. V, 228, 250–1, 371–2, 486–7, 513, 533–4. This is an ongoing issue in the Company minutes with searches appearing to take place sporadically when the company officers were pushed to search by the actions of those members actually engaged in the trade.