UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Anatomizing the social body: representing the plague in London, 1665 Monteyne, Joseph R. 1993

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata


831-ubc_1993_fall_monteyne_joseph.pdf [ 8.27MB ]
JSON: 831-1.0086266.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0086266-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0086266-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0086266-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0086266-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0086266-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0086266-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

ANATOMIZING THE SOCIAL BODY:REPRESENTING THE PLAGUE IN LONDON, 1665byJOSEPH ROBERT MONTEYNEB.A. University of British Columbia, 1991A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENTOF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OFMASTER OF ARTSinTHE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES(Department of Fine Arts)We accept this thesis as conformingto the required standardTHE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIAOctober 1993© Joseph Robert Monteyne, 1993In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanceddegree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make itfreely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensivecopying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of mydepartment or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying orpublication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my writtenpermission.(Signature)Department of FINE ARTS The University of British ColumbiaVancouver, CanadaDate ^5e,r DE-6 (2/88)ABSTRACTThis thesis will analyze the motivations behind a broadsheet produced inresponse to the outbreak of bubonic plague in the City of London in 1665. This formof representation utilized visual, textual, and statistical elements in 'anatomizing'the spaces of the City during the outbreak, and the social processes brought into playby the presence of the disease in the urban centre. I argue that this broadsheetattempted to create an ordered and unproblematic rendering of the disease's effectson the City and the social body out of the disorder wrought by the epidemic. Withthe construction through its representational framework of the disease as aphenomenon that is cyclical and natural, the print does the same for the meansestablished by civic and royal government to counter the sickness and preserveorder in the City. In other words, in this manifestation of Restoration print cultureintended for a potentially large and unknown audience, harsh social policiesenacted to police the spaces of the City and quarantine those infected wererepresented as inevitable and effective in returning London to a state of health. In sodoing, the broadsheet also effaced any notion of social conflict and crisis over thelatter issues that was invariably a part of epidemic plague's presence in the socialbody of early modern London. To represent the City and the social body under thegrip of the disease in this way, discourses being reformulated in the Restorationcontext, such as 'political arithmetic', or statistical knowledge, were mobilized alongwith the construction of a visual narrative that applied closure over the event of theplague. Though it sought to create a picture of order out of the disorder of theplague, the broadsheet is laced with internal contradictions, and when viewed inrelation to other textual and visual representations, this history of the plague in theCity of London in 1665 reveals what it sought to obfuscate — social tensions betweenthe sick and the healthy, those quarantined and those free to move about the City,between those who fled and those who stayed, and the real or imagined breakdownof order in the urban centre.TABLE OF CONTENTSABSTRACT^ iiTABLE OF CONTENTS^ i i iLIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS^ i VACKNOWLEDGEMENT^ VINTRODUCTION^ 1CHAPTER ONE^THE RESTORATION CONTEXT: THE REASSERTING^25OF ORDER AND THE POLICING OF CULTURAL FORMSIntroduction^ 27I Circumscribing the Body Politic^ 29II Policing Print Culture^ 36III Ordering the Natural and the Social World^46CHAPTER TWO^REPRESENTING THE PLAGUE AND SOCIAL ORDER^55ANATOMIZING THE SOCIAL BODYIntroduction^ 57I Picturing the Plague^ 65II Counting and Countering the Plague^78III The Uses of 'Political Arithmetic' at the Restoration 89IV The Plague Broadsheet and the Social Body^99BIBLIOGRAPHY^ 132111LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONSFIG. 1: Plague broadsheet by John Dunstall and John Sellers (1665-1666), 120Museum of London, London.FIG. 2: Frontispiece for Richard Atkyns' The Original and Growth of^121Printing (1664). Source: Early English Books 1641-1700 (AnnArbor: University Microfilms Inc., 1990).FIG. 3: Frontispiece for George Thomson's Loimotomia; or the Pest^122Anatomized (1666). Source: Early English Books (1990).FIG. 4: Scenes of the plague in London, anonymous print (1665).^123Source: F. P. Wilson, The Plague in Shakespeare's London(Oxford, 1927).FIG. 5: London Bill of Mortality, August 15-22, 1665. Source: Walter^124George Bell, The Great Plague in London in 1665 (London, 1924).FIG. 6:^Title page to London's Dreadful Visitation (1665). Source:^125Early English Books (1990).FIG. 7: A memento mori from an earlier plague. Source: Wilson (1927). 126FIG. 8: Spoon commemorating the plague of 1665, Museum of London, 127London.FIG. 9: Plague broadsheet, 'Lord Have Mercy Upon Us' (1636),^128Guildhall Library, London.FIG. 10: Plague broadsheet, 'Londons Lord Have Mercy Upon Us' (1665), 129Guildhall Library, London.FIG. 11: Plague broadsheet, 'The Mourning Cross: or Englands Lord^130Have Mercy Upon Us' (1665), Guildhall Library, London.FIG. 12: 'Welcome Home Brother', satirical print greeting the 'runaways' 131in 1665 by John Goddard. Source: Wilson (1927).ivACKNOWLEDGEMENTI would like to thank first of all my readers, Dr. Rose Marie San Juanand Dr. Maureen Ryan, for their criticism and guidance. They pushedand encouraged me up to the last minute to make revisions and polishmy argument, counselling that always resulted in the improvementand strengthening of the thesis. I am finally comfortable with thisversion, and I thank them for their support. I also wish to thank myfellow students, too many to mention, and the rest of the faculty in theFine Arts department for contributing positive criticism and advice,and for producing the constructive intellectual environment of whichthis work will always remain a part.vINTRODUCTIONIn late 1665, as a result of epidemic plague in London, an engraver by thename of John Dunstall produced a series of nine images depicting the disease and itseffects on the urban centre (FIG.1). In visual form, these representations offer achronological narrative of the progress of pestilence through the spaces of the City.Beginning with a scene of the sick being cared for in a private domestic interior, and,following several pictures located in urban public spaces, the sequence concludeswith an image of a steady stream of people returning to London with the everpresent old St. Paul's in the background. These images comprise the upper part of abroadsheet, or broadside, now in the collection of the Museum of London, that wasprinted towards the end of the year while plague still made its presence felt in thecapital. Below the visual narrative, a person named John Sellers has compiled acomprehensive array of statistics drawn from the yearly Bills of Mortality for thecurrent year, 1665, as well as those of 1625 and 1636, two previous years of greatmortality from pestilence. 1 These numbers compare the total deaths for the year1 In the British Museum Print Room, and in the print collection of the Victoria and Albert Museum inLondon there are a small number of prints and portraits by John Dunstall. In the British Museum theseare often bound in other books or collections and it is doubtful that they were originally sold in thismanner. For example, there are a few Dunstall images of fish in a seventeenth century book entitledPisces, Animals, and Insects, a collection of pictures of the fauna of the natural world. Appended to theback of a book by Jacques Bellange entitled Rope Dancers is another text labeled Geometrical Plates byJohn Dunstall, wherein is included various geometrical figures to aid and introduce a viewer/reader tothe "Art of Pourtraicture, Delineation, or Drawing". The author is identified as "John Dunstall,School-master in Blacfriers, London, since removed into Ludgate Street". Additionally, there areetchings of festoons, a view of the Customs House and, at the Victoria and Albert Museum, a view ofClarendon House at St. James, and an image of a royal coach presented to Charles II by CountGrammont. As these prints are all quite small and relatively unsophisticated, the plague broadsheetis, quite possibly, Dunstall's most significant commission. Bryan's Dictionary of Painters and Engravers, new edition, George Williamson ed. (London, 1920), contains the following entry: "Dunstall, John, wholived in London about the year 1660, engraved a few portraits and other plates, which are etched andfinished with the graver in imitation of the style of Hollar. In 1662 he published a book of birds,beasts, and flowers, fruits, &c. from his own designs". On the individual named John Sellers, I havebeen unable to turn up any information.against those from plague alone for the alphabetically arranged ninety-sevenparishes within the City walls, sixteen out parishes, nine out parishes in Middlesexand Surrey, and eight other out parishes. In addition, a written description in thelower right hand corner anchors the engravings, as each one is numbered andcorresponds to a brief description in this text. The broadside is slightly damaged onthe uppermost portion where a heading was originally located. Nevertheless, it isstill possible to make out that the sheet intended to represent the last three greatyears of plague for London and adjacent parishes, "being a True ACCOUNT howmany Persons died Weekly in every of those YEARS", and to exhibit the "Figures ofthe Greatness of the CALAMITY, and the Violence of the DISTEMPER in the LastYear, 1665".Single sheet prints depicting visual and textual narratives of historical andcurrent events — great battles, devious plots, strange happenings, tragic deaths orexecutions — were a regular feature of the print culture of early modern London. Ihave located in both the Guildhall and the British Library broadsides dating as farback as 1625 which utilize a similar format to represent the plague. The sheet byDunstall and Sellers, through its manipulation of sophisticated visual, textual, andstatistical elements, embodies the most intriguing example I have seen of this formproduced as a result of significant outbreaks of epidemic disease. It so happens thatthis broadsheet is also one of the last examples of its kind, for bubonic plague incatastrophic proportions ceased in early modern England after 1665-1666, and thisform of cultural expression on the whole disappeared. One can thus look atDunstall's and Sellers' print as the most evolved model of this specific culturalproduct available for analysis.This thesis will investigate the purpose and function of this type ofrepresentation in the years 1665-1666 and the context of Restoration London. Thethreat of plague, more than any other disrupting natural or social phenomena,2always raised the spectre for ruling authorities of a potential breakdown of socialorder. In the same way that plague made the individual body sick, the disease inepidemic proportions caused the social body to become ill as well. The sick weredeemed too dangerous to be in free circulation, and therefore were shunned andquarantined away from the rest of the City. But it was never exclusively the sick inlarge numbers that menaced the overall well being of the body politic during theplague, for the threat to the City in 1665 derived from the healthy too — those whofled because they could afford to, abandoning community, parish, and neighbour,and those who left the metropolis taking with them a great proportion of itseconomic activity and vitality. Furthermore, in 1665, five years after Charles II wasrestored to the throne of England in the hopes of bringing peace, social stability, andreligious uniformity to a nation besieged by insecurity and the fracturing of royaland ecclesiastical power in the previous decades, constant rumours of rebellions anduprisings circulated through the stricken spaces of the metropolis, an areadangerously under policed and virtually lacking in judicial authority. In otherwords, plague in 1665 exacerbated many social problems and tensions alreadyexisting within the social fabric of this Restoration locale. It is a crucial point, andone that will become clearer later on in this study, that the form of print culture Iam analyzing parallels both the rise of statistics as a useful form of knowledge, andthe rise of grossly unequal mortality rates between the parishes of early modernLondon and adjacent areas. With an awareness of this context, one realizes thenecessity of the circulation of an image of the afflicted social body that couldaccommodate both the practices and actions of the City's inhabitants and the overall,more general, concerns of government with the preservation of order at theRestoration.What is this image constructed by the broadsheet? In brief, the narrativeconstructed by Dunstall's visual images and accompanying textual description call3up a succession from sickness to health: the first image, depicting the sick in aninterior space is offset by the ninth, showing a number of the City's inhabitantsreturning to the urban centre. The statistical comparisons on the lower half of thebroadside inform a viewer that plague came to the City, grew to epidemicproportions, and then subsided, creating the impression that the group in the lastimage return to a now healthy city. Through this representation, the sick social bodyof the City undergoes the same process as the body of an afflicted individual. Theplague's threat to the single body is countered by medical care — the sick personspictured in the first frame are supplied with beds, nurses, a doctor and medicines,clearly pictured on the small table to the right — while the potential disruption tothe spaces of the City is countered by fires in the streets, dog killers, shut-up houseswith posted watchmen, means of disposing with the dead, and means forindividuals to escape from the City. Everything is orderly, everyone works together,and in the same way that some of the plague victims in the first image are cured, theCity too is returned to a state of health. What seems to be represented here is anurban centre peopled by a cohesive and unified body, a peaceful and stablecommunity, effectively combating the disorder of the plague.As will emerge in the following chapters, the perceived success of the civicand royal government's attempts to control the infection, the representation of theCity as a consensual community, and the use of objective scientific knowledgethrough the inclusion of statistics, were all tactics mobilized through this printedmedium in an intricate and highly sophisticated way. In investigating theserepresentational strategies, I pose a number of questions to Dunstall's and Sellersbroadsheet: how was the use of statistical information linked to Restorationconcerns about social peace and stability, and the growing importance of the scienceof natural philosophy? How was the City and its urban spaces during this particularplague represented, and what internal conflicts were emphasized or effaced? How4was the disease and its effect on the social body ordered in this visual and statisticalrepresentation? Was the threatened social body pictured, mapped out, 'anatomized'to present a less threatening version of the plague in order to mediate its effects for acertain audience? How would this broadsheet have, if it did, construct arepresentation of an ordered body politic out of the disorder of the plague? Thebroadsheet seemingly seeks to offer proof that programs taken by civic and royalauthorities to control the disease, programs that were highly controversial and evenfelt by some to be ineffective or serving to exacerbate the problem, were as inevitableas the plague itself and therefore acceptable undertakings in order to return the Cityand its population to a state of well being. I argue that internal conflicts, thosebetween City and country, between different groups in the City itself, between thosewho stayed and those who fled, conflicts that received articulation in other printedrepresentations, were effaced or made innocuous in this narrative progression froma diseased social body to a healthy one.Seen in a close reading of its historical context, Dunstall's and Sellers'broadside becomes a complicated and multi-layered phenomenon. Its complexityforces us to reappraise the resonance and scope of 'popular' material intended for apotentially large, anonymous audience of varying social and political composition. 22The first attempt to address the issue of popular culture in seventeenth-century England on any scale isrepresented by the essays collected by Barry Reay in Popular Culture in Seventeenth-Century England(London, 1985). The essays in this book deal with several aspects of popular and folk culture throughthe Civil War years and the Restoration, topics ranging from religion, sex and marriage, Englishcommon law, charivaris, festivals and popular protests, as well as issues revolving around theoverlapping of print and oral culture. Some of the individual essays will be referred to later in thisthesis. Like Peter Burke, who has an essay in the book, Reay and his collaborators define popularculture as the cultural manifestations of the non-elite, the little as opposed to the great tradition, "asystem of shared meanings, attitudes and values, and the symbolic forms...in which they areexpressed"(6). Popular culture, or more accurately, popular cultures in the plural, particularly in theearly modern Europe of the seventeenth-century, has to be seen as a fluid phenomena — in the process ofa transition from oral to print, with both forms, the old and the new, existing at the same time andmutually influencing one another. In addition, these essays argue, it must be seen also to give to andtake from high culture, or the culture of the elites. The latter becomes problematic when one sees that5The fact that the view of the social body in Dunstall's and Sellers' broadside in anyway links such a seemingly ephemeral, inexpensive, and mass produced culturalform to the pressing debates about social peace and stability in the Restoration raisesanother, more general question about the separation of culture into categories suchas 'popular' and 'elite', and the little as opposed to the great tradition. These labelscan serve to delegate cultural practices and objects to an appropriate container, and,for popular culture anyway, the only question to be answered then become whethera form or phenomena resists the dominant culture of the elites in any way. Wehave to look at the motivations behind cultural objects in their specific historicalcontexts, to try to understand the ways those commodities circulated, were made useof by actual individual subjects, and how they utilized or were utilized in a complexinterrelationship of discourses and practices that cannot be simply termed popularor elite, dominant or resistant. For example, Paul Slack, the historian who hasperhaps done the most extensive work in the last decade on plagues in earlymodern England, has inevitably encountered many forms of print culture in hisresearch on the social aspects the disease. His assumptions are generally that plagueliterature, and here he would be including broadsheets such as Dunstall's andmembers of the upper classes and elites continually took part in and patronized aspects of popularculture, whereas the converse, that members of the popular classes took part in and in any way dictatedhigh culture, virtually never occurred. From this one can infer that there was something at stake inpopular culture for the dominant groups of early modem society, and it was in their interests to have ahand in banging the pots, making 'rough music', and influencing the content of plays or ballads.Therefore, there must have been something of ruling class ideology in the forms and expressions ofpopular culture, as well as resistance to it. The writers in this collection, it seems, feel that as ahistorian, one must be continually alert to decipher the hegemony of the dominant social group, orgroups', ideology in the forms of cultural expression normally referred to as popular, for this can help uscome to some understanding of our own modem period. Control over culture can mean the hegemony ofthe thoughts and beliefs of one class or social group over the everyday lives and leisure activities ofanother. In this sense hegemony, taken from the Italian writer, Antonio Gramsci, "refers to an order inwhich a common social-moral language is spoken, in which one concept of reality is dominant,informing with its spirit all modes of thought and behaviour...hegemony is the predominance obtainedby consent rather than force of one class or group over other classes". See J.V. Femia, Gramsci's PoliticalThought (Oxford, 1981) 24.6Sellers', performed a kind of therapeutic function. The literate had the mortalitybills and the broadsheets from which to draw statistical 'information', as well asother texts designed to entertain and be morally instructive. All helped thepopulation of early modern England's plague afflicted towns and cities "to come toterms with plague". 3 Speaking specifically about the single sheet broadsides, Slackstates that they illustrate "the range of intellectual options open at the popularlevel", and that the inclusion of large amounts of statistical information allowed"ordinary Londoners, as well as their governors...to anticipate a rise or fall inmortality, and to turn to medicine or prayers as circumstances or inclinationdictated".4 Elsewhere, Slack has referred to popular texts and printed matter dealingwith the disease by stating that "plague offered ample opportunity for contemporaryreflection on a variety of moral and social themes". 5Half a century earlier, Walter Bell, the great historian of London's disasters,discussed some of the same material known as 'popular' plague literature. In fact, itis thanks to Bell that Dunstall's and Sellers' broadsheet has been preserved, for itbelonged to the writer before he bequeathed it to the Museum of London. In Bell's1924 The Great Plague in London in 1665, the author describes Dunstall's images,comments on their crudeness, and then states that the artist was no Hogarth, foronly the great social commentator of the later period "could have suggested to usthe dramatic quality of those fearful months". 6 The lack of dramatic qualitynotwithstanding, Bell states that the value of this broadsheet is that it wascontemporary with the plague, and therefore represented a form of truth. For3Paul Slack, The Impact of the Plague in Tudor and Stuart England (London and Boston, 1985) 242.4Slack (1985), 242.5 Paul Slack, "Metropolitan Government in crisis: the response to the plague", in London 1500-1700. TheMaking of a Metropolis A. L. Beier and R. Finlay eds., (New York, 1986), 60.6Walter George Bell, The Great Plague in London in 1665 (London, 1924), 103. Bell's other in-depthstudy of a London disaster antedates his work on the plague, and is entitled The Great Fire of London in1666 (London, 1920).7example, he states in describing the crowded quality of the first image of the sickroom: "All this in one room! Perhaps the draughtsman has crowded his objects tooclosely to get all represented, but what he has expressed is true. And it is the samewith the next picture". 7 Similarly, in his The Plague and the Fire of London,Sutherland Ross reproduced four of Dunstall's images, separated from the context ofthe sheet and the rest of the narrative construction. In his description of two of theimages, panels five and seven, showing the carrying of coffins and mass burials in achurchyard, Ross reasons that "the orderly appearance of the proceedings is probablydue to the artist's lack of skill, but he has an eye for detail". 8It is not the intention here to detract from the contributions of thesehistorians, for Slack and Bell in particular have produced invaluable research whichthis thesis draws upon frequently. Yet, as this study is specifically concerned withprint culture, social order, and representation, I want to push the historicalinterpretation of popular plague literature, and popular culture in a wider sense,further than the somewhat passive attributes given it in studies such as these. I amnot concerned to pass judgment, for example, on John Dunstall's skill and merit asan artist, but more interested in understanding if the unusual orderly appearancethat historian Sutherland Ross discerns in Dunstall's imagery has anything at all todo with the social context in which the image was produced, a context, as I indicatedpreviously, overly concerned with the issue of social order and peace. My ownanalysis seeks to discover whether this broadsheet could have served a more activerole, rather than merely a 'truthful' reflection of or response to the given socialcatastrophe of the plague. In fact 'truth', the quality that Bell finds in Dunstall'simages, or different kinds of 'truths', were in the process of being contested andarticulated in the historical moment that saw the production of this broadsheet.7Bell (1924), 103.8Sutherland Ross, The Plague and the Fire of London (London, 1965), 52.8Some of these 'truths' are directly implicated in the image of the plague and socialbody represented on the print. For example, the statistical information on the sheetwas not merely 'information' and therefore assumed a somewhat inert role, butembodied a culturally specific form of truth and a particular political position.Images of the plague in the City did not merely document the disease's progressthrough the City's urban spaces, as I will show, nor did statistics passively record thenumbers of plague deaths in each parish. Woven together during the Restoration,the use of the visual and the statistical worked together to construct a representationthat imposed a visual, chronological, narrative, and statistical order on the disorderof the plague of 1665. This representation, I will argue, was active and integral inserving to call up a viewing subject and implicate that subject in discourses andissues crucial to the Restoration era. The exercise is, then, to decipher if possible theideological function of this broadsheet, to suggest the ways in which it might havebeen used, to posit the subject position called up by this specific form ofrepresentation, and assess how the viewing/reading subject's compliance with itwas demanded and instituted. 99Here I hesitate to use the term Restoration ideology, even though I am thinking of the methodologiesposited by literary critics the likes of Terry Eagleton and Frederic Jameson. See, for example, TerryEagleton, Criticism and Ideology (London, 1976), and Frederic Jameson, The Political Unconscious,(Ithaca, 1981). Their work has been concerned with questions of ideology and literature, and theposition of the reading subject in relation to literary texts. The construction of a subject position for themtakes place in between the notion of ideological interpellation, drawn from Althusser, wherein areading/viewing subject is shaped by the subtle and complex workings of dominant ideologies, and, onthe other hand, the process of individuation, wherein resistance to the workings of ideology takesplace within the already construed subject positions in a given social context. Terry Eagleton has arguedthat literature is the "most revealing mode of experiential access to ideology that wepossess"(Eagleton, 101). For it is within this cultural form "that we observe in a peculiarly complex,coherent, intensive, and immediate fashion the workings of ideology in the textures of lived experienceof class societies"(Eagleton, 101). With this in mind, cultural forms would become difficult to viewmerely as reflections, documentations, or passive records, and allow for the possibility that they are alocus themselves for the production of ideology. For a good critical discussion of these issues, see PaulSmith, Discerning the Subject (Minneapolis, 1988).9In attempting to answer such questions about an object of this type, this thesisis indebted to the historians of what is now known as the new cultural history.'°Through an approach to cultural objects and events that are often ephemeral andmultivalent, such as religious, civic, and royal processions, or even the long ignoredtexts and images of popular culture, practitioners of the new cultural history havebeen compelled to undertake studies of an interdisciplinary nature. This type ofhistory has consequently been pushed away from the positing of abstract analyses, infavor of an interpretation of culture that relies on historical specificity. Meaning fora given cultural form is derived from its context, and the struggles over varyingrepresentations of reality. 11 There can be no single, objective, unified truth tohistory, but many truths and histories in competition. A carefully constructedrepresentation of the plague, such as that fashioned by Dunstall and Sellers, was oneversion of the event among others, and helped to produce a certain kind ofknowledge and perception about the outbreak of the disease that served the interestsof royal and civic authority. At the same time, the contents of the broadside couldeasily intersect with other motivations, and be read or used by individuals indifferent ways. In other words, despite concerns over social order and the policing of10See, for example, Peter Burke, Popular Culture in Early Modern Europe (London, 1978), Lynn Hunt ed.,The New Cultural History (Berkeley, 1989), as well as her Politics, Culture, and Class in the FrenchRevolution (Berkeley, 1984), Stuart Hall, "Notes on Deconstructing 'the Popular – in People's Historyand Socialist Theory , R. Samuel ed. (London, 1981), Natalie Zemon-Davis, Society and Culture inEarly Modern France (Stanford, 1975), Roger Chartier, Cultural History: between practices andrepresentations (Cambridge U.K., 1988), Roger Chartier ed., The Culture of Print: power and the usesof print in early modern Europe (Princeton, 1989), T.J. Clark, The Painting of Modern Life: Paris in theArt of Manet and His Followers (Princeton, 1984), and Thomas Crow, Painters and Public Life inEighteenth Century France (New Haven and London, 1985). This list is by no means inclusive, andrepresents only a smattering of recent critical efforts in these fields."For example, in discussing her Politics, Culture, and Class in the French Revolution, Hunt states thather aim was not "to reduce revolutionary discourse to one stable system of meaning (the reflection ofcommunity, for example) but rather to show how political language could be used rhetorically to builda sense of community and at the same time to establish new fields of social, political, and culturalstruggle — that is make possible unity and difference at the same time"(Hunt, 1989), 17.10cultural forms undertaken during the Restoration, not the least being rigid controlover the productions of print culture, the knowledge and history of the plagueproduced in Dunstall's and Sellers' broadsheet was not just an imposition of powerfrom the top down, but utilized forms of knowledge and representation thatempowered individuals in certain ways. These functions were, of course, implicitlytied to and inseparable from the context of Restoration London.In legitimizing and theorizing a shift in the methods and objects of history,the writings of Michel Foucault have also greatly encouraged historical analyses ofan interdisciplinary nature. 12 In Foucault's work, as he explains, the objects ofhistory have not exactly been replaced by new, previously undiscovered orunexamined events, individuals, archives or documents, but, rather, the focus ofanalysis has been shifted slightly: "it's still the same domain of objects, but the objecthas been magnified". 13 Such a magnification can allow a change in the level atwhich the discourse of history operates, and unearth or address "a layer of materialwhich hitherto had no pertinence for history and which had not been recognized ashaving any moral, aesthetic, political, or historic value". 14 Foucault's methods ofdiscourse analysis, and his research into the operations of the technologies of powerbrought into place throughout the early modern period and into the present day, areparticularly useful in a project like this that seeks to ascertain how certain elementsof popular print culture were embedded in, and made up an active part of, a matrixof political, social, and even scientific debates. But the intention here is not to use121n fact, the new cultural history itself has received great impetus from the work of Foucault, and mostof the historians cited in footnote 13 have, at one point or another, had to come to terms with theauthor's writings. See Patricia O'Brien, "Michel Foucault's History of Culture" in Hunt ed. (1989), andthe chapter entitled "Foucault's Phantasms" in Robert Young, White Mythologies: Writing Historyand the West (London and New York, 1990).13Michel Foucault, Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972-1977 , ColinGordon ed., (New York, 1980), 50.14Foucault (1980), 50.11Foucault simply to contextualize a printed broadsheet from the seventeenth-century, which would run the risk of positing a transcendental historical subjectsomehow distanced from it. Rather, the project is to get at what kind of power thisrepresentation of the plague utilized or set in motion, and how that could come toaccount for the constitution of a subject within a specific historical framework.Foucault encourages us to analyze the workings of power at the level where itis in direct and immediate contact with its object, at the point of its continuous anduninterrupted process wherein it comes to 'subject' bodies. As he writes, "in otherwords, rather than ask ourselves how the sovereign appears to us in his loftyisolation, we should try to discover how it is that subjects are gradually,progressively, really and materially constituted through a multiplicity of organisms,forces, energies, materials, desires, thoughts, etcetera". 15 Power must be analyzed inits disparate contexts and arrangements, for, as power utilizes and is utilizedthrough a net like organization, individuals 'circulate' and are always in a positionof simultaneously being subjected to power and making use of it. 16Foucault charts a dramatic shift in the operations of the mechanisms ofpower predominantly through the eighteenth century and its period offundamental structural change. Power was redirected into what he refers to as itscapillary form of existence, where it became synaptic, interiorized, exercising force15Foucault (1980), 97.161n the essay "Questions on Geography" in Power/Knowledge, Foucault discusses how power came to bedisseminated in nineteenth-century France to more regional and local mechanisms. He states:In consequence, one cannot confine oneself to analysing the State apparatus alone if onewants to grasp the mechanisms of power in their detail and complexity. There is a sortof schematism that needs to be avoided here — and which incidentally is not to befound in Marx — that consists of locating power in the State apparatus, making thisinto the major, privileged, capital and almost unique instrument of the power of oneclass over another. In reality, power in its exercise goes much further, passes throughmuch finer channels, and is much more ambiguous, since each individual has at hisdisposal a certain power, and for that reason can act as the vehicle for transmitting awider power(72).12from within the social body as opposed to from above: "It was the instituting of thisnew local, capillary form of power which impelled society to eliminate certainelements such as the court and the king. The mythology of the sovereign was nolonger possible once a certain kind of power was being exercised within the socialbody". 17 Though Foucault speaks primarily of French historical developments, inEngland crucial social and political shifts effecting profound structural change beganto occur much earlier than the eighteenth-century. These conflicts began, in fact, inthe middle of the seventeenth-century with the struggles of parliament againstCharles I, and the contention over religious freedom. 18 The Restoration is aparticularly interesting moment in that all the trappings and symbolic systems ofthe monarchy were reestablished, and existed in the same cultural context as formsof power beginning to exercise themselves within the social body. The centralizationand bureaucratization of the administrative arm of the state, the technologies ofpower and surveillance, the means to control and watch over the social bodythrough methods of record keeping — the compilation of statistical information as away of serving government with detailed knowledge about the nation, lands,population, and colonies — received their most rigorous formulation andtheorization following the return of Charles II to power in 1660. For example, thetechniques and methods of natural philosophy, of which the 'political arithmetic'mentioned earlier was a part, were offered to the king and the returningmonarchical government as a tool capable of being utilized in the preservation ofsocial peace. Charles II and his advisors recognized the potential benefits of such an17Foucault (1980), 39.18Foucault discusses the different contexts briefly in "Prison Talk" in Power/Knowledge: "In Englandthe same capillary modification of power occurred as in France. But there the person of the king, forexample, was displaced within the system of political representations, rather than eliminated. Henceone can't say that the change at the capillary level is absolutely tied to institutional changes at thelevel of the centralised forms of the State"(39).13exchange, and with the granting of a royal charter in 1662, incorporated theassociation of intellectuals responsible for articulating these methodologies into thegroup known as the Royal Society. New modalities of power that would ultimatelyserve to destabilize and deconstruct the mythology of the sovereign were allowed toflourish under the protection and privilege of the king.19One of the key elements to be garnered from Foucault for this thesis is hisquestioning of historicism and its relevance for studies of the plague. Foucault isopposed to historicism and Western humanism, because they assume a continuousprocess of development and progress leading to a kind of globalization. 20 History,Foucault argues, should be seen as only one of several possible discursive forms ofcomprehension, and consequently one that is incapable of providing a solidfoundation for knowledge. 'Total' history should be opposed by 'general' history.The former, standing for the assumption of a spatio-temporal continuity betweenthe phenomena of history, the drawing of everything together according to a singleprinciple, law, or form, and the interpretation of documents to create or imposeuniversal meaning on them, is contrasted with a form of history that attempts onlyto determine relations between different series, to analyze temporal and specificheterogeneities rather than create homogeneity, and to avoid producing acomprehensive world view. 21 With this in mind, then, what we should be doing is19J.R. Jones, in Country and Court: England 1658-1714 (London, 1978), 80-81, is hinting at this when heclaims that a new ideology was emerging under the surface of Restoration political events. This newideology was characterized and encapsulated in the words 'interest' and 'improvement', wherein'interest' became the bond that cemented social relations, for men would only work together if theirprivate interests coincided with their public interests, and 'improvement' was linked to science andcommercial development. Systematic examination of natural phenomena was to improve the workingsof nature, society, and government.20Foucault, The Archaeology of Knowledge (New York, 1972), 9, and Young , 70.21Young, 78. Young identifies another list of suspect categories and concepts that Foucault would come toreject including the subject, class, ideology, and any general theories of history or society.14attempting to offer answers to particular questions capable of making individualpractices and cultural forms intelligible.Studies of the plague in recent years have gained great impetus from Foucaultand an anti-historicist approach. Traditionally, plagues have been seen as greattragedies that rise up on unsuspecting populations, decimate different nations,cities, and groups or classes of people equally, subside, disappear, and return again ina decade or a century to change the course of history. Plague is often emphasized ascyclical, and when one moves away from this notion we see societies and culturesprepared to deal with, and dealing with epidemic disease on an everyday basis. Thedisease, for example, was clearly not cyclical in early modern London, as the Bills ofMortality show, but continually present in some form. It was only at certain times ofgreat infection that the disease became highly visible within the community, givingrise to social and cultural practices intended to meet and counter it, whether infantasy or reality. Giulia Calvi, in her study of the Florentine plague of 1630-1633,points out that institutional responses imposed upon an afflicted city and itspopulation from above by the state or crown coexisted with singular strategies forsurvival and the protection of individual interests.22 Therefore, she argues, there22Giulia Calvi, Histories of a Plague Year: the social and the imaginary in Baroque Florence(Berkeley, 1989). Other plague studies that move away from a historicist approach are, for example,Carlo Cipolla, Faith, Reason, and the Plague in Seventeenth-Century Tuscany (New York, 1977),which is a microcosmic study of a small Tuscan village that brings to light the subtle conflicts andstrategies employed by the church and ruling authorities; Ann Carmichael, Plague and Poor inRenaissance Florence (Cambridge, 1986) wherein the author sets out to counter plague accounts that seeepidemics as altering the course of history by showing that decisions and conflicts undertaken in plaguestricken societies did influence patterns of mortality; and Arien Mack ed., "In Time of Plague: TheHistory and Social Consequences of Lethal Epidemic Disease" Social Research vol.55 no.8 Autumn,1988, which reproduces the papers given at a conference designed to initiate discussion betweenscientists and historians, and place AIDS in perspective through a social history of disease. The lattertext indicates that even the definition of 'plague' is continually shifting through history. Mostrecently, is James Amelang's translation and commentary on a journal kept by a seventeenth-centuryBarcelona tanner, A Journal of the Plague Year (New York and Oxford, 1991). Amelang is very muchconcerned to position this translated journal within the current debates on popular culture, and does aninteresting analysis of this text, and other written plague narratives, in his introduction.15can be no single history of the Florentine plague, but many versions constructingdisparate socially and politically positioned representations. For example, in regardto an official account of the epidemic, that written by the Grand Duke Ferdinand II'slibrarian Francesco Rondinelli, Calvi has this to say:The body of the city supposedly followed the same parabola ofphysiological decline and renewal experienced by the bodies of thosewho survived. The emphasis throughout is on cyclical and naturalprocesses. Just as the disease appeared at regular intervals, so too wasthe opposite route toward health repeated. Imposing a naturalisticreading upon events, the official script assimilated the course of thecity's history to that of the inevitable trajectory of the illness. 23Calvi shows how this cyclical ordering of the plague in representation performed aspecific political and social function in Florence in 1630. A similar emphasis on thecyclical nature of plague is constructed in Dunstall's and Sellers' broadsheet as well.The inclusion of statistics shows the rise and fall of plague in the City of London forthe current epidemic and for two in recent history. Coupled with the narrativeconstruction produced by the visual images, that pictures a city moving fromsickness to health, a very particular version of the disease's presence in the socialbody was contrived. Visual imagery and statistical 'truth' mutually supported oneanother in this broadsheet, which, as I will argue, attempted to construct a form ofcontinuity and consensus, a homogeneity to the social body, out of the discontinuityand rupture brought by the disease.Foucault's own work on the plague is also important to the conceptualframework of this thesis. In his preamble to the chapter on Panopticism inDiscipline and Punish, Foucault leads into the discussion of Bentham's circularprison controlled by an act of surveillance from a central tower, and his overallconclusions about panopticism, with an analysis of the social reorganization set in23Calvi (1989), 2.16motion by a series of French plague decrees from the late seventeenth century.These French plague orders — edicts and instructions to civic authorities on theproper way of controlling an urban centre's public spaces and its sick — envisagedan infected community subject to strict spatial partitioning, quarantine,surveillance, disinfection, and inspection that gave rise to the political dream of adisciplined society. 24 The natural catastrophe of the epidemic offered institutionaland official structures the opportunity to exercise, instigate, and hone the effects ofpower and discipline on a diseased social body. Official power attempted to counterthe social inversion sickness threatened to bring with it by fixing the individual inplace — a segmented, frozen, and immobile space in which the individual plaguebody and the entire social body had to remain visible continuously to therepresentatives of order. In other words, the plague stood as a metaphor, acondensed referent for all forms of social confusion and disorder, and was intendedto be met by the technologies of order and discipline. Foucault argues: "Against theplague, which is a mixture, discipline brings into play its power, which is one ofanalysis".25 In other words, to preserve order in the social body during the plague,that body had to be dissected, compartmentalized, fragmented, and studied through24Foucault, Discipline and Punish (New York, 1979), 198.25Foucault(1979), 197. The vision of order and quarantine during the plague has its opposite in an imageof complete social freedom. Foucault writes that a great "literary fiction of the festival grew up aroundthe plague: suspended laws, lifted prohibitions, the frenzy of passing time, bodies mingling togetherwithout respect, individuals unmasked, abandoning their statutory identity and the figure underwhich they had been recognized, allowing quite a different truth to appear". For Mikhail Bakhtin,camivalesque inversion and the plague come together in the figure of Boccaccio and the Decameron.According to Bakhtin, the Decameron, written during a time of great infection, articulates the momentas a model of cultural freedom, as a way of creating new possibilities for the utilization of frank,unofficial, words and images Social and moral conventions are effaced, as well as all laws, bothspiritual and temporal: "Life has been lifted out of its routine, the web of conventions has been torn; allthe official hierarchic limits have been swept away. The plague has created its own uniqueatmosphere that grants both outward and inward rights". See Mikhail Bakhtin, Rabelais and HisWorld, Helene Iswolsky trans. (Bloomington, 1984), 272.17the production of detailed knowledge about its constituent parts. This was a processcarried out on specific, living bodies and communities, as well as in representation.Dunstall's and Sellers' print is a type of anatomical dissection of the socialbody of the City of London in broadsheet form. An anatomy metaphor presupposesa sick or diseased body, and the use of the anatomy metaphor on the social body ofearly modern London and England was not unusual. As I will show, it was ametaphor that could serve many interests in the seventeenth-century. For example,an anatomy could function to produce knowledge about an unknown entity, tomake visible the feared and the invisible, and to counter these with objective truthbased on the premises of the knowledge produced by the scientific and medicaldissection. In the case of Dunstall's and Sellers' representation, the sick body is thesocial one, afflicted with the plague and the perceived social disorder carried alongwith it. To anatomize the social body of the City, both visually and statistically aswas done in this broadsheet, in so far as it was to produce knowledge about that bodyand hold it up as truth through the legitimation by the scientific, served particularpolitical and social functions in the uneasy moment of the Restoration.I wish to position the production of Dunstall's and Sellers' visual andnumerical representation of the plague of 1665 within what I see as a shift in theconceptions about scientific knowledge, and political philosophic articulationsutilizing the metaphor of the social body. In English political and philosophicthought, the notion of the individual body finding its correlate in the socialstemmed from a complex relationship of pagan, Christian, and non-religioustraditions, which posited links between the macrocosm, the ordered world of theheavens, and the microcosm, the individual human being.26 Also known as theGreat Chain of Being, such a system reinforced social hierarchies, and the26James Daly, "Cosmic Harmony and Political Thinking in Early Stuart England", Transactions of theAmerican Philosophical Society , vol. 69 pt.7, 1979.18integration of humankind with the environment. Each part of the chain wasthought of as a link, with a necessary role to play, and like the individual body,certain parts of the chain had more importance and controlled other aspects. Thehead, or king (sometimes referred to as the heart), directed the other parts of thebody, and each other part had to exercise its appropriate function in collaborationwith the head. In the discourse of seventeenth-century English medicine, and thepractice of anatomy handed down virtually unchanged from the Greeks, was themethod to establish hierarchy in the human body, and, by consequence, in the socialbody as well. As James Daly has argued, "the body natural was a favorite source ofinstruction for the body politic, since neither the head nor body could survivewithout the other, and the prevalence of virtually untreatable illness was a constantreminder of what happened when physical harmony was absent".27In such a world picture, the natural sciences served methods and techniquesof knowledge production that sought to discover the essential order of the naturaland social world. Yet, the very world picture that natural philosophy sought tobuttress and support came under attack in Stuart England, particularly in the middledecades of the century when the head was literally removed from the social body,and the body of the monarch, Charles I. Though the Restoration attempted toreinstall the head onto the political body, and along with it its entire set ofrepresentational and analogical symbolism, the belief in an essential natural orderhad been severely challenged and hampered by new methods of thinking. 28 Ifdivine and natural order could no longer be discovered in the macrocosm and, by27Daly, 6. Daly states further that "what the macrocosmic correspondences did was to provide a rangeof analogies through which were pictured a political life in which royal power, legal order, and socialcooperation were given a foundation in nature and supemature, and a sanction which appealed to theesthetic side of the imagination"(14).28Daly, 34, and see also Gerald Reedy, "Mystical Politics: The Imagery of Charles II's Coronation", inPaul Korstin ed., Studies in Change and Revolution: Aspects of English Intellectual History, 1640-1800(New York, 1972).19consequence, the microcosm, by the disciplines of natural philosophy, perhaps thesciences, including anatomy, could be used to create order instead. This, I think, isone of the issues at the heart of the reformulation and dissemination of statisticalknowledge, and the anatomy of the social body found on Dunstall's and Sellers'broadside. It is also part of the reformulation and institutionalization of science onthe whole following the Restoration.Another issue central to the concerns of this thesis is how large a public couldread, view, and engage with the printed productions of Restoration society. Theexpansion of literacy and, codeterminous with it, growth in the production ofprinted text and visual imagery through the middle decades of the seventeenthcentury left a legacy of politically charged issues for Restoration government.29 Forsome members of the population, particularly the dissenting religious sects,ministers had from the early seventeenth-century on emphasized the "civil andmoral comeliness in behaviour" fostered through acquiring literacy, and felt that itcould help counter confusion and disobedience.30 Widespread literacy had been oneof the central obligations of the Covenant and viewed positively as a benefit to socialstability. Each individual would have his or her own access to the word of Godexpressed in the written texts of the bible, unmediated by the interpretation ofspecialized clergy. Conversely, for others, particularly by the 1660s, the advancesmade in national literacy were felt to have been socially and politically dangerous.29The extent of this literacy is given in varying degrees: Barry Reay, in the introduction to PopularCulture in Seventeenth-Century England, states that at the time of the Civil Wars, 30% of English menand 10% of women could sign their names. Reay gets his information from David Cressy, (see note 34below). Peter Burke, in his essay "Popular Culture in Seventeenth-Century London", published in thesame text edited by Reay, gives the percentage for the early century as 76% of a sample of craftsmenand shopkeepers in the City could sign their names. For women, literacy rose dramatically from 10% to48% at the end of the century. Bernard Capp, in his essay "Popular Literature", also in the same text,gives the number of 30% for the male population in 1641, but qualifies it by noting that a far greaternumber would be able to read, but not write (199).30David Cressy, Literacy and the Social Order: Reading and Writing in Tudor and Stuart England(Cambridge, 1980), 6.20The royalist, William Cavendish, in a letter to Charles II, claimed that "the Bible inEnglish under every weaver and chambermaid's arm hath done us much hurt";another royalist, James Howell, complained in the same era that "people of all sortsthough never so mean and mechanical" were learning to read and write. 31Throughout the seventeenth century, under the reign of the Stuarts as well asthe Commonwealth, both visual and textual material flowing from the printingpresses of London had been a problem either for civil, monarchical, or religiousauthorities. 32 The quantity of this production was substantial, indicating thatinexpensive, mass-produced books, pamphlets, single sheets, bills and broadsideswere increasingly becoming an important and visible part of seventeenth centuryEnglish culture for a substantial portion of that society. 33 For example, prior to 1640,the Stationer's Company registered approximately two hundred titles of printedmaterial each year. In contrast, George Thomason, who faithfully gathered a largeamount of material as it was published between 1640 and 1660, collected on averagesix hundred eighty books and pamphlets a year for the two decades, with twothousand alone in 1642. By this time printed editions of three thousand were not31Cressy, 45.320n the problems caused by print culture for royal, ecclesiastic, and parliamentary authority, and thelegal steps taken to control the press see Frederick Seaton Siebert, Freedom of the Press in England 1476-1776 (Urbana, 1952).33Peter Burke comes to the conclusion that popular political consciousness was raised dramaticallythrough the middle decades of the seventeenth-century, particularly in London. He writes: "As a lateseventeenth-century witness remarked with some sourness, 'every little blue-apron boy behind thecounter undertakes as boldly as if he had served an apprenticeship at the council board'. The CivilWars of the 1640s and the crises of 1679-81 and 1688 made a great contribution to the political educationof the ordinary Londoner. The impact of these events was made stronger and also more permanent by thefact that they were recorded in print. A new medium reinforced the new messages" (Reay, 48). PerhapsBurke could not quite see that the printing press and its products were also in a large way responsible forthose decisive events occurring in the first place. See also Tim Harris, London Crowds in the Reign ofCharles II: Propaganda and Politics from the Restoration Until the Exclusion Crisis (Cambridge, 1987),who argues that the parliamentary struggles of the period of the Stuart kings and the Commonwealthcan only be comprehended if we acknowledge that the political nation was far broader thancustomarily believed.21unusual, and total annual printed production in London has been estimated byDavid Cressy at two million volumes per annum, with four hundred thousandtwo-penny almanacs alone. 34 Judging by the dramatic increase in printed productionbetween 1640 and 1660, a time of great political instability in England, it is reasonableto assume that the printing press became the single most important tool in thedissemination of political information, and, therefore, also largely responsible forthe instigation of continual religious and political tension in a widely based andvaried reading public.In chapter one, I pay close attention to the historical context of the period inEnglish history known as the Restoration, the era that saw a Stuart king, Charles II,return to the throne of England, and the enactment of a series of repressiveparliamentary edicts intended to circumscribe dissenting political and religiousactivity. These attempts involved the policing of almost all aspects of cultural andsocial life, not the least being the power of the print medium. 35 In such a context,virtually all the licensed productions of the print culture of London, which meansthe majority of England as well, for almost all printers in the country lived inLondon, became the voice of the dominant Restoration ideologies, and the voice oforder. In addition, developments within the field of natural philosophy are veryimportant in this context, for the statistical elements in Dunstall's and Sellers' sheetwere linked to the discourse referred to at the time as 'political arithmetic', one of34Cressy, 46-48.35Most of the work done on this particular issue of the Restoration has predominately concerned theliterature of the period. See, for example, Kevin Sharpe and Steven Zwicker eds., Politics of Discourse:The Literature and History of Seventeenth Century England (Berkeley, 1987). Of particular note inthis collection of essays is the introduction "Politics of Discourse" by Sharpe and Zwicker, Zwicker'sessay "Lines of Authority: Politics and Literary Culture in the Restoration", and the essay by MichaelMcKeon, "Politics of Discourses and the Rise of the Aesthetic in Seventeenth-Century England". Also ofinterest, and more concerned with crossing into other disciplines and fields of discourse, is RichardKroll, The Material Word: Literate Culture in the Restoration and Early Eighteenth-Century(Baltimore and London, 1991).22the many such disciplines being reordered and reformulated under the allencompassing designation of natural philosophy, itself being institutionalizedunder royal protection in the years immediately following the Restoration. 36 In the1660s, such a reworking of the discourses of experimental science, as will be shownin the first chapter, was conceived of by many of the leading proponents of the newscience as a way of assisting in the production and preservation of social peace andstability. 37 Natural philosophy, given state sanction in 1662 with the incorporationof the Royal Society, could and did develop into a complex interrelated field ofdiscourses with the potential of serving to protect a community, define its normseven, its boundaries of health, and inscribe those identities and definitions onto andinto the social body. Natural philosophy had the tools, or claimed it could producethem, that could be applied to a community — city, region, nation, colony — for thepurpose of ordering that body, deciphering what, if anything, should be purged fromit, and even what sort and form of activities and behaviour were desirable within it.Social order, conformity, and consensus had to be emphasized and encouraged inthe cultural context of Charles II's England, for it was a predicament that occupiedgovernment and intellectuals alike following two decades of political and religiousinstability wrought by the Civil War and the Commonwealth. 38 A close reading of36See Peter Buck, "Seventeenth-Century Political Arithmetic: Civil Strife and Vital Statistics", Isis68 (1977)37See for example, Christopher Hill, "Partial Historians and Total History" in The Collected Essaysof Christopher Hill (Amherst, 1986), 8, where the author states:The restoration brought back bishops, and aimed at restoring traditional certaintiesagainst the 'enthusiasm' of mechanic preachers and the 'atheism' of mechanicphilosophers. The propagandists of the Royal Society, some of them a little tarredwith the brush of radicalism, took up with gusto the attack on enthusiasm andatheism. Our most religious king, Charles II, was well advised to become patron of theRoyal Society as well as head of the Church of England, and to tie both closely to thesocial hierarchy. It may have been no better for science than it was for religion, but itcertainly helped to conserve the newly established order.23this historical context is necessary to understand the complexities and subtleties ofDunstall's and Sellers' print of the plague in London in 1665. This anatomy of thesocial body of the afflicted City is looked at more closely in chapter two, where theelements that comprise it —the images, the statistics drawn from a related culturalform, the Bills of Mortality — are linked to specific functions and uses of this formof representation, and to other representations of the social effects of the disease in1665.38See, for example, Andrew Browning's introduction to English Historical Documents 1660 -1714(London, 1953), wherein he states that "by 1660 the peoples of the British Isles had become heartilytired of revolutions, anxious for the establishment of a settled and orderly system once more, andconvinced that the best prospect of achieving this result lay in a return to something like the positionbefore the outbreak of the civil wars"(3). If the Restoration was a moment overly concerned with there-establishment of order, it was so because disorder threatened to erupt again at any moment, for theconflicts that had lead to the civil war and the commonwealth still existed, and, as Browning reasons,the later Stuart period was in fact, one of the most unsettled periods in British history.24CHAPTER ONETHE RESTORATION CONTEXT: THE REASSERTING OF ORDERAND THE POLICING OF CULTURAL FORMSAt which Words, Monarchy, and Loyalty, unveiling themselves, Rebellion starts asaffrighted, but, recollecting herself, concludes her Speech thus.Ah! Britain, Ah! stand'st thou Triumphant there,Monarchick Isle? I shake with horrid Fear.Are thy wounds whole? Upon thy Cheek fresh smiles?Is Joy resttor'd to these late mournful Isles?Ah! must He enter, and a King be Crown'd?Then, as He riseth, sink we under Ground.Rebellion having ended her Speech, Monarchy entertains His Majesty with thefollowing.To Hell, foul Friend, shrink from this glorious Light,And hide thy Head in everlasting Night.Enter in Safety, Royal Sir, this Arch,And through your joyful Streets in Triumph march;Enter our Sun, our Comfort, and our Life.No more these Walls shall breed Intestine Strife:Henceforth Your People onely shall contendIn Loyalty each other to transcend.May Your Great Actions, and immortal Name,Be the whole Business, and Delight of Fame.May You, and Yours, in a Perpetual Calm,Be crowned with Laurel, and Triumphant Palm,And all Confess, whilst they in You are Blest,I, MONARCHY, of Governments am Best.A portion of the discourse between Monarchyand Rebellion at the first triumphal arch of Charles II'sprocession to his coronation, described in John Ogilby'sThe Entertainment of His Most Excellent MajestieCharles II, in His Passage through the Cityof London to His Coronation (1662).25By these Arts and Practices, the Faction works upon the Passions and Humours of theCommon-People; and when they shall have put Mischief into their Hearts, their nextBusiness is to put Swords in their Hands, and to Engage them in a direct Rebellion.Sir Roger L'Estrange, Considerations and Proposalsin Order to the Regulation of the Press (1663).26INTRODUCTIONAn analysis of John Dunstall's and John Sellers' anatomy of the social body ofLondon during the plague of 1665 can only be undertaken with an understanding ofa cultural context in which the political instability of the previous twenty years hadreached a peak. England's faith in its political system's ability to resolve conflict hadbeen shattered by the execution of a monarch, the destruction of the House of Lords,military dictatorship, constitutional reforms, and the spectre of political andreligious radicalism in the highest seats of power. A combination of economic,political, and religious pressures in England had forced the reunion of parliamentand monarchy in 1660, and the ensuing cultural moment of the Restorationrequired the negotiation and mediation of the nation's recent past. 39 Internal andexternal wars had devastated trade, and the fracturing of governmental authorityhad given rise to a weak, divided nation, that both moderate religious radicals andlandholding gentry increasingly felt could only be rejuvenated by the return of themonarch. The anarchy and heterogeneity of Civil War and Commonwealth, theyhoped, would now be countered by harmony and a certain homogeneity of politicaland religious life. Part of this program would be brought about by the exertion ofstate control into a wide variety of cultural forms and discourses. For this thesis, theattempts by the returning monarchical government to control, police, and dictatethe productions of the printing community are of paramount importance, but suchactions did not exist on their own, and must be seen in relation to a complex set ofordinances and government decrees designed to demarcate, delineate, andcircumscribe the public life of Restoration London and England. This chapter isconcerned to examine those attempts and their significance in some depth. Controlover print culture was just one example, though an extremely important one, of the39See the comments of Paul Seaward, The Cavalier Parliament and the Reconstruction of the OldRegime, 1661 -1667 (Cambridge, 1989), 39.27state's attempts to homogenize and contain dissent in this historical moment, andworked in combination with attempts to police religious life, and delimit politicalradicalism in English society. Print culture was by this time clearly the most effectivemeans to influence public knowledge of political, cultural, and social events, andtherefore offered a variety of positions from where to articulate criticism of the state.The circumstances of the years between roughly 1640-1660 were seen at theRestoration as evidence of great disease wrought in the public body of the City andthe nation. The decisive historical events of these years had been brought aboutlargely by the fracturing of royal power and the growing strength of dissidentpolitical and religious publics. With the reinstallation of the monarchy, theseuncontrollable and dangerous factions were both feared and seen as a threat to socialorder and stability, particularly in London, where dissenting interests were oftenidentified with the causes of urban independence. 40 As the speech opening thischapter from 'Monarchy' to 'Rebellion' during Charles II's coronation processionstated, hopes were pinned on a restored monarchy to purge these disturbingelements from the guts of London's social body where they continued to breed'Intestine Strife'. 'Monarchy', the restored institution of government in its perfectedform, would eradicate non conformity to the Church of England and resistance tothe Crown from the City, and enforce social and political uniformity by compellingthe kingdom's population to confess that kingship was the only form ofgovernment capable of uniting the state and transcending the recent conflicts.The monarch was restored as the head of the body politic, and Charles II'sgovernment was to heal the wounds caused by the Civil War and theCommonwealth. When the social body became really sick, literally, in 1665 with theplague, some writers could not resist employing the metaphor of the king as healer,40Jones (1978), 37.28capable of expelling from the sick community whatever was inimical to it. Forexample, Thomas Cock, author of a text on public health in 1665 entitled Hygienie,or A Plain and Practical Discourse Upon the First of the Six Non-Naturals, in adiscussion of good and bad vapors, related that the heart was the ultimate judge ofwhat was good for the individual body. Cock, in explaining this, used the metaphorof the heart as king, capable of sensing what was best for the social body. Plagues, in away, would be defeated by the wisdom of a king;which being communicated by the lungs to the heart, the heart (as in aThrone) by its Prerogative Royal, and Legislative Power, acts Rex, andtruly examines and determines, approves and disallows whatever isHomogeneal and Heterogeneal to itself; and when it apprehends anyinimical blood, scent, or vapour, contaminated and lodged in (itsKingdom) the Body, to approach its presence by the communication ofinferior parts, it speedily throws off, and expells it by the coercivepower of its Systole. 41The monarch embodied what was best for the social body at the Restoration, and itwas his power and wisdom that could surgically excise the diseased portions of thecommunity from the rest of English society. But in reality, the king could not actalone, and required a similar thinking Privy Council and parliament in order tocarry out this operation.I) CIRCUMSCRIBING THE BODY POLITICIn the elections called by the hastily assembled Convention Parliament asCharles II made his way back to London in 1660, the parliamentary power baseestablished by Presbyterians and independent religious sects was rapidly and41 Thomas Cock, Hygienie, or A Plain and Practical Discourse Upon the First of the Six Non-Naturals;viz: Air: with Cautionary Rules and Directions for the Preservation of People in this time of Sickness(London, 1665), 16 . Systole is the contraction of the heart to force blood through the human body.29decisively eroded by the return of the conservative gentry to power. 42 Despite theendorsement at the request of Charles II of the Act of Indemnity and Oblivion,absolving and protecting from prosecution all those who had aided parliament orbenefited from the sale of royalist or church lands — with the exception of theregicides — the Convention Parliament quickly ordered the symbolic mutilation ofthe textual representations of religious freedom by having the public hangman burnthe Solemn League and the Covenant, which exemplified the agreement byPresbyterian dissenters to support parliament and oppose episcopacy. 43 TheConvention Parliament also repealed the 1642 statute excluding the Anglicanbishops from the House of Lords, allowed clergy to once again hold lay offices, andrestored the leading gentry to control over civil power through their command overthe offices of the justices of the peace.The parliament that was to sit for the next decade, commonly referred to asthe Cavalier Parliament, worked very effectively to both limit and contain thevarious political publics established in the period leading up to the Civil War andthrough the Commonwealth. This suppression was achieved by a number of actsbrought into legislation which, by the time plague struck London in 1665, hadgreatly circumscribed the public sphere. For example, the Act to Preserve the Personand Government of the King of 1661 extended the charge of treason fromimprisoning or restraining the monarch to encompass writing, printing, preaching421n addition to the texts focusing more on the political and religious events of Restoration era bySeaward and Jones already cited, see also the very good study by Ronald Hutton, The Restoration: APolitical and Religious History of England and Wales 1658-1667 (Oxford, 1985), and the essayscollected in J.R. Jones ed., The Restored Monarchy 1660-1688 (London, 1979). For a text dealing mostlywith the religious settlement at the Restoration see Douglas R. Lacey, Dissent and ParliamentaryPolitics in England (Rutgers, 1969).43Hutton, 155. The Act of Indemnity and Oblivion is reproduced in Browning ed., English HistoricalDocuments 1660-1714 , 164, hereafter cited as Documents and J.P. Kenyon, The Stuart Constitution 1603-1688: Documents and Commentary Second Edition (Cambridge, 1986), 339, hereafter cited as StuartConstitution.30and speaking against royal authority; in the same year the Act Against TumultuousPetitioning required that any petition proposing alterations to established laws hadto receive preliminary sanction from a justice of the peace or grand jury. 44 Inaddition, as part of an attempt to deal with the problem of large crowds gathering inthe public spaces of the City for political purposes, this Act dictated against anypetition being presented by more than twenty people. Another edict empoweredjustices of the peace, acting on information gathered from the churchwardens, withthe authority to eject the poor from a parish if it was suspected that they mightbecome a burden on the poor rate, and remove them to their locale of birth.Intended to prevent the poor rate of the wealthier parishes from becomingoverburdened and overtaxed, such legislation effectively placed a large part of thepopulation under the direct control of the justices of the peace and parish officers. 45Religious dissenters from the independent and Presbyterian sects wereeffectively removed from positions of civic power with the Corporation Act of 1662,which saw Charles II and the country gentry firmly placed in control of the civiccorporations. This move, of course, included the Corporation of London, which hadbeen a stronghold of dissenting political power for the last two decades. Charles IIhimself selected commissioners to administer this Act from individuals acceptableto the House of Commons and the local cavalier interests. These commissionershad great power to effect purges, forcing all office holders to take oaths of allegianceand the Anglican sacrament. 46 Also in the same year, the gentry's belief thatreligious uniformity was an essential prerequisite to political uniformity andstability saw the introduction of the much discussed Act of Uniformity. This actsought to impose religious harmony and agreement on all clergy in England by44Documents, 63 and 66.45Documents, 464. This act is known as the Poor Law Amendment Act of 1662.46Stuart Constitution, 351.31ordering them to use only the Book of Common Prayer, and consent to everythingprinted in it. Practicing ecclesiastics had to be ordained by a bishop, pledge non-resistance to royal authority, and disclaim the Covenant, now deemed to be anunlawful oath.47 Such an act was designed to purify the religious establishment inmuch the same way as the Corporation Act cleaned out the civic corporations, forthe nature of Presbyterian doctrines, and those of the independent sects even moreso, did not allow believers and practitioners to take oaths of any kind.Another much discussed act of 1662 and one that is central to this discussionin that it was directed at a vehicle often held most responsible for creating afractured political body in England and contributing to a breakdown of monarchicalpower and civil war, placed control over print culture in the hands of the highestoffices of church and state. This was the Licensing Act, and its object was toreorganize and oversee the press and the printing trade. 48 Several means wereadopted to achieve this end, including the reintroduction of the repressive StarChamber legislation of 1637 that required all mechanically reproduced publications— books, single sheets, bills, and pictures — to be licensed by the Secretaries of State,the Bishop of London, or the Archbishop of Canterbury. The Act also sought to limitthe number of master printers, thereby making production and the profession itselfeasier to monitor, and officially returned a monopoly on printed production inLondon to the Stationer's Company. The Stationer's monopoly had become invalidduring the Civil War and the Commonwealth, and was now reinstated byRestoration government in exchange for a program of self censorship. 49 Needless to47Documents, 377, and Stuart Constitution, 353. According to Jones (1978), the Act of Uniformity wasreally the birth of religious non conformity, for it permanently divided the nation.48Documents, 67. The Act stated that "the well-government and regulating of printers and printing-presses is matter of public care and of great concernment, especially considering that by the generallicentiousness of the late times many evil-disposed persons have been encouraged to print and sellheretical, schismatical, blasphemous, seditious, and treasonable books, pamphlets and papers".49Siebert, 257.32say, it became exceedingly difficult to publish anything critical of governmentauthority or policy, for only those publications which did not challenge thedominant ideologies of the restored powers would receive licensing.Finally, in a long list of parliamentary edicts leading up to the year plaguestruck Restoration London, two more completed the program of attempted politicaland religious homogenization. The Conventicle Act of 1664 legislated against allunauthorized religious meetings, meaning any not taking place in an establishedchurch under the direction of a conforming minister, and the Five Mile Act of 1665,brought in during the Oxford session when parliament had convened there at theheight of the plague in the City. Fearful that dissenting ministers were in a positionto assume control over the pulpits from the Anglican ecclesiastics who had fledLondon during the plague, and hypersensitive to the danger that these dissentingvoices, if publicly aired, could incite rebellion in an already restless public,parliament decreed that no ejected minister — one who had not taken the oathunder the Act of Uniformity — could come closer than five miles to any corporatetown.50Clearly, then, severe and repressive measures were enacted by the returningmonarchical government to eject opposition influences from parliament, churchand civic corporations, to control print culture, and impose some form of order onsocial and political life. What should be emphasized here, though, is that thepolitical changes imposed at the Restoration, however conservative and reactionarythey might appear when compared to the Commonwealth, did not simply representthe replacement of parliamentary authority by absolutist power. Though the Stuart,Charles II, was returned to the throne, the monarchy of his father, Charles I, wasnot. Charles II was not the victor over parliament, for the latter's successes in the50Entitled "An Act for Restraining Nonconformists From Inhabiting in Corporations", Documents, 382.33Civil War had made it a permanent political force, and at the Restoration it retainedreforms undertaken during the interregnum that had benefited its constituents as aclass. Without question the gentry who wielded parliamentary power welcomed thepossibility of the restoration of the monarch, for it would return the forms andprinciples of a hierarchical social order. As some recent historians, such as PaulSeaward and Ronald Hutton have argued, the true victors at the Restoration werethe country gentry, who wielded their power in parliament to circumvent thepotential for Charles II to gain absolute power. 51 Refusing to allow thereintroduction of the prerogative courts and the establishment of a large standingarmy were just two examples of the way in which parliament exerted itsindependence and acted as a check on the absolutist potential of another Stuart king.The country gentry were also prime movers in the re-establishment of thetraditional episcopal Church of England. Radicals, independents, and dissenters51Hutton, 183. Hutton states that the country gentry "gained absolutely from the Restoration", andtheir new found powers served as a preamble to Hanoverian England. Monarchy was re-established,and along with it episcopacy. For Hutton two obscure acts not mentioned in the text of the thesis point tothe victors of the Restoration: the 1662 Poor Law, which strengthened the power of the Justices of thePeace over their localities by giving them the power to deport any newcomers who occupied a tenementworth less than £10 per annum to the parish of their birth, and a statute of 1661 which imposed asevere penalty for the hunting of deer on any land without the permission of the owner. These wereboth measures whereby the ruling class of gentry "reinforced its privileges and its control over thecommunity". At the Restoration, with no prerogative courts and no standing army, "Charles II wasessentially the president of a federation of communities run by their landowners, who operated auniform judicial, administrative and political system". Paul Seaward, 49, also sees the gentry asreacting against the perceived decline of their wealth and power, expressed in the desires to reassertcontrol over their local communities: "The determination of the restoration gentry to suppress politicaldissidence and to restore the proper social hierarchy was clear enough in the activities of thecommissions of the peace, of the Corporation Act commissioners, and in the enthusiastic securitymeasures taken by individuals, sometimes at their own expense". Seaward counters the generallyagreed upon argument that the gentry were concerned to impede the power of the state and Crown inlocal affairs by stating that the gentry's real concern was with their social inferiors in the City and atcourt: "The royalism of the 1650s had been a philosophy of virtue in adversity, of distance from thecorruption and stained principles of political life. Instead of converting royalism into a set of valuesand ideas which would firmly uphold the government after the Restoration, the court's actions helpedto confirm its [the gentry] preference for the 'country', and its contempt for the court, its longing for theclarity of rural fresh air against the smog of city politics"(55).34were hunted out from the established church and civic corporations as urbancenters were invaded by country gentry and the power of their parliamentary seats,reinforcing their privileges, and their control over the communities of RestorationEngland.52Despite seemingly unanimous support for a restoration of the king by bothconservative country gentry and civic government many conflicts still existed. Onone hand, the former were deeply suspicious of civic powers that they felt to beseditious and Presbyterian, and fearful of the plots and rebellions, real or imagined,of other radical and dissenting sects. On the other hand, the members of thereligious sects were wary of perceived plans by the gentry to make the king absolute,abolish parliament and parliamentary law, and replace the church of England withpopery.53 The question of religious settlement proved to be the most difficult for the52Jones (1978), 71. Jones differs from Hutton and Seaward in viewing the restored gentry's power as lessstable and more tenuous. For him, the conservative reaction at the Restoration was masking theoperation of long term structural changes, marking the slow and consistent decay of the economicposition of the lesser gentry and freeholders, while "mercantile and urban retailing interests increasedin importance, and an entirely new social class, the 'monied interest' gained in prominence, wealth, andinfluence". Despite regaining their offices and land, provincial gentry never felt secure, and found itincreasingly difficult to maintain their standards of living due to falling agricultural production andrents, while they were continually faced with the prospect of the monied interest, the bankers andfinanciers, growing ever richer, and the court enjoying the favour of their proximity to the king.53See R.S. Bosher, The Making of the Restoration Settlement (London and New York, 1951) andSeaward, 5 and 39. Seaward acknowledges that the "demolition of the episcopal Church of England inthe 1640s, its partial replacement by presbyterianism, and the wide liberty of conscience permitted inthe 1650s, was bound to be one of the restored monarchy's trickiest problems". The solution, though, wasthe most unlikely: a reconstruction and reinstitution of the Anglican Church of England and thelegislation of religious uniformity. Interestingly enough, the author posits that conservative Anglicandivines had made strong connections during their years of marginality with the country gentry wherethey had been forced to find shelter and support. With this gentry's return to positions of power inRestoration England, the potential of the Church's role in the suppression of sedition and dissent wasrecognized. A minority party of ultra-Anglicans wielded enormous influence in the new CavalierParliament, and stressed the antiquity and legitimacy of the Church of England, more so than itsdoctrine. They argued for the political necessity of religious uniformity in the interests of social peaceand stability. Only a small faction of the Cavalier Parliament vociferously advocated religiousuniformity, but, the majority of the House being concerned to preserve social order, therefore allowedthe demands of this minority to be carried. Anglican parliamentarians continually attacked dissent in35restored monarchy since, after the demolition of the episcopal Church of Englandduring the Revolution and the liberty of conscience allowed by parliament, it washighly unlikely that a reconstruction of the Anglican church and the imposition ofreligious uniformity would transpire. Yet, this is exactly what occurred, despite thefact that the House of Commons itself that had insisted on legislation proclaimingthe dismantling of the Church of England twenty years previously. Enough supportwas mustered in parliament, and those pushing for conformity looked to thelegitimacy, permanence, and antiquity of the law of the Church of England toguarantee stability. As the Act of Uniformity itself stated, "nothing conduceth moreto the settling of the peace of this nation (for which is desired of all good men), norto the honour of our religion and the propagation thereof, than an universalagreement in the public worship of Almighty God...". 54 Social and political stabilityin Restoration England, or so it was felt, relied upon the imposition of religiousuniformity and conformity upon the social body.II) POLICING PRINT CULTUREWidespread interest and involvement in religious affairs and politics at theRestoration was a legacy of the previous two decades, and clearly could not be easilyeffaced. During the Civil War and the Commonwealth the interest and participationof the public in political events had been assured by radical preaching and theany form, and opposed Charles II's bid to allow some form of religious freedom. They argued that thefreedom to choose religious doctrine according to one's own individual conscience was what had led torebellion, and called for the supremacy of institutionalized religious authority over individualconsciences. These Anglican supporters could not go so far as to give the monarch himself the power tointerpret the word of God, for the unchecked power of the king in religious concerns was equally asdetrimental as the anarchy of individual beliefs. See Lacey (1969), 14-32, for a comprehensive accountof the shift from presbyterian control in the City of London, to the collapse of independent religiouspower by 1662. Also interesting, and coming at the issue from the perspective of arguments over thenotion of public and private interests, and their corresponding benefits to the community and nation, inthe discourses about religious toleration at the Restoration is J.A.W. Gunn, Politics and the PublicInterest in the Seventeenth Century (London and Toronto, 1969).54Documents, 378.36productions of the printing press. It should be apparent by now how Restorationgovernment succeeded in controlling what was said and taught from the pulpit,through the imposition of the Act of Uniformity and the removal of dissenting andunorthodox religious voices from public life. It is now necessary to take a closer lookat moves to control the print culture of Restoration London.At this time, the censorship of the press in England was equally ascontentious an issue as religious uniformity. 55 In 1662, with the return of Charles II55Aside from the brief analyses in the previously cited texts by Seaward, Hutton, Siebert, and Jones, ofparticular interest on this issue are Richard L. Greaves, Deliver Us From Evil; The RadicalUnderground in Britain 1660-1663 (Oxford, 1986), James Walker, "The Secret Service Under Charles IIand James II" in Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 4th series, vol.15, 1932, in addition to his"The Censorship of the Press during the Reign of Charles II" in History , new series XXXIII, 1950, andPeter Fraser, The Intelligence of the Secretaries of State and their Monopoly of Licensed News 1660-1688 (Cambridge, 1956). Legal authority and precedent for controlling printed matter revolved aroundthe treason laws, proclamations, and royal injunctions of 1559, and the Star Chamber decrees of 1586and 1637. In 1641 parliament abolished the authority of the Star Chamber thereby inhibiting thepossibility that an author might be prosecuted for printed material critical of governmental authority.Also around 1641, when conflicts between the King and parliament grew tense, the monopoly by way ofroyal charter given to the Stationer's Company for licensed printed production broke down. TheStationer's Company themselves had switched allegiances to parliament in the hope of preserving amonopoly, but lack of controls allowed anyone who had access to a printing block to publish withoutfear. Parliament was forced to establish a committee in May of 1641, soon after the assumption of stateadministration, to examine the question of the press. The House was being buffeted from all sides bynumerous pamphlets, broadsides, newsbooks, sermons and petitions. Presbyterians and independentscampaigning for support in parliament, as well as royalists and high Anglicans, saw the benefits ofgarnering public support through the printing press. As Frederick Seaton Siebert has pointed out,parliament created 'public opinion' at this moment, and, once in power, quickly became terrified ofit(180). By summer of 1643, parliament issued an ordinance preparing for the regulation and licensing ofprinted production and, as Siebert shows, "it is significant that the movement which sought to curtailthe powers of the crown did not seek to abolish the controls but merely the source from which thecontrols emanated" (187). Power over the press was placed firmly in the hands of parliament, and theold alliance between the jurisdiction of the state and the Stationer's Company was renewed — only thelicensing system now had biases that were Presbyterian and parliamentary rather than royalist andepiscopal. Under Cromwell, periods of absolute repression were interspersed with moments of relativefreedom for print production until 1655, when Cromwell himself produced a decree of regulation. Underthis decree all official and unofficial newsbooks were suppressed, printers shops were inspected, allunlicensed printers suppressed and prosecuted, as well as street hawkers and mercury women, who soldsingle sheets and playbills in the public spaces of the urban centres. Offenders were sent to the prison atBridewell for corporal and pecuniary punishment.37to the throne, a new program of censorship and restraints on the printing press wasimplemented as soon as the transfer of power was complete. One of the first acts ofCharles II was to call in and have the public hangman burn several schismaticworks at Session House in Old Bailey, including John Goodwin's The Obstructoursof Justice (1649), and Milton's Pro Populo Anglicano Defensio (1650) andEikonoklastes (1649).56 All reforms, decrees, and acts deriving from the period of thePuritan Revolution were repudiated, and the new royal government took up whereit had left off in 1641. The sole exception being that it was impossible to revive theStar Chamber, for its abolition had received the assent of Charles I. Though the StarChamber could not adjudicate as an actual body, most of its legislation was revivedin some form and the king allowed, even urged, parliament to assist him incontrolling the press — a job that had once been a matter solely of royal right andprivilege. 57 Charles II did not relinquish much power, if any, and still retained theprerogative to suppress and license by royal proclamation, in addition to retainingauthority over copyrights. The monarchy had wisely added parliamentary assistanceand legislation to the privileges over the presses it had enjoyed previously, andeven gave parliament pre-emptive control in some measure. By June of 1662 theLicensing Act was in effect, and remained in operation more or less until 1694. It isclear that the Act was seen by Charles and his government as an integral part ofendeavors to preserve order and social peace, and was rapidly moved through theHouse of Commons with the addition of a note from the king himself stressing thatthe Act "did most conduce to the securing of the peace of the Kingdom". 58Under the Licensing Act printing was again limited to the City's masterprinters who belonged to the Stationer's Company, and to the two presses at the56Greaves, 208, and Siebert, 238.57Siebert, 237.58Cited in Seaward, 160.38universities of Cambridge and Oxford. A master printer was allowed two presses,one journeyman, and one to three apprentices, depending on their status in theCompany. The importation of books from abroad in English was banned outright,and foreign language books had to land in London, except on special order from theArchbishop, whose appointee had to inspect them before they were freed from thecustoms officers. Book selling was limited to members of the Company solely, orthose licensed to do so by the Bishop of the diocese where the seller resided. Inaddition, all "haberdashers of small wares, ironmongers, chandlers, andshopkeepers" were specifically prohibited from handling books and other printedmateria1. 59 As a condition of the licensing stipulations, each printer had to affix hisname on every production from their shop, and, as often as possible, the name ofthe author. The Lord Chancellor, the Keeper of the Seal, the Lords Chief Justices,and the Lord Chief Baron, or individuals appointed by them, were in charge oflicensing books on the law. Texts dealing with the "history concerning the state ofthis realm" fell under the jurisdiction of the Principal Secretaries of State and, forbooks on heraldry, titles of honor or arms, the task fell to the Earl Marshal orappointee. And finally, books on divinity, philosophy, science, and art fell to theoffice of the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of London. 60Dissenting and controversial publications still continued to be published,though their production became severely constrained. 61 That strict control over the59Siebert, 240.60Licensing Act, Documents, 68.61The previously cited text by Greaves is concerned with analyzing this material and the constraintsunder which it was produced. Siebert points out thatin spite of the stringent regulations and the multiplicity of agencies of enforcement,there continued to flow from the presses a stream of publications which in that day andage were considered either seditious or offensive. While some of the publications seemmild enough to modern eyes accustomed to lively and often vituperative politicalcriticism, it must be remembered that in the seventeenth-century both the government39print culture of early modern London was deemed essential for effectivemaintenance of public order is made clear in the number of texts produced at thetime addressing the issue. In A Brief Discourse Concerning Printing and Printers,(1663), published by the anonymous 'Society for Printers', the pamphlet called forthe inclusion of printers in the policing of the industry, criticizing their exclusion infavour of the Stationer's Company. A member of the Stationer's Company did notnecessarily have to be a printer, or even know anything about the trade, and couldjust deal in book stock. Therefore, even though given a monopoly on production inthe City for a program of self censorship, it really was in the financial interests of themembers of the Stationer's to disseminate as much printed matter as possible,seditious, non-conforming, or otherwise. The text argues that if the printersthemselves were given enhanced power through the Licensing Act, more of themwould be encouraged to obey, and comes to the conclusion that "printing requires amore than ordinary inspection, because of the great influence it hath upon thePublike peace and safety, which is very much endangered by its irregularity, andwhich ought by all means possible to be preserved".62Even stronger in its calls for a policing of the trade and its productions, was atext by Richard Atkyn's published in 1664, one year before the plague struck London.This book, entitled The Original and Growth of Printing; Collected out of History,and the Records of this Kingdome, argued that the art of printing, and absolutelyeverything connected with it, depended upon, and should depend upon, the Royaland its subjects were inexperienced in either digesting the printed page or judging itseffects(249).I take a more positive view of the print culture of seventeenth-century, and see it as a terrain makinguse of highly sophisticated strategies to target publics, as well as complex representational strategies.Comparing the print medium of that day to our own is somewhat facile, and does nothing to better ourunderstanding of the specific intentions, beliefs, and motivations behind the printed products of theRestoration.62A Brief Discourse Concerning Printing and Printers, Printed for a Society of Printers (London, 1663), 9.40prerogative. In the book's frontispiece (FIG.2), a lower image of a laurel wreathedhead and shoulder portrait of Charles II presides over a discarded pile cannons andother weaponry. Pushed into the background, like a historical memory, is the imageof an army rushing forward to do battle, directed by a figure with a baton mountedupon a horse. This is perhaps a reference to Charles I, and the battles of the recentCivil War, as the ruler was well known for his equestrian portraits. The battle itselfis invisible, taking place behind the portrait of Charles II, and on the right an armyretreats victorious and orderly out from behind the image of the king. Charles II hasbrought stability to a nation wrought by internal wars without causing any moreviolent conflict, this lower image informs a viewer, an interpretation reinforced bythe Latin inscription below the portrait drawn from Cicero, 'Cedant Arma Togae','leaving arms for togas', literally meaning leaving strife for peace. Above thispicture is a second, larger image, depicting Charles II seated on a throne flanked bytwo figures, one in bishop's dress holding a bible, representing episcopacy and theAnglican Church of England, the other displaying the purse containing the GreatSeal, representing the sovereignty of the king, and associated with the office of theLord High Chancellor, the highest judicial official in the nation. 63 The two figuresare symbolically joined by a banner they each hold in an outstretched hand, on63The figure on the left could also represent the Archbishop of Canterbury, as the robes are strikinglysimilar to the dress required of that position. See, for example, George Clinch, English Costume(London, 1909). The right figure seems to be in the regalia of one of the monarch's clerks, for examplethe Clerk of the Privy Seal or the Clerk of the Chamber, but the purse is clearly that which containsthe Great Seal, and is clearly shown in several portraits of various Lord High Chancellors. TheChancellor was sort of a secretary of state, presiding over the House of Lords, heading the judiciary,and controlling the appointments of the Justices of the Peace. The purse for the Seal was borne in front ofthe Chancellor, or carried on his arm during processions, but the Seal itself always remained in theHouse of Lords. At the opening of Parliament, the purse is the receptacle in which the Lord Chancellorconveys the signed copy of the king's speech from the Robing Room to the steps of the Throne. The GreatSeal itself was the emblem representing the authority of the sovereign, and the only object throughwhich the will of the king could be expressed. See H.C. Maxwell-Lyte, Historical Notes on the Use ofthe Great Seal of England (London, 1926), and J. Harvey Bloom, English Seals (London, 1906).41which is written 'Scriptura et Leges Sunt Fundamenta Coronae', 'scripture and lawsare the foundations of the crown'. The monarch sits on his throne, a hand on eachfigure's shoulder, giving them both royal protection and power, as rays deliver thedivine right of rule from the heavens to the king. 64The basis of the king's power lies with the written word represented byscripture and law, disseminated through the print medium to his subjects, amessage reinforced with great brevity by Atkyns in his epistle to the king, where hestates "Where the Word of a King is there is Power: The King and Power beingRelatives". Atkyns goes on to assert that printing is the people's deity, and as such isvery dangerous if mishandled. Therefore, the trade should be under the protectionof the king, who can ably administer and guide it:That Printing belongs to Your Majesty, in Your publique and privateCapacity, as Supreme Magistrate, and as Proprietor, I do with allboldness affirm; and that it is a considerable Branch of the Regal Power,will no Loyal Person deny: for it ties, and unties the very Hearts of thePeople, as please the Author: If the Tongue, that is but a little Member,can set the Course of Nature on Fire; how much more the Quill, whichis of a flying Nature in itself, and so Spiritual, that it is in all Places atthe same time; and so Powerful, when it is cunningly handled, that it isthe Peoples Deity. 6564The Latin inscription "Justitia Stabilitur Solium" can be translated as "by justice the crown isstabilized", and "Per me Reges Regnant" as "through me kings rule", the 'me' being Christ. The latterinscription was also found on the crown of the Holy Roman Emperor since the tenth century. My thanksto Prof. Carole Knicely for aiding with the Latin translations.65Richard Atkyns, Esq. The Original and Growth of Printing: Collected out of History, and the Recordsof this Kingdome. Wherein is also Demonstrated, that Printing appertaineth to the Prerogative Royal;and is a Flower of the Crown of England (London, 1664), Bl. In this extremely interesting text, theauthor goes on to argue that parliament should have nothing to do with control of the press, and that itshould be up to the decision of the king and his privy council to police what is said about public figures.Atkyns argues that liberty of the press caused Charles II's father, Charles I, to be imprisoned, for aflurry of anti monarchical texts had been published and the people accepted whatever was printed as'truth':the Common People that before this liberty believed even a Ballad, because it was inPrint, greedily Suckt in these Scandals, especially being Authorized by a God of their42Atkyns also states that printing is a food capable of nourishing the individualsubject, as well as the public political assembly. He reasons that "Printing is like agood Dish of Meat, which moderately eaten of, turns to the Nourishment andhealth of the Body; but immoderately, to Surfeits and Sicknesses". The appetites ofsuch a body for print should not govern the head, which, for Atkyns, is without adoubt the monarch.A figure to control the 'diet' of the social body was required. Sir RogerL'Estrange was named surveyor of the press in 1662 and given wide ranging powersaimed at silencing partisan print culture. L'Estrange was entrusted by the king tosearch for and seize all seditious material including pictures, manuscripts, andbooks, and to arrest authors, printers, and publishers, a task he accomplishedthrough the operation of a network of spies.66 Book stock and printing materialwere often seized without any apparent reason, in the hopes that the printingindustry would be frightened into passivity and conformity with governmentdemands if the Stationer's Company's program of self-censorship was ineffective. Inthe language of a typical warrant of 1664 issued from the king to L'Estrange, thepolitical expediency of controlling the print culture of Restoration London for thepurposes of ensuring social peace and stability was exemplified:His Mate taking notice of ye many ill consequences that arise from yeprinting, publishing, & dispersing of unlawful books & pamphlets to yedisturbance of ye government & of ye public peace of the nation, Hisexpresse pleasure & command is, that taking with you a constable youdoe from time to time make search for & seize authors, contrivers,own making: the Parliament finding the Faith of the deceived to be implicitly inthem...so totally possest the Press that the King could not be heard: By this means theCommon People became not onely Statists, but Parties in the Parliaments Cause,hearing but one side, and then Words begat Blows: for though Words of themselves aretoo weak Instruments to Kill a Man: yet they can direct how, and when, and what Menshall be killed.66For a biography of L'Estrange see George Kitchen, Sir Roger L'Estrange (London, 1913).43printers, binders, stitchers, & publishers, dispensers, & concealers oftreasonable, schismaticall, seditious or unlicensed books, libells,pamphlets, or papers, & bring them in safe custody before one of hisMate principal sec. of state, to ye end they may be proceeded againstaccording to law, together with all copys exemplaryes of such Bookslibells, pamphlets or paper as aforesaid. And in the due executionhereof all justices of ye peace, constables, & other his Mate officers &Subjects are to be aiding & assisting to you, as there shall from time totime be occasion, etc. 67L'Estrange believed that the public had no right to be informed of politicalaffairs, and, under his control the two Restoration newspapers, the Newes and theIntelligencer, published less and less information about political events. With ahigh literacy rate, particularly in London, these moves represented attempts to limitdiscussion and the amount of information available to a political culture of a highlyliterate and vocal population. L'Estrange's own work, Considerations and Proposalsin Order to the Regulation of the Press (1663), claimed that printed material stillmanifested a revolutionary spirit, and was being utilized to disaffect the peopletowards Charles II and encourage "seditious Inclinations into Action". 68 Amongsthis many suggestions to control access by members of the body politic to printedmaterial and printing presses, L'Estrange even went so far as to suggest that nomaster printer be allowed to keep a press in his own home, nor should any printinghouse be allowed to have a back door.69 L'Estrange's news-sheets quickly became thesanctioned public voice of the government, continuing to appear during the plagueof 1665, when it was crucial to maintain an 'official' version of the epidemic'scourse through the City, even though the paper had pretended the outbreak did notexist until it reached epidemic proportions. Such a monopoly on public news, and67Cited in Siebert, 256.68Sir Roger L'Estrange, Considerations and Proposals in Order to the Regulation of the Press (London,1663), A3.69L'Estrange, 4.44the importance of keeping the voice of the government heard above all others, wasironically referred to in a 1666 poem about the plague, wherein the author remarkedthat L'Estrange's two publications were the only products available in the City, andbuying them represented the only trade: "Nothing sold here, but Oxford andL'Estrange,/ Two Sheets, the Cities Market and Exchange". 70In addition to the regulation of licenses for printed production, the issuing ofprinting patents and copyrights also served the aims of government policing of theprinting industry. 71 These could be issued as a reward for acquiescence with theprinting regulations dictated by the state, and as a way of more closely binding theinterests of individual printers and publishers with those of the government. Theissuing of a patent was, quite simply, a royal grant of monopoly that gave soleownership of the reproduction of a book to an author, printer, and stationer, or thereservation of an entire section of the publishing industry to a group or individual.Copyrights were often decided from prior registration in the annals of theStationer's Company. For example, license was given to the Stationer's Companyitself to print all French comedies and Aesop's Fables. One of the most notoriouspatents issued, and relevant to this study, was that given to the surveyor of the presshimself, Sir Roger L'Estrange. In 1663 L'Estrange was given exclusive monopoly onthe rights to publish "all narratives not exceeding two sheets of paper, mercuries,diurnals, playbills, quack-salvers, bills, etc.". 72 In addition to erudite and scholarlybooks and the two weekly newspapers, the Newes and the Intelligencer, it appearsthat the cheapest and most ephemeral print forms coming off of the popular presses70John Crouch, London's Bitter Sweet Cup of Tears (London, 1666), 6. The author's reference to Oxfordwas probably a reference to the Intelligencer, traditionally parliamentary news, and a reference to thefact that during the plague parliament had removed to Oxford, one of the only places other thanLondon where a printing press could be found.71Siebert, 245.72Siebert, 245.45of Restoration London were intended to be firmly controlled and administered fromthe highest offices of the state.III) ORDERING THE NATURAL AND THE SOCIAL WORLDWhile the productions of the printing press and the printing trade itself werebeing organized during the early years of the Restoration, a similar process ofreformulation was being carried out on the methodology and production ofknowledge. The discourse of natural philosophy, or experimental science — ofwhich John Sellers' 'political arithmetic' on the broadsheet was a part — underwentsignificant alterations." For both government and members of a concerned public,anxious to distance the nation from the political and social unrest of the two decades73In addition to the rhetoric of natural philosophy analyzed in the previously cited text by RichardKroll, the most stimulating analytical account of the discourse of natural philosophy and its historicaland cultural context is Steven Shapin and Simon Schaffer, Leviathan and the Air Pump (Princeton,1985). Kroll sets out to "reexamine what was at stake in the historiographical union of science andlanguage" (5), and sees natural philosophy as part of a multiple discursive reorientation definedlargely by 'nonscientific motives'. The writers involved in articulating the discourse of naturalphilosophy cooperated in "constructing a distinctively neoclassical method within their literarypractices"(7). The construction of knowledge is then contingent on the specifics of its use or intended uses,and therefore Kroll shows "the deployment of a contingent epistemology to serve the motives ofinstituted organs of power, of which a typical case is the Royal Society"(18). The dominant rhetoric ofthe Restoration, of which natural philosophy comprises a large part, "entails a distinct epistemology,which in turn necessitates an equally distinct will to knowledge and representation"(40). Shapin andSchaffer, on the other hand, look at the scientific controversies between Robert Boyle and ThomasHobbes, and their resonance in the cultural context of the Restoration to "suggest that solutions to theproblem of knowledge are embedded within practical solutions to the problem of social order, and thatdifferent practical solutions to the problem of social order encapsulate contrasting practical solutions tothe problem of knowledge"(15). The authors seek to explore the character of the relationship betweenthe history of the new science, natural philosophy, and the history of political ideas and practice inthe contrasting views put forward by the key seventeenth-century figures Hobbes and Boyle:One solution (Boyle's) was to set the house of natural philosophy in order by remedyingits divisions and by withdrawing it from contentious links with civic philosophy. Thusrepaired, the community of natural philosophers could establish its legitimacy inRestoration culture and contribute more effectively to guaranteeing order and rightreligion in society. Another solution (Hobbes's) demanded that order was only to beensured by erecting a demonstrative philosophy that allowed no boundaries betweenthe natural, the human, and the social, and which allowed for no dissent within it(21).46between 1640 and 1660, it was clear that unregulated knowledge could produce civilstrife. In 1662, with the granting of a royal charter, the creation of naturalphilosophic knowledge was institutionalized in the Royal Society. 74 This publicsociety was made up of individuals from a great variety of social backgrounds,members of the court and civil service, as well as merchants and tradesmen. 75 Thegroup was united under the common ideology of producing scientific 'matters offact' through experimentation and discourse. 76 With the granting of a state sanction,some members of the Royal Society, and in particular those associated with the74For specific histories of the Royal Society see Thomas Sprat, History of the Royal Society (London,1667), Thomas Birch, The History of the Royal Society ,4 vols., (London, 1756-1757), and the work ofMichael Hunter, Establishing the New Science: The Experience of the Early Royal Society(Woodbridge, 1989), and Science and Society in Restoration England (Cambridge, 1981) On the periodduring the Interregnum, and the contributions of the Puritan scientists and early groups leading up to theestablishment of the Royal Society see Charles Webster, The Great Instauration: Science, Medicine,and Reform 1626-1660 (London, 1975).75At this time, the composition of the Society was 40% from landed and aristocratic families, and 23%were the sons of Anglican clergy. The other third was made up of the sons of merchants, artisans, andyeomen. See Hunter (1981), 60-61.76Michael Hunter (1989), cautions that it is difficult, if not impossible, to definitively assert or discernthe ideology of the early Royal Society(46). That they needed an ideology, or a public statement oftheir aims, is certainly clear, and Hunter cites the following reasons: incorporation gave them publicvisibility and permanence, and they needed to establish the public importance and justify the culturalneed for what they were doing; they needed to answer to the critics of the new science, for example,from High Churchmen and lampooners; and finally, they required a definition of their role in the newsociety of the Restoration, for they believed that what they were proposing was innocuous, positive,and reconciling (48). The Society was intended to be permanent and stable, and be secure after theturmoil of the mid century, and it did have the capability to take in a mixture of royalists, Puritans,and Anglicans in a public body dedicated to the corporate pursuit of scientific knowledge, or 'truth'. Itspublic function was stressed by its first president, Lord Brouncker, and in Sprat's History , where thepotential to subsume the private interests of its members into the public concerns of the group for thebenefit of society was stressed. Hunter ties this to the need during the Restoration to move away fromindividual interests and the capriciousness associated with them, to more public and formal structuresand procedures, a move paralleled in shifts by government to impersonal and bureaucratic institutionsand public service. Sprat's History was careful to repeatedly proclaim loyalty to the monarch, andthe benefits to the nation of natural philosophy. As Hunter writes, Sprat's aim was simply to align thenew science with as many consensus values as possible, his specifics as to what was excluded mainlycomprising elaborations of the enmity towards 'fanaticism' whose wide support among divers sectionsof the political nation was what had made the Restoration of the Stuarts possible a few yearsearlier"(57).47figure of Robert Boyle, began to actively theorize and publicize how themethodology utilized in producing undisputed matters of fact, and the knowledgesuch matters of fact represented, could perform a political and social function.As the work of Steven Shapin and Simon Schaffer has shown, the knowledgeproduced through the Society's discourse on science and experiment wasrepresented at the time as being objective and uncontested inasmuch as it wasproduced by a group of individuals occupying a communal space with clearlydefined and accepted working methods and rules. This idea of the communalproduction of knowledge could counter a notion of the acquisition of knowledgeadvocated by various Civil War and Interregnum sectaries, based on directindividual experience. 77 Moreover, and of even greater importance, knowledgeproduced in a community could serve as a microcosmic model of how social peaceand stability might be established and maintained at the Restoration. The scientificand intellectual community institutionalized in 1662 as the Royal Society, bycountering disagreement and strife with consensus and stability, could foresee theirmethods being implemented in, or having repercussions in, a much wider culturalfield, and potentially indicating the way to a permanent and indivisible social order.Even if not present in the laboratory while an experimental matter of fact wasproduced, an individual, by accepting and acknowledging the manner and practicesof the production of this kind of knowledge, could give assent to it through aprocess of what has been termed 'virtual witnessing'. This process was the extensionand multiplication of witnesses through the dissemination in print of a descriptionand/or representation of an experiment, in order to allow the public legitimation ofits matters of fact. Shapin and Schaffer have stated that "through virtual witnessing77Shapin and Schaffer, 39. "The laboratory was, therefore, a disciplined space, where experimental,discursive, and social practices were collectively controlled by competent members. In these respects,the experimental laboratory was a better space in which to generate authentic knowledge than thespace outside it in which simple observations of nature could be made".48the multiplication of witnesses could be, in principle, unlimited. It was therefore themost powerful technology for constituting matters of fact". 78Since this study will examine a broadsheet that brought together the visualand the statistical, the emphasis in this historical context on the connection betweenwhat is seen, or witnessed, and truth is crucial. Natural philosophy advocated thatsincere knowledge was crystallized through the making of what were termed'mirrors of nature', in other words the construction of detailed and objectiveobservations of the natural world. Such realistic representations were based on aphilosophy that the sense of sight was primary, and natural philosophy was avehicle that could bring phenomena into view that had previously remainedinvisible. This conception was the basis of Robert Hooke's 1665 book Micrographia,which claimed that the insights offered in the text's commentary and visual imagesrepresented true knowledge and could help regulate and order sensual impressions.Such a process was "to begin with the Hands and Eyes, and to proceed on throughthe Memory, to be continued by the Reason". 79 The expediency of utilizing visualimagery with natural scientific discourse could easily allow the conflation of visualrepresentation and truth. Boyle used images in his texts to facilitate the process ofvirtual witnessing and, as Shapin and Schaffer argue, "their role was to be asupplement to the imaginative witness provided by the words in the text". 80 I willargue that the truth claims of the visual imagery in Dunstall's and Sellers'broadsheet were maintained by way of a mutual relationship with statistical 'fact',derived from the presence of the comparisons drawn from the Bills of Mortality.The slippage from representation into truth disguises the ideological articulations ofthe broadsheet, and effaces the possibility that the City of London and the behaviour78Shapin and Schaffer, 60.79Robert Hooke, Micrographia; or Some Physiological Descriptions of Minute Bodies made byMagnifying Glasses (London, 1665), Preface.8°Shapin and Schaffer, 61.49of its population under the infection of the plague might have appeared other thanthe way it was depicted.Social stability achieved through the establishment of religious uniformityand political consensus were critical issues at the Restoration, and Boyle along withthe Royal Society saw in their construction of an experimental community apositive metaphor for the forms and conventions social relations might now takeon. In other words, they saw the natural philosophic community linked by theobjective discourses of science , and their 'matters of fact' as providing an integralbasis for the preservation of social peace and stability. In attempting to make theproduction of knowledge visible as a collective enterprise and socially useful, thiscommunity moved towards the public constitution and validation of knowledge inorder to erase the social rupture and dissensus produced by the disputes of theprevious twenty years. As Shapin and Schaffer have argued;In the official formulation of the Royal Society, the production ofexperimental knowledge commenced with individuals' acts of seeingand believing, and was completed when all individuals agreed withone another about what had been seen and ought to be believed. Thisfreedom to speak had to be protected by a special sort of discipline.Radical individualism — the state in which each individual sethimself up as the ultimate judge of knowledge — would destroy theconventional basis of proper knowledge, while the disciplinedcollective social structure of the experimental form of life would createand sustain that factual basis. Thus the experimentalists were on guardagainst "dogmatists" and "tyrants" in philosophy, just as theyabominated "secretists" who produced their knowledge-claims in aprivate and undisciplined space. No one man was to have the right tolay down what was to count as knowledge. Legitimate knowledge waswarranted as objective insofar as it was produced by the collective, andagreed to voluntarily by those who comprised the collective. The50objectification of knowledge proceeded through the displays of thecommunal basis of its generation and evaluation. 81The history of the Royal Society and its key figures is implicitly bound up inthe religious and political debates of the Restoration. Boyle and his associates wereconvinced that social and religious peace were necessary for the construction andmaintenance of a social body able to serve both the individual interests of itsmembers, and those of the nation. In A Discourse Concerning Liberty of Conscienceof 1660, Boyle's close associate Peter Pett wrote: "The great alteration in the body ofthe people since these last twenty years, requires that our old ends of promoting thewelfare of the Church of England, should be attain'd by the conduct of newmeans". 82 Pett's, and consequently Boyle's, new means of correcting the deformityin the body politic came dangerously close to subjugating the church merely toprivate gain, for, they argued, it would be in serving the individual interests ofthose groups most needy of being pacified and incorporated into a Restorationsettlement — church, gentry, and merchants — that such a reparation could beachieved. The combined interests of these groups became identified after 1660 withthe national good, and their uniting factor was trade, motivated by private interest.According to Boyle, man's greed did not represent a hostile state of nature, as hisolder contemporary Hobbes would assert, but, conversely, was an essentialcomponent of God's plan for humanity. Longing for worldly possessions andcomfort had given society trade and manufacturing and, consequently, the discoveryof nature.83 In this combination, God's purpose for man and the full benefits ofhuman life would be achieved through the knowledge provided by natural81Shapin and Schaffer, 78.82Cited in J.R. Jacob, Robert Boyle and the English Revolution: A Study in Social and IntellectualChange (New York, 1977), 140. Boyle and Pett were advocates of a policy of limited religioustoleration, combined with strong discipline and the promotion of a strict work ethic to bring the moreradical dissenting groups into line.83Jacob, 141.51philosophy, or scientific inquiry. The latter kind of knowledge was useful for manin ordering his immediate economic universe and social world, in 'anatomizing'the physical world in a way, so that an individual could utilize this power to extendand exert his "Empire... over inferior Creatures". In such a way, Boyle argued,"Experimental Philosophy may become useful to human life". 84Moreover, such a link between natural philosophy and the interests oftraders, gentry, and clergy at the Restoration was not only reserved for the yield ofknowledge conducive to indigenous economic production and conditions. Forexample, in addition to enabling access to information about regional conditions forthe possibilities of trade and agriculture, the utility of natural philosophic wisdomwas also to be an essential part in the colonial project, and Boyle was commissionedby Charles II to take part in a Council for Foreign Plantations in 1660. This councilworked in tandem with a Council of Trade to project how the colonies in the WestIndies and North America could most efficiently be operated. In addition to theempirical information about material conditions and the most effective means toextract and transport the raw stuff of the colonies, natural philosophy could alsoserve a social function in ordering the population. Boyle was asked to offersolutions to many problems, including how the colonies could best be supplied withservants, the creation of a program to send vagrants overseas "who remain herenoxious and unprofitable", how to control the perceived debauched behavior of theplanters and servants, and, of course, the most efficient way to convert the nativesto Christianity. 85 The knowledge wielded by the natural philosopher was calledupon to discern the right candidates for emigration, so that "ye Justices of ye Peacemay be impowered at ye generall Sessions, or Assizes to... dispose of loose and84Boyle cited in Jacob, 142.85Jacob, 145. As J.R. Jacob writes, "the apparent intention behind the creation of the council then was togive some order and regularity to colonial settlements, which up to this point had grown ratherhaphazardly and not always to best effect from the point of view of the crown" (145).52disorderly people... for supply of forraigne Plantations". 86 The private interestsworking for the public good needed a way of removing problematic individualsfrom the social body, or at least a way of controlling or making them discernible andquantifiable, and looked to the enlightenment offered by natural philosophy.During the plague in London in 1665, scientific knowledge would be mobilized toserve a similar purpose in forming part of a sophisticated anatomy of the social bodyof the City, both as a statistical map of the urban center and its population, and a wayof imposing conceptual order on the disorder wrought by the disease.It should be clear by now that the Restoration, and in particular the early yearsprior to the plague of 1665, represented a moment when a new royal governmentwas determined to police a wide variety of cultural forms in order to insurereligious conformity, social peace, and stability, and willing to support certainreformulated discourses as a way of buttressing the power and permanence of thestate. Attempts were being made to reorganize culture at this moment in earlymodern England and, in many of its manifestations, it was pressed to becomeconcrete and ordered. 87 Richard Kroll argues, quite rightly, that the historicalmoment of the Restoration was marked by multiple discursive reorientations inresponse to the series of social, political, and religious pressures mapped out in thischapter.88 These discursive readaptations encouraged new focal points for cultural86Cited in Jacob, 148.87Hunter (1989), argues that the timing of the early Royal Society's attempts to institutionalize thenew science is significant, for it tells us something about the wider cultural context of mid seventeenth-century England: "Indeed, the time itself is arguably crucial, for the context of the Society's foundationis provided by a more general urge to organize which is in evidence during the decades on both sides of1660" (6).88Kro11, 39. He writes: "Earlier forms of discourse and inherited vocabularies remain visible but assumedifferent connotations and alliances; we witness the invention of new discourses to serve the needs ofrevived or new institutions". Kroll too sees the Restoration as a moment when culture becomes"organized and concrete". He cites the example of London after the Great Fire in 1666, as well asthe frontispiece of Sprat's History of the Royal Society, depicting King Charles II inalliance with Bacon and Boyle's totemic air pump, or the establishment of the53activities and productions that shaped self-representations and produced meaningsfor the members of Restoration society. In the next chapter, a specific cultural form,a type of representation of the plague featuring text, visual imagery, and statisticalinformation will be drawn into this Restoration nexus preoccupied with social peaceand stability, and the reorganization of cultural and discursive configurations.publication industry as a distinctive subculture, or the reorganization of universitypublishing, the architecture of the Royal Navy College at Greenwich, Wren's Londonchurches, the Royal Society Charter, the granting of the theatrical monopolies toDavenant and Killigrew, the introduction of women players on the stage, theinstitutionalization of the royal mistresses, the development of a strikinglyhomogenous portrait style influenced by Lely and Kneller, and the habit of tea drinkingas a characteristically English habit (44).The Royal Society also sought to reorganize language itself, and discussed forming a body to regulateand improve English in a manner similar to the Academie Francaise. The work "An Essay Towards aReal Character and a Philosophical Language (1668), posited a clear and systematic language to beutilized by merchants, divines, and natural philosophers, for the shortest way to clear knowledge. SeeHunter (1981), 118-119.54CHAPTER TWOREPRESENTING THE PLAGUE AND SOCIAL ORDER:ANATOMIZING THE SOCIAL BODYFor with all humble submission to your Lordship, I conceive, That it doth not ill-becomea Peer of the Parliament, or a Member of his Majestie's Council, to consider how fewstarve of the many that beg: That the irreligious Proposals of some, to multiply Peopleby Polygamy, is withall irrational and fruitless: That the troublesome seclusions in thePlague-time is not a remedy to be purchased at vast inconveniences: That the greatestPlagues of the City are equally, and quickly repaired from the Country: That thewasting of Males by Wars, and Colonies do not prejudice the due proportion betweenthem and Females: That the Opinions of plagues accompanying the Entrance of Kings isfalse, and seditious: That London, the Metropolis of England, is perhaps a Head too bigfor the Body, and possibly too strong: That this Head grows three times as fast as theBody unto which it belongs, that is, It doubles its People in a third part of the time:That our Parishes are now grown madly disproportionable: That our Temples are notsuitable to our Religion: That the Trade and very City of London removes Westward:That the walled City is but one fifth of the whole Pyle: That the old Streets are unfitfor the present freqeuncie of Coaches: That the passage of Ludgate is a throat toostraight for the Body: That the fighting men about London, are able to make three asgreat Armies as can be of use in this Island: That the number of Heads is such, as hathcertainly much deceived some of our Senators in their appointments of Pole-money, &c.From the Epistle Dedicatory to John Graunt'sNatural and Political Observations Mentioned in aFollowing Index, and made upon the Bills of Mortality (1662).What Come again? Where have you Roving been?And what Rare sights i'th' countrey have you seen?What Newes from thence? Did you the Plague outrun?Or tell me truly, was it not BegunBefore you came? Or is your Money spentWhich you had in your pockets when you went?Will not the Countrey trust? Your Credit's bad;Is their no Entertainment to be had?That to your City dailie Day by Day,You flock as fast as when you Ran away!Doth home spun Jone, or Country-Tom denieYou for to Lodge, or in their Barn to lie?It was the Plague did drive you out from hence,And now the Plague o' the Purse, I hear from thence:What fury dogs, and haunts you up and down,First from the City, to the Country Town?But when you'r there, you are afraid to stay,And with a nimble pace do Run-Away;55Like as the fearful Hare, or Swift-foot Deer,Doth file before the Hounds: Your pannick FearDoth cause you with a swift and nimble pace,To Run-Away, and flee from place to place,For suppos'd Safety; yet you are much worse,Having both Plague of the Body, and of the Purse.From a broadsheet entitled The Run-Awayes Return:or, the Poor Penniless Pilgrim (1665).56INTRODUCTIONIn Renaissance and early modern Europe, the notion of the anatomy referredto the demonstrative, staged dissection of a human body for didactic, moral, andjuridical purposes.89 In addition to the latter uses made of the spectacle, an anatomydissection represented a process enacted on an individual body, as a type or anobject, in order to catalogue and analyze its individual parts. As I indicated in theintroduction to this thesis, in England it was through the practice of anatomy thatthe distinct parts of the individual body could be relegated to their proper place inthe establishment of a hierarchy of organs and limbs. The rank and essential orderof the parts of the body thus established, a similar hierarchy could then be extendedto the social body in order to perpetuate an impermeable classification of socialpositions and titles. In Restoration England the noun, anatomy, and itsaccompanying verb 'to anatomize', appeared in printed representations from abroad range of discourses — the medical profession, in the works of politicalthinkers and religious scribes, as well as social commentators, and invariably wasinvested with disparate meanings. For example, the individual body was dissectedby the anonymous author of a 1672 broadside entitled The Phanatick Anatomizedthat caricatured the physical failings and deformities of religious dissenters: "HisBack, and Shoulders broad yet cannot bear/ A heavy Burden, such as Common89See for example Luke Wilson, "William Harvey's Prelectiones: The Performance of the Body in theRenaissance Theater of Anatomy", Representations 17, Winter 1987. Wilson's essay deals withHarvey's anatomy demonstrations for the College of Physicians in London in the 1620s. In a footnote,Wilson discusses the origins of the word itself: "A further indication that the 'whole' body is nothingother than the open or damaged body sewn up again or repaired is found in the word anatomy :etymologically a 'cutting up', the word describes the body as it is seen on the dissecting table, but itequally denotes simply the morphology of the intact body" (92). For a slightly earlier Continentalcontext and function for the anatomy, see in the same issue, Glenn Harcourt, "Andreas Vesalius and theAnatomy of Antique Sculpture", Representations 17, Winter 1987. Also dealing with the history of themedical and social aspects of anatomy dissections in England, but focusing primarily on the nineteenth-century, is Ruth Richardson, Death, Dissection, and the Destitute (New York, 1987).57Prayer/ His Belly's Tympanous, and full of pain/ Caused, (some think) by emptinessof brain".90 The body politic of the nation was the object of a similar process in thepublished speech by an ardent royalist during the Convention Parliament entitledEngland Anatomized, her Disease discovered, and the Remedy prescribed, in aSpeech by a Member of the (so called) Parliament (1660). 91 These examples aremarked by the positing of an affliction topical to Restoration society that necessitatesa cure, and their anatomies give away their political biases — in the latter, the cureis the reinstatement and preservation of royal authority, and for the former, it isreligious conformity.The plague was a phenomena located both in the individual body and in thesocial body. It was also reproduced through representation. Since the consequencesof plague were a sick individual and an afflicted body politic, several anatomieswere produced as a result of the outbreak in London in 1665. The individual wasdissected in Dr. George Thomson's medical text Loimotomia; or the PestAnatomized (1666), wherein he related his anatomical operation on a pestilentialbody, complete with a frontispiece illustration depicting the key moment of theevent (FIG.3). This scene represented, as Thomson related, the culmination of hisdesire to view the inward parts of a pestilential body. Upon opening the right cavityof the heart, Thomson found "a white congealed matter, extracting which with myfingers, and narrowly viewing it, I would not compare it to anything more like, thana Lamb-stone cut in twain".92 Here in this crude frontispiece, the doctor offers the90The Phanatick Anatomized (1672), anonymous broadside, collection of the British Library.91 England Anatomized, her Disease Discovered, and the Remedy prescribed, in a Speech by a Memberof the (so called) Parliament (1660). This broadside is reproduced in Somers Tracts vol 6 (London,1811).92George Thomson, Loimotomia; or the Pest Anatomized (London, 1666), 58. For Thomson, the plagueonly became deadly as a representation, when the body conceived the image of the disease, as hemakes clear in an earlier text on the plague, entitled Loimologia: A Consolatory Advice, and some BriefObservations Concerning the Present Pest (London, 1665). Here he claimed an individual could becomeinfected with the plague when they grew despondent or depressed, as when they were abandoned by58congealed substance to the viewer while the open cadaver of the fifteen year oldservant of a wealthy patient of Dr. Thomson's lies on a plinth, his body coveredwith buboes, as a pot of sulfur burns to kill airborne infection. Thomson's assistantfears the wrath of God, clasps his hands and looks to the heavens, but the anatomistis empowered by his discoveries, and directly engages the viewer offering visualproof of the dissection and the legitimacy of his medical knowledge.93the medical profession, causing them "to despond, and to become faint-hearted, who otherwise byconfidence and resolved Magnanimity, the best preservative in Nature (for as much as none was everinfected by the Pest, but either from an Idea or Image of Hatred, Terrour, and Diffidence in thephantasie of the Individual Person, or in the Archeus, the innate Spirit of every part of the body..."(8)93As an aside, what is most interesting about this event and image is that it is being represented otherthan it took place, and that Thomson seems to be performing an illegal act and openly flaunting it. Theimage portrays the dissection of the pestilential body occurring in an interior space, perhaps to give theimpression that it took place in a controlled laboratory space. The text, though, destabilizes theimage. In Thomson's own words he relates a different story: after curing the servant's master M. Pickthrough chemical means, he obtained permission "to open this defunct body; for my own instruction andthe satisfaction of all inquisitive persons." With the help of another servant, the corpse was not takento a laboratory or anatomy theater, but "placed in the open air in a yard adjacent, which for severalrespects was very convenient." Anatomies were traditionally performed on the bodies of criminals,turned over to the College of Physicians by royal decree. They were allowed four bodies from the reignof Henry VIII, until; Charles II upped the quota to six. Under Charles II, the Royal Society was alsogiven the privilege in their charter to perform dissections. If we see the plague as an inversion of socialconstraints, then it offered Thomson the opportunity to perform an anatomy himself, on the body of aninnocent youth, completely removed from the official constraints of the College or Royal Societywhich, for the most part, had evacuated the City. And further, this inversion created the space forThomson to publish a book flaunting this event visually and textually, creating the possibility thatthere could be many more witnesses to this dissection than in the confines of the College. But,contemporaneous voices are relatively silent on this event. Aside from a few scurrilous attacks onThomson for his butchery by members of the College, the most interesting mention is the following,completely inaccurate, example in a letter from Joseph Tillison to William Sancroft, Dean of St. Paul'sCathedral:Dr. Burnett Dr. Glover and one or 2 more of ye Colledge of Physitians with Dr. 0 Dowdwch was licensed by my Lds Grace of Canterbury, some surgeons, Apothecaryes, &Johnson ye Chymist dyed all very suddenly. some say (but god forbid yt I should reportit for truth) that these in a consultacon together, if not all yet ye greatest parte of themattempted to open a dead corpse wch was full of ye tokens & being in hand with yedissected body some fell down dead immediately, & others did not live ye next day attNoone. [from Watson Nicholson, The Historical Sources of Defoe's Journal of the PlagueYear (Boston, 1919), 149.]59The social body was anatomized in William Austin's long verse workentitled The Anatomy of the Pestilence (1666), in which the author presented areader with a step by step critique of the behaviour of the City's various socialgroups during the height of the epidemic. Austin was most critical of those groupsthat abandoned the City during the plague: doctors, clergy, lawyers, the court, eventhe trades and artisans that followed them. For example, in chastising members ofthe clergy that left the City in its time of great need, Austin writes: "They leave us;and we well do know the matter,/ That shepherds, when the sheep are smittenscatter". 94 Lamenting the exodus from the City of a large proportion of thetradesmen, who would follow their richer clients, he rhymes:The only thriving trade that one can tell hereLives by the dead, (as Hangman) Coffin-Seller;You judging of this mystery, must know,That sturdy Smith, who lives by the thump and blow,Shoemaker, Chandler, Glover, Baker, Grocer,And she makes shirts, and lives by Yes and No Sir;All these, with almost eve'ry money-taker,Are summ'd and tomb'd up in a Coffin-maker. 95In addition, Austin included a description of the spaces of the City at the height ofthe infection, the streets and the abandoned 'richly furnisht buildings', as well as adescription of the well known figures associated with the plague: searchers of thedead, nurses, and watchmen. 96Nothing of the sort happened, of course, except for Tillison's incapacity to imagine that such anundertaking could be carried out by an individual not attached to the College of Physicians, andtherefore outside the realm of institutional authority and juridical constraints.94William Austin, The Anatomy of the Pestilence; A poem, in three Parts, Describing the deplorableCondition of the City of London under its merciless dominion (London, 1666), 12.95Austin, 16.96There was a tradition of this form of literature in response to outbreaks of the disease, going back toWilliam Bullein's "Dialogue against the Fever Pestilence" of 1564, Early English Text Society , extraseries, no. LII, (London, 1888), in which the author established a dialogue between various professionaland social groups who discussed their obligations when plague strikes the City. The key figure in60Margaret Pelling, in her work on barber surgeons, the body, and disease inearly modern England, has tied the early uses of the anatomy metaphor to a literarytrend of social critique beginning in the early seventeenth century. Writers began toadopt the voice of the medical practitioner in order to diagnose social ills, and "thecauses of the decline of civilized society were named and condemned in the sameterms as disease was diagnosed and eradicated in the body". 97 The decline ofcultured society was often felt to be caused by growing urbanization and, it isreasonable to assume then, that the literary practice of the anatomy was linkedclosely to the growing uncertainty associated with anonymity in early modern urbanlife. Therefore, to anatomize a social body could be a process designed tointellectualize, rationalize and expose growing unknown individuals and/or typesin the city. For example, this operation was clearly at work in a publication like TheCaterpillers of this Nation Anatomized (1659), wherein the author set out to informreaders in the easiest and safest way to spot house breakers and pick-pockets, andother criminal elements of early modern England. 98 The book also offered tips onBullein's text was the archetypal citizen 'Civis', who agonizes over flight from the City, finallydeciding to escape, using biblical excuses to flee from danger. See also Slack (1985), 41-43.97Margaret Pelling, "Appearance and Reality: barber surgeons, the body, and disease", published inBeier and Findlay eds. (1986). See also T.J. Arthur, "Anatomies and the Anatomy Metaphor inRenaissance England" (University of Wisconsin Ph.D. thesis, 1978), summarized in DissertationAbstracts International 39 (1979), 4263A-4A. Pelling writes that the figures of the barber surgeons andthe metaphor of the anatomy were utilized in literature of the late sixteenth-century because theywere seen to be most capable of combating extreme and visible forms of corruption with the mosteffective and decisive means — cutting and revealing. Yet, she points out, writers were less concerned topromulgate a cure. This thesis differs, in that it looks at a representational anatomy of the social body,and postulates its perceived and hoped for therapeutic effect on the public community of early modernLondon.98 The Catterpillars of this Nation Anatomized, In a Brief yet Notable Discovery of House Breakers,Pick-pockets, & C. Together with the life of a Penitent highway man, discovering the mystery of thatInfernal Society, to which is added the manner of hectoring & trapanning, as it is acted in and aboutthe city of London (London, 1659). The title of this text bears resemblance to that of a previouspublication from the early 1640s, entitled The Caterpillars of the Commonwealth Truly Dissected andLaid Open; the Frogges of Egypt, or the Caterpillars of the Commonwealth Truly Dissected and laid61how to avoid dishonest and dangerous people while traveling, and, true to thepromise of the anatomy in the title, took the reader inside an unknown anddangerous secret social group, "the society of Highway men", thanks to a penitentthief.However, more than just a social critique, which might give the impressionthat the anatomy was predominantly negative, to 'anatomize' meant constructingsomething, a representation, which is never inert. Representations produceknowledge, and consequently are permeated with the social and political biases fromwhere they originate. 99 For example, the same Dr. Thomson mentioned above, in aslightly earlier text on the plague from the same year, had set out to respond tocriticism of his medical practices by the official body of medical practitioners, theCollege of Physicians. Thomson, a doctor of chemical medicine, a disciplinetarnished during the Restoration by its earlier associations with the radical religioussects, was engaged in a bitter print battle with the Galenist doctors attached to theCollege. Thomson exposed what he perceived to be falsehoods and inadequacies intheir prescribed treatment of patients afflicted with the plague, and came to thefollowing conclusion:I have, I suppose, ... ripped up, and sufficiently anatomized, usque adSceleton, ... the huge deformed bulk of the monstrous, mutilatedGalenical body; in so much that the most wise and acute Spectators andOpen with the subjects Thankefullness unto God for their deliverance from the nest of vermine (London,1641).99For example, in the already cited essay by Luke Wilson (1987), the author points out that theanatomy by the physician William Harvey was to take place in the theater of the officiallysanctioned College of Physicians. In addition to the physician members in the audience, there wouldhave been the less classically trained barber surgeons, who would have been excluded from a large partof the spectacle in lieu of their lack of Latin, the language the demonstration would have beenconducted in. Therefore, Wilson concludes, "the body is reconstituted in and through everyone in thetheater, and particularly in and through the physician-surgeon difference, among others. At the sametime, the body is the field where the political struggle occurs, and the object the superior knowledgeand control of which constitutes the physicians' medical and political hegemony" (91).62Auditors of this Nation, ... have concluded that it was high time forsuch an unwieldy lazie, cumbersome, good for little, voracious animalSarcophagum ... should now expire or breathe out his last, and becomefood for the birds of darkness. 100In this example a specific social body, that of the Galenist physicians, were publiclyanatomized when they had become a perceived problem for an individual outsideof the group. Here, what the doctors attached to the official College of Physicianswere up to needed to be exposed and made visible to a public through the surgicalprecision of a dissection.In a different anatomy of the social body, Austin's Anatomy of the Pestilence,the metaphor could work in a slightly different, but related manner. In thededication to the reader, the printer has written the following:I shall only tell you, that this poem was written at the earnest request ofsome worthy persons into the Countrey, at that time of the Sickness,when the Mortality in London was so great, that (waving what wasgenerally believed, that they, not to scare the City from itself, wereafraid to own and publish half the number of the dead) according to theaccount of the usual Bills, there dyed seven or eight thousand a Week,with some hundreds over and above. 101The tone was set, and the revelatory agenda of the text hinted at. Here in Austin'stext the anatomy could reveal what had previously been hidden, misrepresented, ormisunderstood, and transform it into something known, unthreatening, andcontrollable. As a process employed to construct representations, the anatomy madethe invisible visible, and proclaimed that what it could produce and communicateto others was a commodity known as truth.The broadsheet produced by Dunstall and Sellers was also, like Austin's work,an anatomy of the social body of afflicted London whose function was to propagate a100Thomson (1665), 12.101Austin (1666), preface.63kind of truth. Austin's anatomy seems to have been motivated by the desire toproblematize the social behaviour of various groups in the urban centre, and bringto light social conflicts over flight from the City, strict quarantine, the destruction oftrade and commerce, and the abandonment of brothers and sisters in thecommunity. I will show that Dunstall's and Sellers' anatomy intended to do theopposite, in that it sought to smooth over the social tensions exacerbated by thepresence of pestilence in epidemic proportions in the City. This it attemptedthrough the use of visual imagery, text, and a numerical form of representation, itsstatistical comparisons. The information that Sellers compiled from these yearlyBills of Mortality functioned as kind of a statistical map of the City of London and itsclose lying regions, and substituted the ordering structure of language and numberfor the physical reality of the urban center. London, particularly within the walls,was characterized by a chaotic jumble of ninety seven parishes of varying size,population, and wealth, and was here arranged alphabetically parish by parish in theimposition of an order on the metropolis completely foreign to it, an order never tobe found in its actual urban spaces and parishes. Rather, the City was organized bythe alphabet and the information drawn from the Bills of Mortality, extraneousorders existing only within language and number. In the same way that theindividual body of the plague victim was laid open by Dr. Thomson, and thediseased disorder of its interior parts organized visually and textually, so too was thediseased social body of the City. Dunstall's images and Sellers' mathematical factsbrought the totality of the diseased urban centre onto the single sheet of paper, laid itout, and made it spaces capable of being grasped conceptually by a viewer as onemight read a book. 102102Michel de Certeau, in the introduction to The Writing of History (Columbia, 1988), brieflydiscusses the formulation of the body in the field of medicine as a legible picture that can be translatedinto something which can be written "within a space of language". De Certeau is thinking of the work64This association of statistical fact and the representation of the plague in thesocial anatomy of the Dunstall and Sellers broadsheet was cultivated in order toproduce an illusion or image of the maintenance of social stability when it wasperceived to be threatened. Such a representational strategy of shaping a viewer'sresponse to the event of the plague through the closure of a visual narrative and theordering discourse of the newly formulated 'political arithmetic', could function toerase the social tensions exacerbated by the disease, and to naturalize the severe andrepressive attempts by civic and monarchical government as the most effectivemeans possible to control the disease, those afflicted with it, and the City's urbanspaces.I) PICTURING THE PLAGUEHow was the disease, those infected, and the urban spaces of London picturedby John Dunstall? The images were organized into nine different rectangular panelsread from left to right. Each scene was numbered and supplemented by a textualdescription to guide the viewer through the intended chronology. The first picturedepicts a private domestic sphere where, we are told in the accompanying text, thesick are being treated and those cured now walk with canes for the infection hasmade them lame. The viewer is thus given access to the inside a shut up house,where two female nurse keepers and a lone doctor minister to the sick, some lyingtwo to a bed, while another is viewed on the floor next to a coffin. Two otherwomen, both searchers of the dead, are visible: one in the foreground, carrying herwhite staff, and the other seated patiently at the bedside of a vomiting plague victim.of Foucault, particularly The Birth of the Clinic (New York, 1975), and indicates one of the processes ofthe 'anatomy' in its production of knowledge: "The body is a cipher that awaits deciphering. Betweenthe seventeenth and the eighteenth century, what allows the seen body to be converted into the knownbody, or what turns the spatial organization of the body into a semantic organization of a vocabulary —and vice versa — is the transforming of the body into extension, into open interiority like a book, or likea silent corpse placed under our eyes" (3).65A quite spacious interior, with large four poster beds and furniture is depicted inthis image, leading one to suspect that it is more a representation of a middle classinterior being shown. Despite the fact that the plague of 1665 devastated the poorerparishes of London, and ready evidence of this was available in the sheet's statistics,the middle classes seem here to claim infection with plague equally, despitecontemporary criticism that they had on the whole abandoned their fellow citizensand community. Moreover, other than for the sick themselves, the view presentedby this first scene would only be experienced in real life by the representatives ofofficial authority, those hired by the City and the parishes to treat and care for thesick, the nurse-keepers and doctors, and those hired to identify the cause of deathand remove the corpses, the searchers and bearers of the dead. The rampantmortality of the plague is offset by the descriptive text, which emphasizes thatmedical care provided by civic and parishes authorities was successful in treatingand curing, and therefore controlling, the disease's effects.Behind the closed doors of the shut-up houses, the individual members ofthe social body are cared for by the nurses, and the bodies of the dead will be swiftlyremoved by the searchers. This social body is inevitably gendered. In ElizabethGrosz's research on the constitutive and mutually defining relationship betweenbodies and cities, the city, for her, becomes one of the integral determinants in thesocial production of sexed bodies. 103 Grosz problematizes the formulation that positsa parallelism or metaphor between the body and the city, in which the features andcharacteristics of the individual body are also the same in the social body. She arguesthat this construction reached its most articulated form in seventeenth centuryEngland with the writers Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and, I would add, FrancisBacon, William Petty, and John Graunt. Yet, as Grosz questions,103Elizabeth Grosz, "Bodies-Cities", in Sexuality and Space , Beatriz Colomina ed., Princeton Paperson Architecture (New York, 1992), 242.66if there is a morphological correspondence or parallelism between theartificial commonwealth (the 'Leviathan') and the human body in thispervasive metaphor of the body-politic, the body is rarely attributed asex. If one presses this metaphor just a little, we must ask: if the state orthe structure of the polis/city mirrors the body, what takes on themetaphoric function of the genitals in the body-politic? What kind ofgenitals are they? In other words, does the body-politic have a sex?104Grosz argues that the body-politic, though it is claimed to be represented by andmodeled on the human body, is implicitly gendered because the notion of thehuman body uses the male to represent the human. Grosz posits that such agendering of the social body led to notions of ideal forms of government and orderin the body politic that were naturalized:the human body is a natural form of organization which functions notonly for the good of each organ but primarily for the good of the whole.Similarly, the body-politic, whatever form it may take, justifies andnaturalizes itself with reference to some form of hierarchicalorganization modeled on the (presumed and projected) structure of thebody.105Plague brought disorder, anarchy, and selfishness to the social body,threatening its male qualities: order, rationality, virtue. The most condemnedindividuals in the majority of accounts of the plague in London in 1665 were thefemale nurse-keepers and searchers of the dead, hired by the parishes to care for thesick and report the causes of death to the Parish Clerks. The City personified as awoman was not unusual, nor was it threatening, but the City under feminine rulewas something altogether different. London under the dominion of the plague wasruled by the care of the nurses, and the information on the social body provided bythe searchers, for the data in the Bills of Mortality during times of severe infection104Grosz, 246.105Grosz, 247.67initially derived from their judgments. Graunt condemned the searchers, sayingthey often could not tell plague from consumption, or "after the mist of a Cup ofAle, and the bribe of a Two-groat fee instead of one given them, cannot tell whetherthis emaciation or leanness were from a Phthisis or from a Hectick Fever". 106Thomas Vincent claimed that people were more scared of the nurse-keepers than ofthe plague itself, and the physician, Nathaniel Hodges, claimed that the nurses wereresponsible for more deaths than household segregation: "but what greatlycontributed to the loss of people thus shut up was the wicked practices of the nurses,for they are not to be mentioned but in the most bitter terms". Hodges later stated, inaddition, that "nothing, indeed, deterred these abandoned miscreants fromprosecuting their avaricious purposes by all the methods their wickedness couldinvent". 107 Even the text The Shutting Up of the Infected Houses , a text critical ofgovernment policy, blamed the nurses for a breakdown of the city's social bonds:"Little is it considered how careless most nurses are in attending the visited, andhow careful they are to watch the opportunity to ransack their houses". 108106John Graunt, Natural and Political Observations Mentioned in a following Index, and made upon theBills of Mortality (London, 1662), 46. Even Walter Bell (1924) was not free from this opinion, for incautioning the reader of his history of the plague that it may be difficult to comprehend thedifferences between the seventeenth-century and the twentieth. He uses the example of thenotification of death: "Notification of death, now so exact, was the most careless of matters. Noneexpected it of the doctor. Relatives were under no obligation to make known to any public authority theloss of a life. It was no national or county or civic officer's duty to ascertain death; in fact, no man's job.It was a woman's job — that of the "searchers of the dead."(17) He goes on to call them illiterate,lacking in knowledge of diseases, usually elderly, and "circumstances made them habituallydishonest." Later on in the text, Bell discusses the nurse-keepers, and comments on the almost universalcondemnation of these figures:They are painted as monsters of iniquity. It would be happy to believe the chargesincredible. They are too persistent and definite to be untrue; and when this character isallotted to the nurse-keepers by persons so fair minded as Dr. Nathaniel Hodges and bythe Rev. Thomas Vincent — to name but two — it becomes evident that, in at least agreat number of instances, the one who should have been the sick man's best friend wasin fact his worst enemy. (108)107Hodges, cited in Roland Bartel ed., London in Plague and Fire 1665-1666 (Boston, 1957), 34.108The Shutting Up of the Infected Houses as it is Practiced in England Soberly Debated (1665), 9.68For all these writers, the representation of the disordered City under theaffliction of the plague was one that keyed on the figures of the female searchers ofthe dead and the nurse keepers. Under their rule the community's social bonds andresponsibilities of the inhabitants to one another were threatened, challenged by theself interest of their greed, or the irrationality and inaccuracy of their intoxication.The reign of plague and these feminine figures over London was a threat to securegovernment and order, most aptly represented by William Austin in his poem TheAnatomy of the Pestilence :City and monarchical government abandonedWith Searcher, Nurse, and Quack to rule our state,To make completely a Triumvirate.Her politicks are not from Aristotle,But from the grave, the purse, the bag, and bottle. 109The classical basis of stable society and sound government, the system of cosmicharmony entrenched in English society was replaced, according to the poet, byfigures associated with complete and utter disorder — death, greed, thievery, andinebriation. The triumvirate of stable and right rule — King, Lords and Commons— was replaced by the searcher of the dead, the nurse keeper, and the quack.Dunstall's City under the reign of the plague, beginning with an image of thesefigures, is completely the opposite. It is rational, compartmentalized, functioningstill as a community thanks to the effective plague policies of the government. Infact, as the text tells us, the nursekeepers actually help the sick regain their health.From this spacious interior one is led out into the public spaces of the Cityand shown carefully constructed representations that delineate all the measurestaken by civic officials to control the disease's malignancy: fires lit every six housesin the streets during the worst of the mortality in September, houses shut-up with109Austin, 25.69Lord Have Mercy Upon Us and red crosses marked on the doors, the iconic figuresof the searchers carrying their white staves, and the bearers of the dead with theirred ones. Here also, as the textual description informs us, is a dog killer in action,and a sedan chair carrying the sick to a civic pesthouse. Needless to say, there is noindication that the latter were horribly overcrowded and inadequate. All thisactivity takes place in a wide, commodious street in front of tall, many windowed,expensive looking houses. The plague is never pictured where it was the worst, inthe squalid, overcrowded yards and alleys of the poorer parishes. Dwellings thatfronted onto streets in early modern London, as M.J. Power has convincinglyshown, were consistently of the wealthier and merchant populations, with a fullthird having seven or more hearths, and approximately half of the houses with fourto six hearths. In contrast, in the yards and alleys where population and density wasmuch greater, and by consequence the effects of plague as well, over half thedwellings had only one to three fireplaces. 110In the next image, one is given a distant view of London and the Thames,presumably from Southwark, with the old St. Paul's in the background. The river iscrowded with watercraft showing "how multitudes did fly from London by Water inBoates, and Barges, and Lighters laden with Goods". Image number four showsflight by land, on foot, horseback, or in coach. In the foreground, the viewer ispresented with the depiction of a City individual approaching some watchmen froman outlying region brandishing a piece of paper. This image, as the text states,represents "the Countrey people stopping them to shew their Certificates", beingcertificates of health issued by the office of the Lord Mayor. Then follow four imagesdealing with the disposal and burial of the dead: the bearers carrying coffins, "withred Staves in their hands, so that people might shun them"; carts carrying the dead110M.J. Power, "The Social Topography of Restoration London", in Beier and Findlay eds., 210.70to the plague pits outside the City walls as birds fall from the sky, due to the diseasedair; the plague pits themselves; and a public funeral. The last scene, the ninth,"sheweth their Return to the City", and depicts a mass of people on foot, horseback,or in carriages moving in unison towards the City, once again presided over by oldSt. Paul's .This type of narrative sequence becomes even more apparent when it iscompared with another image from 1665-1666 utilizing similar imagery (FIG.4). Thisprint contained four pictures, three of which are identical to the illustrations byJohn Dunstall. These views were printed with explanatory text directly on theimagery similar to that found on the broadsheet. The one dissimilar image,described as "Burying the dead with a bell before them" with a representation of'searchers', takes place in front of the piazza in Covent Garden. Which images wereproduced first, Dunstall's or the latter, is not important here. Rather, what isinteresting is that the four image print makes no effort to construct any kind ofchronology or narrative connection between the pictures whatsoever. Instead, theimages present four disparate views of miscellaneous events associated with theplague in the City. No beginning, or no antecedent to the disease is hinted at as inDunstall's visual narrative, nor is an end to the epidemic and a return to a healthycity postulated.At work in the plague broadside, through the statistics and their collusionwith the visual, was a representation of the world turned upside down turnedupright again. The visual narrative constructed by Dunstall, or whomevercommissioned the imagery in its sequence before the printing of the sheet, and theaccompanying comparisons enabled by the inclusion of the parish by parishbreakdown of the City from the yearly Bills, imposed a conceptual order on thediseased urban center, and helped to produce the notion of a cyclical nature to theepidemic. The City, as a complete entity, followed a course from health to sickness,71and back to health again. This narrative movement, from beginning to end, isshown in the pictures and emphasized by statistical matter of fact. As mentioned inthe introduction of this thesis, Giulia Calvi, in her work on the accounts of theFlorentine plague of 1630, has shown how the body of the community during thatepidemic was likened to an individual sick body that proceeded in a cycle fromhealth to sickness, and back again. Such a naturalistic model was used to imposenarrative order on the disorder of the epidemic, and therefore justified theharshness of official policies, and provided proof of their effectiveness. Despite thedifferences in historical context, and the fact that Calvi speaks primarily of textualmaterial, Dunstall's and Sellers broadsheet performs a similar function as what shecalls 'memoirs to order', by emphasizing that "in official memory the forms ofsocial reorganization mobilized to counter the threat to the city are as inevitable andnatural as the course of contagion itself." 111 Such forms of social reorganizationwere all pictured in Dunstall's images or alluded to in Sellers' statistics: quarantine,segregation, surveillance, prohibition, and record keeping. Because the City isreturned to health in the last image, and those who fled return, a viewer was led toread those efforts taken by official power as smoothly instituted and operated, andultimately successful.Steps legislated and undertaken by civic and monarchical authorities werenot without their snags, disruptions, and contestations. They were not receivedunanimously by a passive population, doing its part to stave off infection and bringthe City back to a condition of well-being like the consensual community postulatedin the broadsheet. For example, as the excluded minister Thomas Vincent wrote inGod's Terrible Voice in the City , panic came into the City as fast, if not faster, thanthe plague itself, and by the end of July there were more empty houses in the City111 Calvi (1989), 2. See also Calvi's shorter work on the plague in Florence entitled "A Metaphor forSocial Exchange: The Florentine Plague of 1630" Representations 13 Winter 1986, 139-163.72than those marked with the red crosses. 112 During late August and September allattempts to control the disease in the City had proved inadequate. Even somethingso apparently uncomplicated as the lighting of fires in the streets, as pictured inDunstall's second image, was viewed as doing the opposite of what it intended.Thomas Cock argued that the lighting of fires would have a beneficial effect inattracting the infection, not repelling it, for all hot bodies attract. Therefore, firesshould be lit in the suburbs, not the center of the City, for "the Infection will bedrawn from the Center to the Circumference, as well as from the Circumference tothe Center, as is apparent by the Cities being more, and the Suburbs less infectedsince this late unlucky experiment was made upon it". 113 It was almost as if flightfrom the City, not plague, had become epidemic, causing problems within the urbancentre as well as in other communities of the countryside. The Lord Mayor, JohnLawrence, refused to issue any more certificates of health like the one being shownto the 'Country people' in Dunstall's fourth image. These certificates, once aguarantee of unrestricted passage during plague times, were being forged in greatnumbers and disregarded by authorities outside the urban center of London. 114 Byearly July the courts had been suspended, thereby depriving the City of the112Thomas Vincent, God's Terrible Voice in the City (London, 1667), 31.113Cock, 3. Nathaniel Hodges, member of the College of Physicians, and one of the doctors hired by theCity to care for the sick, published his account of the plague in Latin in 1672, translated in 1720. In thistext he also sees the fires as backfiring, being initiated by the remaining governors of the City whilethe medical profession remained undecided on what result they would have. As he writes:But alas! the controversie was soon decided; for before the three days were quiteexpired, the heavens both mourned so many funerals, and wept for the fatal mistake, soas to extinguish even the fires with their showers. I shall not determine any otherperson's conjecture in this case, whether these fires may more properly be deemed theominous forerunners of the ensuing conflagration, or the ensuing funerals; but whether itwas from the suffocating qualities of the fuel, or the wet constitution of air thatimmediately followed, the most fatal night ensued, wherein more than four thousandexpired. May posterity by this mistake be warned, and not, like empyricks, apply aremedy where they are ignorant of the cause.Sections from Hodges's text are reproduced in Bartel, 37.114Bell (1924), 94 137.73machinery of justice. 115 Monarchical and institutional authority that organized andcontrolled social life had disappeared: Whitehall was abandoned by king and courton July 7, and both houses of parliament prorogued until August, a minimumnumber required for formalities and adjournment to meet in Oxford due to theking's need for supply in the war against the Dutch.London and the surrounding area were cut adrift from the authority of thesovereign. The City within the walls still had the mayor and a few aldermen toexercise executive power, but the out-parishes were beyond civic control, a lackquickly noted by the government. A few justices of the peace were forced to remainand given wide reaching powers to exert order. 116 Along with king and court, clergy,professionals, and wealthier merchants fled. Dissenting ministers, such as the abovecited Thomas Vincent, took over the pulpits and what was left of the removedclergy's congregations. Services in St. Paul's Cathedral did not cease, though therewas an inadequate number of ministers remaining, and the Dean himself, WilliamSancroft, left the City for Tunbridge Wells citing health reasons. Mass in the greatcathedral was interrupted on occasion by angry mobs of religious dissenters, who1151 do not completely agree with Ronald Hutton's claims (228), when he argues against any indicationthat law and order broke down amongst all the horror of the disease: "Both legal records and literarysources indicate that constables still performed their duties and, despite the number of untended houses,that no great increase in crime occurred. The remarkable resilience of Stuart society again served itwell". His own findings seem to contradict such a statement.116Be11 (1924), 34, and Slack (1985), 223. George Monck, Duke of Albemarle, stayed in Westminster asthe sole representative of the king, with the Earl of Craven as his first lieutenant, and two or threejustices of the peace. The mayor of London, John Lawrence, remained in the City along with theAldermen, who were forced to stay by a Mayoral Proclamation. Bell writes, and this is indeedinteresting as far as this thesis is concerned, thatIt proved greatly prejudicial to the outer areas that collective supervision was whollylacking, save such as could be exercised by the justices of the peace. In nationalemergency these were accustomed to receive instructions from the Privy Council. Thecleavage from the City was distinct, and only for statistical purposes was the GreaterLondon of that day comprised within the Bills of Mortality.74declared openly to the gathered congregation that the sufferings of the City'spopulation were the direct cause of the conformed church and state. 117On September 7, Sir Roger L'Estrange's paper the Newes„ referred to the lackof Poor Rate payments being made in the City, and tried to minimize this escalatingproblem. Supplying for the infected and quarantined greatly strained the coffers ofseveral parishes, and these payments lagged due to the numerous individuals whohad fled the City without leaving a forwarding address. A short article in the paperreported that the Lord Mayor and aldermen had decreed that all citizens removedfrom the City had to notify their Church Wardens where they wished to receivenotice of their Poor Rate payments, and blandly added that it was apparent "by theRoll that several wealthy persons are now out of Town, who have neither paid thesame, nor left any orders for the payment thereof." 118 In late August and September,household segregation collapsed. 119 People refused to stay quarantined and brokeout of their homes, attacking watchers and even aldermen. Watchmen themselvesevidently took part in civil disobedience also, as there are records of these figures11713e11 (1924), 223, and Nicholson, 144. In a letter to Dean William Sancroft of August 10, 1665,Stephen Bing, a caretaker of St. Paul's, wrote "and the more sad are our times that neither calme norstorme will abate the fury of monstrous spirits whoe in the face of a Congregacon as at Pauls th'otherday, will say these calamities are caused by the Government in Church & State". Apparently,according to Thomas Vincent, ejected Nonconforming Ministers took over the pulpits of those members ofthe clergy that had fled the City, and pamphlets circulated in the streets proclaiming 'Pulpits to let.'The Five Mile Act was intended to counter this potentially revolutionary threat, which, if one canbelieve Thomas, was gaining an audience daily. Churches taken over by Nonconforming Ministers wereso full that the priests had to crawl over the pews to get to the pulpit. Once there, these ministers werewelcomed by "such a face is now seen in the assemblies, as seldom was seen before in London; such eagerlooks, such open ears, such greedy attention, as if every word could be eaten, which dropt from themouths of the ministers..."(Vincent, 56).118Newes, Sept 7, 1665.119Samuel Pepys, The Diary of Samuel Pepys , Robert Latham and William Matthews eds. (Berkeley,1983). Entry for September 14, 1665, (see also footnote 152), and Vincent, 42, wherein by late August theauthor sees shut-up shops, empty streets with grass starting to grow in some places, and a hears onlythe sounds of people dying punctuating a deep silence over the City. Now, he writes, "shutting up ofvisited houses (there being so many) is at an end, and most of the well are mingled among the sick,which otherwise would have got no help".75joining neighbours in knocking locks off the entrances of shut-up houses, andphysically erasing the red cross and "Lord Have Mercy On Us" from the doors. Agroup apparently even tried to shut-up Lord Mayor John Lawrence's house. 120 Pepyswrote about infected individuals in Westminster leaning out windows andbreathing in others' faces, and others who would throw rags that had covered theirplague sores at passers by in the streets. 121 Public funerals, and any kind of publicconcourse, were barred by royal prohibition, as funeral crowds were deemed thebiggest danger for increased infection and threat to order during the spell of theplague. London's social body had once again lost its head, with the king abandoningthe City, and the spectre of disorder such a loss recalled — the Civil War and theCommonwealth — presented government with a potentially volatile situation. Thejeopardy of uprisings and even revolution continually stressed authorities and theupper classes while pestilence gripped the City, whether the menace was real or not.Government took measures to control these threats by the Five Mile Act,mentioned in the first chapter, and an edict of June 28 that required all disbandedofficers and soldiers who had at one time served in the parliamentary armies toimmediately depart from London and Westminster to a distance of twenty miles. 122In the non-disorder of the plague in the City of London and parishes adjacentthat Dunstall pictures, there was neither conflict nor tension. Removed from thesevisual constructions were any indication whatsoever of the anarchy of the Cityduring the outbreak, any notions of the potential breakdown of interdependent andcodependent social relationships and their substitution by selfish individualconcerns for safety and self preservation. Instead, in the cycle that carries the Citythrough sickness back to health, what was represented was both order and120Slack (1985), 299.121 Pepys diary, Latham and Matthews eds., entry for February 12, 1666.1220n the Oxford session of parliament, see Hutton, 233-236.76consensus — a community operating effectively and actively under a benevolentcivic and royal authority to return the City to health. This visual narrative of thesocial processes of the City during the epidemic disease of 1665 portrayed a cleandisaster, compartmentalized, anatomized, and achieved in visual representation thesame kind of exertion of order and control that the statistics claimed, and thepolicies adopted by civic and royal government sought. I do not want to argue herethat Dunstall's and Seller's broadsheet was simply an expression of Restorationcultural and political authority, but due to the policing of cultural forms alluded toin the first chapter of this thesis — the control of the press being the most important— it would have been exceedingly difficult for the artist, the statistical compiler, andtheir printer to produce anything that challenged social, political, and religiousconformity in 1665.Yet, within the narrow confines articulated for this broadsheet and printculture on the whole by Restoration authority, space must also be made for a publicthat might have had different uses or readings of this form of representation, orthose individuals who might have had a vested interest in acquiescing with the'official' picture of the plague, but who also found reinforcement within it for theirown individual actions during the outbreak of the infection. The utilization inDunstall's and Sellers' broadsheet of a natural cycle to the disease and its effects onthe urban centre allowed the contentious issues of quarantine and flight to berepresented as activities beneficial to the health of the community. In this way, theremedies of harsh household segregation of the sick from the healthy and escapefrom the urban centre were constructed as smoothly implemented and received bythe population of the City without contestation or criticism, calling up a viewer forthis cultural form that found flight and quarantine unproblematic issues. Perhapsthe key to unraveling the identity of a public for this cultural form lies in therelationship of the visual narrative to the statistics drawn from the Bills of77Mortality. The production of the Bills of Mortality arose as a direct response to theplague. The collection and publication of such statistical information, the gatheringand public dissemination of intimate knowledge about the disease's progressthrough the townships and cities of the kingdom, was initiated in order to facilitateattempts by royal government to preserve order and maintain social control intimes of great affliction. But the knowledge produced by the Bills was alsoinextricably linked to the diverse social tensions irritated by the consequences offlight and strict household quarantine. In fact, as I shall shortly demonstrate bysituating Dunstall's and Sellers' broadside within a tradition of plague broadsidesproduced within the City of London, the single broadsheet form that combinedimage, text, and statistic, likely owes its appearance in this cultural context as anintended mediation of the social conflicts over these issues. In order to betterunderstand the way statistical 'truth' was being fused with visual 'truth' inDunstall's and Seller's broadside in 1665, it will be necessary to take a closer look atthe history of the Bills of Mortality, and statistical knowledge itself during theRestoration, along with their implication in the various means undertaken bymonarchical and civic powers to control and monitor the disease's progressionthrough the social body.II) COUNTING AND COUNTERING THE PLAGUEBills of Mortality exist in manuscript form from the early sixteenth century,and were at first only produced during plague years. The compilation of the numberof total burials from all causes tabulated against deaths from the plague alone hadbecome the job of the Company of Parish Clerks on instructions from the king by1536, when the wardens were instructed to have all of London's parish churchesdeliver to the Lord Mayor and the monarch the names of infected and dead persons78every week. 123 Two years later this tabulation was enlarged to include allchristenings, marriages, and burials throughout the year. Throughout the centurythe scope of the Bills was gradually enlarged to include not only the parishes withinthe City walls, but the parishes outside and in the liberties as well. The Bills ofMortality were first printed in 1593 by the City Printer, and in 1626 a press wasinstalled in the Parish Clerks' Hall, with the operating printer chosen by theArchbishop of Canterbury or the Bishop of London. 124For most of the sixteenth century and the early seventeenth, the audience forthe Bills was limited: the Lord Mayor, the aldermen, and the king, with the LordChancellor and the queen receiving copies by 1607. It is reasonable to assume thatthrough the seventeenth century increasing numbers of the Bills came off theParish Clerks' press as their audience expanded, so that by 1665, what had once beendelivered on horseback to the king and court, and circulated amongst the mayor andaldermen, could be had by whomever was interested for the price of a penny everyThursday, or four shillings for a yearly subscription. 125 On one side a reader couldview the number of total burials beside the number of deaths from the plague forthe parishes within the City walls, as well as several out parishes (FIG.5). On theother side, below the seal of the Company of Parish Clerks, the reader could peruse'the Diseases and Casualties this Week': in addition to the 4237 dead from theplague, one also finds forty-five dead from old age, one hundred twenty six fromconsumption, and more vaguely, three from 'grief', one from 'lethargy', and two123Aside from the discussion of the Bills of Mortality in histories of the plague by Bell (1924), andSlack (1985), the most detailed analysis of the Bills, their contents, the machinery that producedthem, and a further bibliography is F.P. Wilson, The Plague in Shakespeare's London (Oxford, 1927),189-208.124Wilson, 197.125Wilson, 202, and Bell (1924), 58. The price for a single weekly Bill of Mortality would not have beenout of reach for craftsmen and labourers, who made thirty and eighteen pence a day respectively, but itis unlikely they would have had a disposable sum of four shillings for a subscription. See A.L. Beier,"Engine of Manufacture: the trades of London", in Beier and Findlay eds., 162.79'suddenly' during the week of August 15-22, 1665. The obscurity of the latter iscontrasted by the absolute specificity of the single death "Broke her Scull by a fall inthe street at St. Mary Woolchurch". As further indication of their publicdissemination and potential to be perused by a large audience, the Assize of Breadwas printed at the bottom, at nine and a half ounces for a 'penny Wheaten Loaf',and the same weight and price for three 'half-penny White Loaves". Surely theinclusion of the Assize of Bread, wherein the civic authorities decreed the size andweight of the most basic of food stocks, indicates a concern to deter the possibility ofsocial unrest in the capital, particularly during the plague when food sources tendedto get a little scarce.The manner in which the Bills were compiled during times of epidemicdisease seems to have been as follows. The almost universally despised searchers ofthe dead were hired by each parish to view the bodies of the deceased normallyreported to the parish clerks by family members or neighbours. These searchers,upon viewing the corpse and officially ascertaining the cause of death, reported it tothe constable, who reported to the clerk, who then reported the death to the chief ofclerks. Royal orders decreed that the Parish Clerks, in addition to compiling theweekly statistics, were required to notify the deputy of the ward or alderman inwriting within three hours after learning of an individual in their parish afflictedwith the plague. 126 False information could lead to imprisonment in Newgate. Thisinformation appears to have played, or been intended to play, a crucial role inmaintaining control over the spaces of the City during times of plague. Dramaticrises in the number of residents infected by the plague could be watched for indifferent parishes, and swift measures to control the disease could be taken, such as126Wilson, 203.80the posting of watchmen on the streets in and out of an infected parish to preventits residents from leaving.Plague in a parish could be devastating, disrupting trade and commerce, andstraining social relations between different classes of people living and working inclose proximity. The preservation of order and the averting of panic in the City wascontingent on the information in the Bills being kept secret until publication toprevent doctoring, and the parish clerks were ordered to deliver them to Guildhallbefore eight o'clock every Thursday morning without showing them to any otherperson before ten. The Bills could very easily be falsified, as they often were, even in1665,127 and it was necessary to issue an order as early as 1607 against the possibilitythat a member or clerk,by any cunning device, practice, or means, give away, disperse, utter, ordeclare, or by any sinister device, cast forth at any window, hole, orcrevice of a wall of this house [the Guildhall], any bills or notes,whereby the reports of these returns for that week may be known oruttered abroad, before the book is given to the Lord Mayor. 128The printing and disseminating of the Bills of Mortality to a much wider audiencein the latter part of the seventeenth century must have been intended, in part, tocounter the destabilizing force of inaccurate rumour and the manipulation of theBills to serve the particular interests of various individuals or parishes with thesupposed truth and accuracy of an official version, especially during times of greatinfection by the plague. I am unable to discern the numbers in which the Bills werepublished, or how they were circulated to a wider public. I assume they were sold in127For example, Pepys writes in his diary on August 30, 1665:Abroad, and met with Hadley, our [parish] clerke, who, upon my asking how theplague goes, told me it encreases much, and much in our parish; for, says he, there diednine this week, though I have returned but six: which is a very ill practice, and makesme think it is so in other places; and therefore the plague much greater than peopletake it to be(Latham and Matthews, eds.).128Cited in Wilson, 204.81stationer's shops, posted in public spaces, and delivered through the post, 129 for theywere readily and quickly available to individuals outside of the City during theplague. The king and court still received them, and Pepys managed to get them inWoolwich, as did the Venetian Ambassador Alvise Sagredo in Tunbridge Wells,though he doubted their accuracy. 130 The trustworthiness of the Bills bothered moreindividuals than just Sagredo, and the question was discussed repeatedly in theseventeenth century, as well as today amongst historians who still use theinformation compiled by the parish clerks in the belief that they are gaining access tosomething truthful and verifiable about early modern English social life. 131The Bills of Mortality represent one aspect of the many plans and devicesestablished to protect the public health in times of plague in early modern England.In addition to the Bills, government and civic authorities pursued the formulationof a social policy which they hoped would provide the most benefit and public orderfor community and nation. As Paul Slack points out, though, changes andmodifications in procedure never coincided with major epidemics, during which129It is with the Restoration that the notion of a centralized, state controlled post office comes intoexistence, another example of the policing of cultural forms following the return of Charles II to power.An Act for Erecting and Establishing a Post Office (1660), also known as the Post Office Act, wasinstituted in order that "the maintenance of mutual correspondencies and prevention of manyinconveniencies happening by private posts several public post offices have been heretofore erected forcarrying and recarrying letters". One wonders whether the urge to control religious dissent was at theheart of this move, having all communications pass through the public post offices under the authorityof individuals attached to the state. It is suggestive indeed, for Article XII of the Act implicitly states"that no person shall be capable of having, using or exercising the office of Postmaster General, or anyother employment relating to the said office, unless he or they shall first take the oaths of allegianceand supremacy..." (English Historical Documents, 475).130Calendar of State Papers and Manuscripts Relating to English Affairs Existing in the Archives andCollections of Venice (London, 1933), 190. See also, for example, Calendar of State Papers Domestic(London, 1864), 493.131For example, see the discussion in Wilson, 205-208, on the accusations of tampering and the problemsof accuracy of the Bills in the late sixteenth and seventeenth-centuries. On the problems of the use ofinformation compiled in the parish register by historians today, see Christopher Hill, "Sex, Marriageand Parish Registers" in The Collected Essays of Christopher Hill (Amherst, 1986) vol.3, 188-210.82there was no real opportunity to put new policies into effect. Instead, changes togovernment plans in order to control those stricken with the plague and preservesocial peace in England's towns and corporations, especially London, occurred whenrelatively minor outbreaks exacerbated other social problems and issues. 132 In otherwords, the threat of the plague and the potential public disorder caused by theinfected prompted repressive social policies designed to police the City's urbanspaces and parishes.In these early formulations of a comprehensive official plague policy,authorities vacillated on the causes of the disease between theories of infection andtheories of transmission. Legislators argued alternatively for a contagionistinterpretation of the causes of plague, believing that the disease was propagatedfrom person to person or, on the other hand, a miasmic interpretation that claimedpestilence was generated by foul air, filthy streets, and tainted water. The formerinfluenced public policy in the direction of segregating the sick from the healthy,and the latter would give rise to plans for increased maintenance of urban spaces:the cleansing of the streets, the lighting of fires and sulfur to kill the air born germs,and the like. Up until 1543 there was no clear preference by civic or royal authorityfor one program over the other. At this time, though, perhaps envisioning the132Slack (1985), 200. On the development of these plague policies through the sixteenth andseventeenth-centuries in England, see also John Findley Shrewsbury, A History of Bubonic Plague in theBritish Isles (Cambridge and London, 1970). As early as the reign of Henry VIII, in the early sixteenthcentury, aspirations for the introduction of government policy to improve the 'public health' had beendiscussed by Cardinal Wolsey and Thomas More. These two thinkers felt that England should be on parwith Renaissance European states and their social programs. The power of the state had a right and anecessity to intervene in aspects of social life in the interest of public order, and Wolsey and More beganto draw up procedures concerning enclosures and sumptuary regulations, as well as the initiation of acampaign against vagrants and beggars in London. In 1518 Wolsey established the College ofPhysicians with the express purpose of caring for and improving public health in London. Of greatconcern to the initiators of these early programs, and a prime instigator behind their articulation, wasthat plague and sweating sickness had struck London at a time of great social unrest. The measurestaken to combat these illnesses in the name of the public good were, conveniently, also ways of curbingthe potential of popular revolt.83benefits of a highly regulated 'healthy' social body, the Privy Council shifted itssupport behind theories of contagion and decided that the disease was the fault ofindividuals and their lifestyles, and not caused so much by the physicalenvironment of the City. The Council deemed at this time that separating the sickfrom the healthy would be the most effective means for combating the disease, andsettled on a program of enforced household segregation. Subsequent orders issuedby this legislative group clearly stated that plague increased in its intensity andrepresented a threat to the social fabric of the City "rather by the negligence, disorder,and want of charity in such as have been ... infected ... than by corruption of theair". 133In 1579 plague orders were first published and affixed in public places, and thepolicies dictated therein remained essentially unchanged until 1666. These Englishorders derived heavily from continental models, but differed in two ways: taxationwas imposed to support the sick in lieu of the already existing Poor Law, and stricthousehold quarantine was adopted. Along with flight from the City, an issue dealtwith below, household quarantine remained the most contentious issue indiscussions concerning the plague throughout the seventeenth century. Many feltstrict segregation was simply too harsh — those quarantined were not allowedunder any circumstances whatsoever to leave their premises until forty days hadpassed, and family members residing in the same house were similarly shut-in,whether they were infected or not. In addition, no visitors were allowed, andfoodstuffs and supplies were delivered to an afflicted household by a nurse orwatchman hired by the parish.134 The adoption of a policy of social containmentcomprised the majority of attempts by civic government to control the infection, yet133Cited in Slack (1985), 203.134See the Orders Conceived and Published by the Lord Mayor and Aldermen of the City of London,Concerning the Infection of the Plague, 1665 (London, 1665).84was largely condemned by members of the medical profession not attached to theofficial College of Physicians, as well as by other social and political critics. 135 Wehave seen that the broadsheet produced by Dunstall and Sellers in late 1665, or early1666, with its visual and numerical narrative of the plague through the City ofLondon, functioned to erase any indication of the contention surrounding theseissues, and therefore served the interests of dominant authorities in preservingsocial harmony.By 1604, through the Plague Act, the orders for strict household segregationand quarantine of those infected became statute law through an act of parliament,along with the imposition of local rates for the care of the sick. This Act wasrenewed parliament by parliament, and was made perpetual in 1641. By making theshutting up of households during times of plague into law, and therefore the mostimportant action taken by civic and royal authority to check the spreading of thedisease through the individual and then the social body, the Act also provided forthe implication of corporal and capital punishment on those individuals whoescaped from their shut-up houses, whether they had the plague or not. Watchmenwere given the power to use discretionary violence — anyone found loitering in thepublic spaces of the City during periods of great infection could be whipped as a135See William Boghurst,Loimographia; An Account of the Great Plague of London in the Year 1665(London, 1666), 55 and 57. Boghurst, an independent apothecary, includes 'shutting up houses' in his listof ineffectual remedies and things to be avoided. George Thomson, in Loimologia (1665),condemns thepolicy of household quarantine:I humbly conceive, with submission to the highest Powers, that it might be moreconducible to the body Politick and Natural, if this rigid course of enclosing theInfected so strictly within so narrow a compass were mitigated: for hereby intercourse oftrading might be kept alive, and so miserable poverty prevented...Certainly none butsuch a Heathen as Galen would have given his disciples such impious and uncharitableAdvice... (9).85vagrant rogue, and if the person was also discovered to have a plague sore on theirbody, they could be hung as a felon. 136Despite the fact that, in 1665, there was a plague committee in the PrivyCouncil, most of it left London with Charles II in July. This council had been tryingto revise the plague orders in that year, and were pushing a bill through parliamentthat required a public pesthouse in every parish, and gave magistrates clearly statedauthority to impose full quarantine on all infected houses. 137 The Privy Council of1665 had not the same powers as the one of 1630, and had to take into account thedifferences between the two houses of parliament. Ultimately the bill stalled due toopposition in the House of Lords, for the peers wanted their homes exempt fromthe policy of shutting-up, and wanted no pesthouse or graveyard in the proximity of136Slack (1985), 211. One wonders how far, if at all, we have progressed with regard to deadlyepidemic diseases when the social and juridical oppression afflicted upon individuals afflicted withAcquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, and the search for social groups as scapegoats for the disease'sspread, is taken into account.137Slack (1985), 217. Several crucial modifications had occurred to the Plague Act during the time ofthe Stuarts, particularly in 1625, when an outbreak occurred in London while parliament was in sessiondue to the king's need for supply. The poor rate was doubled to care for the infected in the City, and ageneral collection was imposed on the entire kingdom for the benefit of London and Westminster, thetwo largest urban centers and perpetually the hardest hit. The City's civic government was favourablyresponsive to such an idea, and even lent money to the parishes for the purposes of tending to theafflicted until the collections from the rest of the country started to come in. That financial supportgathered in the churches around the kingdom for the benefit of England's large afflicted communitiesmay give the impression of a charitable country concerned about their fellow citizens in the metropolis.However, what was really happening in 1625, as Paul Slack has pointed out, was that the country waspaying for protection from the City, and demanding effective isolation of those infected, as well assecurity to prevent the afflicted from leaving the urban areas to roam free in the country, in return forfinancial assistance.In 1630 Charles I dissolved parliament, and the Privy Council on its own took over the reins ofsocial control and the preservation of order. Though plague was mild in this year, other social problemswere pressing, resulting in the Caroline 'Book of Orders'. The Book of Orders represented a move by thecrown to control many aspects of local government, and remove various public nuisances from urbancenters. It also represented a slight shift in thinking about the protection of public health during timesof epidemic disease, and recommended isolation in pesthouses for those infected with the plague,rather than an encompassing household segregation. By 1665 some attempts were made to constructpesthouses in Westminster and London, but these were wholly inadequate and, as the contagion grew,the policy of strict household segregation was undertaken again.86their residences. The failure of revised plague policy in 1665 indicates that, despitethe representation in Dunstall's and Sellers' broadside that household quarantinewas effective in bringing the city back to health and universally imposed, the policyof strict household quarantine was clearly not enacted on houses in allneighbourhoods, or on all classes of people.Flight from the City was also an option unavailable to all. Those who couldflee were, of course, those who could afford to, having country houses to retreat toas shelter, or those capable of finding some other form of lodging in a neighbouringcommunity. Flight only became a common recourse in the seventeenth century,particularly in 1625 and 1665. Shutting up houses and flight destroyed the economyof a city during the plague for, along with government bans on public markets andfairs, shutting up quarantined a large portion of a city's labor force, and flightremoved the more successful merchants and traders from the city. People becamewary of buying goods, and a shortage of cash and credit ensued because wealthiermembers of the population stopped leaving their money with scriveners andgoldsmiths, and merchants refused to extend credit during the plague due to theuncertainty of the status of the creditor when it came time to collect. The majority ofdoctors and lawyers, who followed their patients and clients, and numerousmembers of the clergy evacuated the City as well. In published critiques of flight,such Austin's The Anatomy of the Pestilence, these figures are almost alwaysuniversally condemned. Various arguments were put to use in support of retreatfrom the City, for example, biblical arguments about the correctness and acceptabilityof flight from life threatening danger were often used, and various 'public persons',that is magistrates and ministers, could use the excuse that their self preservation87was good for the commonwealth as a whole, and could therefore avoid danger ifthey found a substitute. 138It is a crucial point, as far as this thesis is concerned, that the grossly unequalmortality rates between the parishes occurred parallel to the growth of the science ofstatistics as a useful form of knowledge, and the appearance of this knowledge as anintegral part of the print culture of early modern London. For example, the viewthat plague was a disease equally infecting all members of the population becomesclouded when one pays close attention to the statistics printed at the bottom ofDunstall's and Sellers' broadside. The social geography of London had remainedessentially unchanged from the sixteenth into the seventeenth centuries, with thecentral area of the City within the walls being generally richer and the outlyingparishes poorer. This still held true in 1665, but drastic changes were to be found inthe mortality rates for the different parishes. One might expect that the populationsof the poorer parishes would be devastated in earlier epidemics and, withimprovements in medicine and living conditions through the century, themortality rates of these neighbourhoods would come to more closely approximatethe ratios of the wealthier parishes. In fact, the inverse was the case. 139 Both rich andpoor parishes were afflicted more or less on equal ratios in earlier epidemics, but in1665 wealthy parishes fared considerably better than impoverished ones. Statisticsdid, as has been shown, evolve as a discourse and practice specifically designed todeal with the social problem of the plague, as a way of ordering the potentiallydisordered social body of the afflicted city. At the same time, though, it had other138Slack (1985), 43, and Bell (1924), 56-60 and 91-96. See also Boghurst's ruminations on the question inLoimographia, 58-61.139Slack (1985), 157, and Bell (1924), 123. For example, in 1665 there were more deaths in Stepney andWhitechapel than in the whole of the City within the walls. For the years 1625, 1636, and 1665, theparish of Allhallows Honeylane had 8, 0, and 5 deaths respectively from the plague. In contrast, thetotal deceased from plague for the out parish Saint Giles Cripplegate grew from 2,338 in 1625, to 4,838in 1665.88motivations, and as a form of print culture, other uses. One of the functions of theuniformity to the social body and the plague's effect on it in Dunstall's and Sellers'broadside of 1665-1666, as I articulated earlier, would have been to erase theperceived differences in behaviour of the City's varying social groups during theoutbreak of plague in 1665. With the return of Charles II to the throne at theRestoration, the science of mathematical analysis applied to the population ofLondon and England assumed an even greater importance as part of the discourse ofnatural philosophy that could help in countering a fragile social peace with stabilityand consensus. It is now necessary to look more at the theorization and specific usesof statistical knowledge in the years immediately following the Restoration.III) THE USES OF 'POLITICAL ARITHMETIC' AT THE RESTORATIONThe growth of interest in statistics is surely associated with the expansion offunction and use postulated by John Graunt in his 1662 publication Natural andPolitical Observations Mentioned in a following Index, and made upon the Bills ofMortality. Graunt was a practicing tradesman, a London draper and haberdasher, aswell as a Captain in the City Militia. 140 His text is now regarded as the origin ofstatistics and demographics for Graunt was the first person to apply mathematicalanalysis to the social body of London, and the country in its entirety, through theuse of information culled from the Bills of Mortality. He claimed his book wouldproduce undisputed and clear knowledge about the state of the City and the countryin exacting detail. As a result, Graunt was accepted into the Royal Society on accountof this work through the petition of no less than Charles II himself. Graunt stated140For details on Graunt, see the introduction by Peter Laslett to the facsimile reproduction of Graunt'stext in The Earliest Classics: John Graunt and Gregory King (Farnborough, 1973), as well as CharlesHenry Hull, The Economic Writings of Sir William Petty together with the Observations upon thebills of mortality more probably by Captain Graunt, 2 vols., (Cambridge, 1899, facsimile reprint NewYork, 1963).89that the "lowly Bills" had heretofore been used only by a small group of citizens tofind outwhat happened rare, and extraordinary in the week currant: so as theymight take the same as a Text to talk upon, in the next Company; andwithall, in the Plague-time, how the sickness increased, or decreased,that the Rich might judge of the necessity of their removall, andTrades-men might conjecture what doings they were likely to have intheir respective dealings 141Graunt claimed that the information contained in the Bills could and should beutilized in a greater capacity than this, in a way that would have a much moreimportant social function.Graunt and fellow founding member of the Royal Society, William Petty,who published his own A Treatise on Taxes and Contributions in 1662, were justbeginning to theorize the social and political use of mathematical and statisticalanalysis, referring to it as 'political arithmetic'. As Peter Buck has written, wherelater experimenters with statistics presumed that natural and social phenomenawere inherently ordered by causal laws and only then susceptible to quantitativestudy, Graunt and Petty saw the elements that made up the world as distinct entitieswith no intrinsic relations between them. Therefore, "they regarded causal laws asconstructs of the human mind, and they conceived the uses of mathematics interms of creating order rather than discovering its immanent principles". 142Mathematical quantification, they claimed, provided knowledge free fromcontroversy and conflict, and therefore could represent the construction ofconsensus and social harmony akin to the overall model proposed by naturalphilosophy at the Restoration. The conditions for the construction and maintenance141 Graunt, Bl.142Buck, 67.90of social order had to be advocated by public institutional authority and legitimizedby individual self imposition. Broadsheets employing image and statistics, such asthat by Dunstall and Sellers and some different variations dealt with in more depthbelow, that invited the reader/viewer to make statistical comparisons, indeed, evento make those tabulations him or herself right on the sheet, could involve anindividual in the practice of the new science of natural philosophy, and thereforemake that subject virtuous as a producer of order and consensus in that historicalmoment. 143Graunt, in Natural and Political Observations, was obsessed with the problemof disorder in the social body of the City and nation, from beggars and vagrants tothe threat of the plague, and looked to the "Mathematiques of my Shop-Aritmetique" to anatomize these potential problems and bring them clearly intoview. In dedicating his book to Sir Robert Moray, member of the Privy Council forScotland and also President of the Royal Society in 1662, a group Graunt refers to as a"Privy Council for Philosophie" and a "Parliament of Nature", whose three estateswere the mathematical, mechanical, and physical, this London draper represented'political arithmetic' as equivocal in importance to affairs of state and the eventsand figures that comprised history itself:For my own part I count it happiness enough to my self, that there issuch a Council of Nature, as your Society is, in being; and I do with asmuch earnestness enquire after your Expeditions against theImpediments of Science, as to know what Armies, and Navies theseveral Princes of the World are setting forth. I concern my self as143As Buck writes, "Graunt and Petty stated the issue [the relationship between social order and theorder of nature] primarily M methodological terms: quantifying is important because it provides a formof knowledge free from the distorting effects of controversy and conflict; and the natural philosophers'primary claim on our attention is that, as a group, they offer an example of how consensus aboutexplanatory principles and concepts makes for social harmony. Underlying this view was a furtherargument — that the conditions for social order ultimately must be self-imposed by individuals as wellas enforced by public authority" (67).91much to know who are Curatours of this or the other Experiments, asto know who are Mareshals of France, or Chancellour of Sweden. I amas well pleased to hear you are satisfied in a luciferous Experiment, asthat a breach hath been made in the Enemy's works: and youringenious arguings immediately from sense, and fact, are as pleasant tome as the noise of victorious Guns, and Trumpets. 144A belief that the practice of natural philosophy, the conscious and deliberateobservation of the natural and the social world, and the discourses of the RoyalSociety were completely elitist and reserved to a small proportion of the populationof Restoration London, is contradicted by the cases of John Graunt and Dr. GeorgeThomson, author of Loimotomia; or the Pest Anatomized . Graunt, a tradesmanand City militiaman, and Thomson, an independent medical practitioner, point outthat the dissemination of the ideology of natural philosophy in the earlyRestoration, that matters of fact discovered through observation and tactile, sensualexperience in the flesh of the world produced indisputable and powerful truth,found willing and active recipients from the middling and lower middle classes ofthe population. Thomson, much more marginalized than Royal Society inducteeGraunt, claimed in his preface that Loimotomia was practical and representative ofempirical truth: "...I have here laid open what I visibly and experimentally havefound to be true, what I have handled with these hands, and seen with theseeyes".145 Thomson's search for truth was, as he said so himself, compulsive: "yea, Iwas so eager in the pursuit of therapeutical Truth, that I was restless till I had fullview of the inward parts of a Pestilentiall Body". 146 The disorder wrought by theplague to the individual body encouraged Thomson's anatomy, bringing a corpse'sinvisible and unknown parts under the gaze of the natural philosopher and his144Graunt, A6.145Thomson, Loimotomia, A4.146Thomson, Loimotomia, A592virtual witnesses, for his own satisfaction and the "fascination of all inquisitivePersons", in order to counter the diseases threat with therapeutic truth. Graunt aswell wished to bring into view the unknown and therefore threatening parts of adifferent body, on a more macrocosmic scale, and statistical analysis would enablesuch an operation. For instance, political arithmetic could show the necessity ofdividing the City into different, more equally distributed parishes in order tocounter the problem of the growing suburbs, where "many viscious persons get theliberty to live as they please, for want of some heedful Eye to overlook them". 147The Bills of Mortality would be the vehicle to aid such a process, and naturalphilosophy would provide the methodology — the social and political technology— to allow the collective body of the City to be anatomized. Graunt placed thematters of fact produced through his analysis of the Bills of Mortality at the serviceof social control and stability, thereby making trade and government more secure,the two most eagerly sought after goals of the Restoration. Political arithmetic couldoffer assistance to government for the purposes of policy making, Graunt informeda reader at the time, "to understand the Land, and the hands of the Territory to begoverned, according to all their intrinsic, and accidental differences". It wouldprovide knowledge of the size, shape, content, situation, and productivity of all thelands and towns of the kingdom, how much hay an acre of meadow would produce,the number of cattle that could be reared on the same hay, and how much that acreof land would be worth in purely monetary value. In addition to such empiricalinformation on the material and physical properties of what encompassed thekingdom, Graunt claimed it would be equally as important to have detailedknowledge about the inner components of the social body:147Graunt, 58.93It is no less necessary to know how many People there be of each Sex,State, Age, Religion, Trade, Rank, Or Degree, & c. by the Knowledgewhereof Trade and Government may be made more certain andRegular; for, if men knew the People as aforesaid, they might know theconsumption they would make, so as Trade might not be hoped forwhere it is impossible.148This anatomy of the body politic occasioned through scientific knowledge and themethodology of natural philosophy became, for Graunt, the mediator to balancegovernment and maintain consensus and conformity in the context of theRestoration, as he states in the concluding paragraph to Natural and PoliticalObservations :I conclude, That a clear knowledge of all these particulars, and manymore, whereat I have shot but at rovers, is necessary in order to good,certain, and easie Government, and even to balance Parties, andfactions both in Church and State. But whether the knowledge thereofbe necessary to many, or fit for others, then the Sovereign, and his chiefMinisters, I leave to consideration. 149Certainly, it became apparent to Charles II that what Graunt proposed could only inthe end buttress the power of the state in the early years of the Restoration, judgingfrom Graunt's induction into the Royal Society at the express wish of the monarchhimself. This knowledge was also deemed fit for others, as well, for to involveindividuals in the process of political arithmetic was to involve them in aconsensual community producing uncontested matters of scientific fact. Graunt'stext was published in two editions during 1662, and the plague of 1665 saw thepublication of an edition in early summer, and a fourth edition in November. 150148Graunt, 73.149Graunt, 74.150See the Laslett introduction to The Earliest Classics (1973), unpag.94This is clear indication of a reading public becoming aware of, and receptive to, thepossibilities offered by political arithmetic.The establishment of a reading public of significant depth and range, and asubstantial rise in the amount of printed material available to the population ofearly modern London was the result of a substantial rise in literacy witnessed inEngland during the middle decades of the seventeenth century. These gains alsohelp explain what distinguishes the plague of 1665 from other plagues that struckLondon in the same century, in that the amount of printed information about thedisease available to a reading public at the time was much higher. Many medicaltracts were produced, as well as many analyses of past and present Bills ofMortality. 151 This outbreak of the disease cultivated a much greater interest instatistical analysis than any other year, perhaps due to the popularity of Graunt'sNatural and Political Observations . For example, as far as I have been able todiscern, 1665 was the first and last year that all the weekly Bills for the entire yearwere compiled with a yearly Bill in one volume published by the printer E. Cotes,for the Company of Parish Clerks, under the title London's Dreadful Visitation. Thetitle page of this text was bordered by an assembly of images associated with theplague — picks and shovels, winding sheets, hourglasses and skeletons — in a stylesimilar to the memento mori (FIG.6, FIG.7). London's Dreadful Visitation, though,was not a memento mori for a single individual, but now referred to the social bodyin its entirety. Information from the Bills could also be garnered from other sources,such as L'Estrange's news sheets, and even showed up in some unusual places thatyear, such as the shaft of a commemorative spoon, now in the Museum of London,that bears an inscription of the yearly total of deaths on one side of its shaft, and thetotal from the plague on the reverse (FIG.8).151Slack (1985), 244-248, and Bell (1924), 219-223.95How could such material function in the culture of the Restoration? Theprinter, E. Cotes, in his preface to London's Dreadful Visitation, stated thatindividuals following the Bills had suffered from the lack of opportunity tocompare them with Bills from previous years, and therefore offers his text toposterity and the nation to counter this problem. In so doing, Cotes contributes tothe construction of consensus through the public service he performs in offering abook containing a year of statistical information. This collection of Mortality Billswould serve "to confer upon us, such a uniform and cordial Repentance, thateveryone of us may search out the Plague of his own Heart and Brain", and restorethe City to health. 152 Clearly, the statistical anatomy of the body social and politicfunctioned as an integral cog in Restoration attempts to impose conformity anduniformity, and to ensure social peace and order.A growing public for this form of print culture had other practical uses for theBills of Mortality. Individuals could use them as a kind of map of the urban centreduring times of plague, gathering information on which parishes to avoid due toheavy infection, or discerning when to leave the City. 153 Navy Clerk Samuel Pepysused the Bills to enable safe travel through the City on official business, and tomonitor the mortality rates in his own parish, moving to Woolwich when itbecame too dangerous to stay in London. For example, Pepys wrote in his diary onNovember 30 from Woolwich, after the plague had begun to subside in the City,that "great joy we have this week in the weekly Bill, it being come to 544 in all, andbut 333 of the plague — so that we are encouraged to get to London as soon as wecan". 154 Others, too, found it important to have intimate and detailed knowledge152London's Dreadful Visitation: or a Collection of all the Bills of Mortality For this Present Year(London, 1665).153Slack, 252.154Pepys also makes it clear that he is watching the Bills and planning his movements accordingly inthe diary entries for July 27, August 10 and 30, September 7, 14, 16, 20, October 3 and 4, November 8, 9, 24,96about the plague's progress through the City's parishes, such as the Cambridgeundergraduate Samuel Herne, who wrote in a letter to his tutor from London inJuly of 1665:Blessed be the lord I got to London safe on Wensday by eleven of theclock: and there is but very little notice tooke of the sicknesse here inLondon though the bills are very great there dyed threescore and 18 inst giles in the fields since the bill; and 5 in one hour, in our parishsince, it spreads very much. 155For some, the Bills could show other things, such as human incompetence. Acertain J. Heydon, pharmacist to the College of Physicians, replied to Dr. Thomson'sanatomy of the College, cited at the beginning of this chapter, and his criticisms ofmembers of the medical profession who had left the City during the plague bystating that no more medical men left the City in the summer of 1665 than in anyother summer. For Heydon, Thomson's remaining in the City was indicative of hisstation in life and his clientele, and for proof enough that he was a disreputable26, and December 13, 1665. Perhaps, in addition, it was thanks to careful attention paid to the Billsthat Pepys could, without any sense of irony, write to Lady Cartaret:I have stayed in the City till above 7,400 died in one week, and of them above six-thousand of the Plague, and little noise heard day or night but tolling of bells; till Icould walk Lumber [Lombard] Street and not meet twenty persons from one end to theother, and not above fifty upon the Exchange; till whole families, ten or twelvetogether, have been swept away; till my very physician, Dr. Burnett, who undertook tosecure me against the infection, having survived the month of his own house being shutup, died himself of the Plague; till the nights though much lengthened, are grown tooshort to conceal the burials of those that died the day before, people being therebyconstrained to borrow daylight for that service; lastly till I could find neither meat nordrink safe, the butcheries being everywhere visited, my brewers house shut up, and mybaker with his whole family dead of the Plague. Yet, Madam, through God's blessing,your poor servant is in a perfect state of health (emphasis mine, cited in Bell (1924),230.This text illustrates quite well that plague infected different classes of people unequally. Pepys,himself in perfect health, becomes truly concerned when he can no longer enjoy the quality of life hehas grown accustomed to, for all the trades and small merchants he is used to enjoy in a service capacityare either dead or quarantined.155Cited in Bell (1924), 80.97character and an incompetent doctor, Heydon called upon his readers to consult theBills of Mortality. Heydon wrote that Dr. Thomson, having no where else to goduring the epidemic,was forced to tarry in his Garret neer Aldgate, cracking of Nuts in histwo-penny Crucible, and venting his malice against those worthypersons, many of which would scorn him for their Groom: perhaps hisabode there was one main reason that the Bills of that Parish increasedto so vast numbers.156John Allin, an excluded minister, corresponded regularly with friends he hadleft in the port town of Rye, and scarcely a day went by that he did not mention theBills in great detail. For example, on August 11, 1665, he wrote to his friend PhilipFryth in Rye, who had advised him to leave London:I shall not think myselfe safer there then here, whilest my call is to stayhere; yet I am troubled at the approach of the sicknesse neerer everyweeke, and at a new burying place which they have made neere us, andwith some piece of indiscretion used in not shutting up, but rathermakeing greate funeralls for such as dye of the distemper; which yet Ithinke God will not putt an end to till sin be left and suppressed morethan it is: but God seemes to pursue a designe which doubtlesse Heewill efect before Hee bath done. 4,030 in all; 2,817 Plague. 142 in all, 64Plague, in our parish. 157Allin represents an interesting figure, for, as an excluded minister he believedplague to be God's punishment for humankind's sins, and, consequently, nopreventative measure was of any importance when God chose to take a life. On theother hand, in the above citation he seems unsure of what to do, and is looking forassurance in the supposed truth and accuracy of statistical knowledge garnered from156J. Heydon, A Quintuple Rosie-crucian Scourge For the due Correction of that Pseudo-chymist andScurrilous Emperick, Geo. Thomson. Being in part a Vindication of the Learned Society of Physicians(London, 1665), unpag.157Cited in Bell (1924), 258.98the Bills of Mortality. All of these writers are characterized by the way they use theBills to conceptualize the spaces of the City in order to enable free movementthrough its urban geography, or to obtain a mental picture of the status, character,and quality of various parishes at particular times.IV) THE PLAGUE BROADSHEET AND THE SOCIAL BODYIt is coincident with the growing readership for the weekly Bills of Mortalityin the seventeenth-century that a yearly bill in broadsheet form was produced inyears of great mortality. 158 Originally licensed by the Company of Parish Clerks to anindividual printer, after 1629 it appears that yearly bills in various forms werelicensed, and they drew freely from information printed in the weekly Bills. Themost common type of these sheets — examples exist from the plague years of 1636-1637 — contained a small, simple image, surrounded by columns of statistics frompast and present plagues, including sometimes a prayer and a medicinal preparationfor the prevention of the plague. For example, a sheet from 1636 entitled Lord HaveMercy Upon Us. This is the humble Petition of England unto Almighty God,meekely imploring his Divine bounty for the cessation of this Mortality of thePestilence now raigning amongst us: With a lamentable List of deaths Triumphs inthe weekly Burials of the City of LONDON, and the Parishes adjacent to the same(FIG.9) is of this type. The edges of these sheets were often rimmed with a blackborder in a style derived from the memento mori, sometimes including on theborder similar figures of skeletons, skulls, shovels, and bodies in winding sheets.That these broadsheets were printed and distributed during an outbreak of theplague is confirmed by the fact that columns of statistics for the current plague yearhave the week-ending dates for the Bills of Mortality printed, and the space for thenumbers left blank. The owner of the sheet could then fill in the blank columns158See Wilson, 199.99him or herself as the information was gathered from the Bills proper, or analternate source.The small image derives, as far as I can tell, from the broadsheet of 1636.There were several sheets that used a rendition of this same image and style in 1665,such as London's Lord have Mercy Upon Us. A true Relation of Seven ModernPlagues or Visitations in London, with the number of those that were Buried of allDiseases (FIG.10). Despite the loss of some detail from the first version, the smallpicture would have been loaded with signification for a contemporary viewer. TheCity was viewed from the outside, represented as a contained, tightly packed entitycircumscribed by its walls, clearly separated from the country surrounding it. Theold cathedral of St. Paul's was easily discernible, so that even a viewer unable to readwould be able to clearly locate the scene in London. The 'parishes adjacent to thesame' of the sheet's title were represented as closely hugging the outer perimeter ofthe City's walls. In the 1636 version of the image, two of the urban centre's gateswere depicted, showing individuals entering and departing the City, presumably togive the impression to a viewer that London was still an open city during theepidemic, and functioning normally. But the City could not be completely openduring the plague, allowing free circulation of persons infected and those not, andhad to be represented as under the control of civic and royal authority. These officialpowers were taking effective measures to protect the inhabitants of the rest of thecountry, for in the top left corner two citizens approach three watchmen guardingpassage into the country beyond, and carry large sheets of paper. These can only becertificates of health issued by the office of the Lord Mayor to persons declared free ofthe disease by a physician, the same certificates highlighted in Dunstall's fourthimage. In the immediate foreground of the image, individuals flee or supplicatethemselves, with coffins and body bags strewn on the ground. Presiding over all is asymbolic figure of death with its back to the viewer. Arms raised, this skeletal figure100holds a large 'plague arrow' in one hand, and an hourglass representing thetemporal aspect of human life in the other. Above, another figure depicting anangel of death hovers in a black cloud above the City, holding in one hand thesword of sacrifice, and in the other a three tailed whip for the purposes of penance,symbolically urging viewers to repent for their sins, as plague had long been viewedas a punishment delivered from an angry God for the sins of humankind.The strong religious element of these broadsheets gradually shifted throughthe seventeenth century, as religious poems and prayers slowly disappeared andwere replaced by ever increasing amounts of statistics culled from the Bills ofMortality. In addition, taking into account the Restoration cultural context and thepromotion of the discourse of natural philosophy articulated in the first chapter ofthis thesis, one of the more interesting changes was in the titles of the sheets. Nolonger 'humble petitions' with a 'lamentable lists' of plague deaths as in 1636-1637,the sheets now avowed to embody a form of truth in the public realm, and activelyencouraged whomever was in possession of the sheet to literally partake in theconstruction of that truth, by tabulating the ratios of plague deaths and deaths byother causes. The broadsheets announced themselves as either being a 'trueRelation', a 'true Account' as Dunstall's and Sellers' sheet proclaimed, or as capableof transmitting sure knowledge, showing 'the certain causes of Pestilential Diseases'as did another sheet from 1665 entitled The Mourning Cross: or, England's Lordhave Mercy upon Us (FIG.11). Surrounded by a thick black border, this sheetcondensed all visual imagery into the direct and simple heavy black cross, alludingto the red cross painted upon the doors of infected houses.In 1637, a version of the sheet with the single image picturing the City hadappeared with a poem calling upon the viewer/reader to repent for their sins in the101hope that such an action would quell or prevent the plague. 159 This poem alsoappeared on the 1665 version of the broadsheet reproduced here (FIG.10). Thistheme of repentance was not new, as indicated above, but the long poetic text of 1637contained some novel additions. The poem addressed the question of behaviour ofthe City's social groups, and tried to minimize the problems caused by the issue offlight. The text, situated under a version of the small image described above, beganby addressing the reader — "whatever thou art, rich or poor" — to rouse themselvesfor death stood at their door. For the first time, as far as is possible to assess, the issueof flight from the City was invoked in written terms on this form of sheet, in thedescription of God's anger over the City's sins:He is the Rich-man's terrour, makes him flye,And bear away his baggs, as loath to die.What shall the Poor do that behind do stay?Death makes them rich, by taking them away.But what shall Poor men do, that here do live,Tis surely fit the Rich should comfort give,And weekly Means unto them still afford:Oh such Rich men shall be rich in the Lord!Here the contentious issue of flight from the City was simplified and madeunproblematic, for those that fled simply left behind the means to support thedisadvantaged throughout the length of the outbreak. Death from the plague madethe poor rich in the Lord anyhow, as repentance and payment for one's sinsreunited the sufferer with God. This sheet hinted at its function by advocatingproper behaviour for the reader in times of plague, and therefore served atherapeutic or preventive purpose for the social body. In promoting this mode ofreligious behaviour, the broadside also promoted the preservation of social order159This sheet is located in the British Library. It is virtually identical to he 1665 version illustratedand discussed in this analysis.102during the infection. By cautioning the reader that God has given his angels chargeto strike at will, an affliction prevented only through repentance, the sheet thenadvises the reader to note the number of infected houses, either seen in the City bythe marked and inscribed doors, or potentially inferred from the statistics includedon the sheet and in the Bills of Mortality. The broadside instructs the viewer to readthe infected City as a text, and interpret the marked doors as textual reminders of thebenefits of proper behaviour:Let all infected houses be thy Text,And make this Use, that thine may be the next.The Red Crosse still is us'd, as it hath bin,To shew they Christians are that are within:And Lord have mercy on us on the door,Puts thee in mind, to pray for them therefore.The Watchman that attends the house of sorrow,He may attend upon thy house to morrow.Proper social behaviour in this case, must have meant more than mere repentance.Instructions to use this broadsheet and its statistics in order to open up the infectedCity like a book may have helped to define flight from the City as appropriate inorder to avoid having one's own house quarantined. This process indicates thatstatistics enabled a definition of the plague as a more limited social problem thanheretofore believed, for the play between the religious and the statistic created atension that called into question the blanket notion that plague was a universaldivine threat. In this way, then, the information culled from the Bills, and thesebroadsides themselves, could be used to support policies of public order andsegregation of the sick enacted unequally upon different classes and groups in theCity, as well as smooth over the guilt associated with flight.These intentions, I would argue, are also central to the image of the socialbody pictured by John Dunstall, and extrapolated from John Seller's statistical103comparisons. Yet, as I demonstrated earlier on, the broadsheet is laced with internalcontradictions. I want now to focus more on the last two images designed by JohnDunstall, the public funeral and the return of those who fled. Dunstall himselfseemed to invite a closer comparison of these two by linking them visually throughthe inclusion of a hill in the foreground that joins the scenes. This pair form a subtext in the overall visual narrative and historical chronology of the plague in theCity. One of the largest discrepancies, when revealed, seriously challenges theoverall homogeneity and consensual community called up in the pictures, and thetruth interpellated by political arithmetic and its claims to produce detailedknowledge about the entire social body. Dunstall's pictures are strangely lacking inreligious symbolism when compared to other sheets of this type, especiallyconsidering the era of religious tension during the Restoration, outlined in the firstchapter of this thesis. But in the eighth scene, a public funeral procession is depicted.Such public concourses were expressly forbidden by royal and civic proclamationsunder the threat of imprisonment, yet they occurred anyway. This being the case,then, the image could have been read as depicting an effect of the disorder of theplague, in that it portrays an example of civil disobedience. It is possible, too, that theimage was included in the sheet's chronology of plague in the City to do theopposite — to counter critiques of the inhumanity of a policy that refused publicfunerals for the dead, or to indicate that the outbreak never threatened the socialbody enough to destroy any of what were constructed as the most basic humanneeds and considerations. The image could also have helped to construct the notionthat plague afflicted a wide variety of social groups: those piled into anonymousmass graves, and those commanding a coffin and a large funeral procession.Yet, as the text in the lower right hand corner informs us, this is a Quakerfuneral: "The Eighth sheweth the manner of burying the dead with their Friendsaccompanying them". At the Restoration, the Quakers, whose official name was the104Religious Society of Friends, represented one of the dissenting religious groupscharged with contributing to the anarchy of the previous two decades, and one ofthose groups excluded from the religious life of the nation with the passing of theAct of Uniformity. By consequence, the eight image represents the Quakers outsideof the sanction of the recently reinstated Church of England, and also, moreimportantly, in open defiance of the Plague Orders proclaimed by civic and royalauthority. Therefore, this group of individuals depicted in the eighth illustrationcould have been seen as a threat to the safety of the rest of the public.Though they are pictured, dissenting religious groups like the Quakers werenot represented as part of the consensual community called up by the statisticaldissection of London and the out parishes, for they kept their own graveyards, anddid not report their dead to the Parish Clerks. 160 Consequently, their deceased didnot make up part of the numbers on the Bills of Mortality. This fact would havebeen common knowledge to anyone in seventeenth century London who followedthe Bills and had any sense of the religious life of the City, of which, clearly, a largeproportion did. Excluded from the statistical anatomy of the City, the 'Friends' wereincluded in the visual one, and represented as a threat to the social body. In turn,the plague becomes a metaphor for the disorder of the Civil War and theCommonwealth, for when dissenting religious groups can once again enjoy thefreedom of public ritual, disharmony has returned to the social body.160Bell (1924), 179, and Nicholson, 70, wherein a letter is reproduced from John Tillison, cathedralstaff, to Dean of St. Paul's, William Sancroft. In this letter Tillison writes: "The Quakers (as we areinformed) have buryed in their peece of ground 1000 fro some weekes, together last part. Many are deadin Ludgate, Newgate, and Christian Church hospitall & many other places about the towne which arenot included in the bill of mortality". See also Pepys diary, (Latham and Matthews eds.) entry forAugust 31, 1665, where Pepys, after discussing the current weekly bill, writes: "But it is feared that thetrue number of the dead this week is near 10,000; partly from the poor that cannot be taken notice of,through the greatness of the number, and partly from the Quakers and others that will not have anybell ring for them". Church bells were rung when a death was reported to the parish clerk.105But still the eighth image does not quite fit into the construction of theordered representation of this plague, and making it do so hazards the risk ofdenying any autonomy to the individual viewer and reader of this broadsheet, whobrought with them their own experiences of plague and the recent political conflicts.Nor can we deny the presence of the artist, who, in fact, chose this image to sign hisname to: 'John Dunstall fecit'. Who was John Dunstall? It is impossible to know,other than schoolteacher and drawing tutor, he is virtually anonymous, despitethese images. To me, it almost seems possible that Dunstall was himself a memberor a sympathizer of one of the dissenting sects: Presbyterian, or even Quaker.Within the harsh constraints established by government for print culture andreligious freedom, Dunstall produced a series of representations that did not overtlychallenge the picture of the plague demanded by the Restoration context. Yet, at thesame time, despite all the contradictions and internal conflicts that are smoothedover, Dunstall inserted a piece that didn't quite fit, that remained ambiguous andresisted any easy interpretation within the overall narrative construction. Morethan likely Dunstall would have been aware of the increased persecution of theQuakers while the plague raged in London, perhaps he even felt it personally onsome level. Fifty-two Quakers died in Newgate during the summer of 1665, as didhalf of the fifty-five held in the hold of ship awaiting deportation for violating theConventicle Act. 161 When Charles II fled the City in July, he left George Monck,Duke of Albermarle, to preserve order. Monck commanded a large group of soldiersstationed in Hyde Park to preserve them from infection, and he directed thesesoldiers on a continuous series of searches and seizures. Monck was incensed when,after capturing a group of dissenters planning an uprising in September while theplague was nearing its height, the leader of the group, Robert Danvers, was spirited161Hutton, 231106away by supporters while his guards had a drink in a local tavern. This promptedmass arrests and persecution, with more than fifty Quakers confined. 162 It is almostas if the image implies that despite all this — the plague, persecution,imprisonment — and the fact that the space for nonconformists within Restorationsociety was growing smaller and more uncomfortable everyday, they were stillthere, and absolute conformity imposed on public religious life was impossible. Infact, out of the controlled disorder of the plague represented here in the print, this isthe largest and most orderly group, hinting at the presence of an autonomous andsolidified community within the greater social body of Restoration London.The image of an ordered and consensual community offered in thebroadsheet becomes even more destabilized when it is considered together withother representations, both visual and textual, of the plague of 1665. Ironically, alongwith a some members of the medical profession 163 , it was the Quakers and otherdissenting religious groups who had a vision of the social community in times ofsickness that was at odds with the one presented in this broadsheet. The policy ofstrict separation of the sick from the healthy went against dissenting sects notions ofcharity, involving caring for friends and neighbours in times of sickness, and theirideas that plague was divine punishment, meaning that it was irrelevant whetherone fled from the City, or visited one's afflicted neighbours and family members. IfGod chose to take a life, there was nothing one could do to prevent it. In addition tothe view of the official College of Physicians, it was, generally, the Anglican Churchof England that supported the program of shutting up of the houses, and most162Hutton, 231. As Hutton writes, the soldiers acted all the more willingly in that they blamed themeetings of nonconformists for the spread of the epidemic".163 In Nathaniel Hodges' account he expressed doubts that the practice of household quarantine waseffective, and acknowledged that it was highly disputed (Bartel, 34).107critiques of this policy were from the dissenting and independent religious sects. 164Interestingly enough, counters to criticisms of established policies often werestructured around an unsubstantiated argument that voices in opposition to officialplague policy were voices encouraging popular resistance. These official responsesargued that fatalistic attitudes towards plague, in other words dissenting ones, wereheld by the rude multitude, the ignorant sort, whose behaviour was responsible inthe first place for the outbreaks of the disease, and who represented that part of thesocial body against whom public health measures were directed. Such a view was inopposition to visions of public order and the social body articulated by religiousdissenters such as Benjamin Spenser, in his Vox Civitas (1625), wherein he opposedhousehold segregation with the following metaphor: "A commonwealth is a body,and one member methinks should nourish another". 165Dissenters to official plague policies, such as the anonymous author ofGolgotha, or a Looking-Glass for London , proposed locking up four or fivemembers of the College of Physicians in a shut-up house in order to experience thehorror of it, and to recognize that the practice increases the plague. The authorexplains that the sick need the care and kindness of their neighbours, or else "theFamily, so dismally exposed, shall sink by degrees, one after another, in the den ofthis dismal likeness to Hell, contrived by the Advice of the English-College ofDoctors". Another unlicensed, anonymous text published in 1665 argued that stricthousehold quarantine would lead to civil disobedience, in that those shut off fromfriends and neighbours would break out of their homes and spread the sickness intothe surrounding areas. The writer even saw in the information supplied by the Billsof Mortality the potential for a criticism of official plague policy, and argued that164Slack (1985), 231. See also the official publication of the College of Physicians, entitled NecessaryDirections for the Prevention and Cure of the Plague in 1665, which comes out in support of householdquarantine, (published in Bartel, 52-55).165Cited in Slack (1985), 309.108statistical information drawn from the yearly bill for 1625 clearly showed thatinfection decreased when the shut-up houses were reopened. 166 That this text wasanonymous and unlicensed indicates that there was an official, permitted use forstatistical information and the Bills of Mortality, one that dovetailed with the aimsand desires of the ruling authorities.Also tied in with the contrasting views held by dissenting religious sects inregard to acceptable behaviour during the plague, was the question of flight. Non-conformists generally believed that plague was punishment for one's sins, andconsequently it was useless to flee, for the arrows of God would always be capable offinding an individual. In addition to the constraints placed on the machinery ofcharity, flight from the City was also held responsible for the financial strainsunderwent by all those unable to leave the City. The last image in Dunstall's visualnarrative pictures a varied crowd returning to the City on foot and horseback, aswell as in covered and private coach. Represented here in this exodus back to theurban centre was a heterogeneity of social groups delineated by the various means oftransportation, denying the fact that not such a mixed assembly evacuated the Cityin the first place. Predominantly, those who fled London were the wealthiermerchant classes, the court, and a large part of the clergy — those who had thematerial means to effect such a change of location. Pepys, before he too evacuatedthe City, wrote in his diary on September 14, 1665, that on a visit to the RoyalExchange, traditionally the center of trading and merchant activity in London, hewas surprised to find there a large number of people. The Navy Clerk was quickly166The Shutting Up of the Infected Houses as it is Practiced in England Soberly Debated (London,1665), 6. See also Golgotha; or a Looking Glass for London; With an humble Witness against the CruelAdvice and Practice of Shutting up unto Oppression; by J.V., grieved for the Poor, who perish dailyhereby (London, 1665). One cannot resist, in this case, to link the looking glass as producer of unseentruths metaphor to the publication by the Royal Society, in the same year, of Robert Hooke'sMicrographia: or Some Physiological Descriptions of Minute Bodies made by Magnifying Glasses(London, 1665).109appalled, though, when he found out this crowd was not the usual one occupyingthis space:I did wonder to see the 'Change so full, I believe two hundred people;but not a Man or a Merchant of any fashion, but plain men all. AndLord! to see how I did endeavour all I could to talk with as few as Icould, there being now no observation of shutting up of housesinfected, that to be sure we do converse and meet with people thathave the plague upon them. 167The plague brings with it an inversion, breaking down social and spatial hierarchies,and the City's urban areas evacuated by 'men' and 'merchants' are now filled withthose not normally found there.Dunstall's last image applies a form of closure over the disruption of theoutbreak, showing the return of the 'runaways' to a now healthy City. For theviewers of this broadsheet, such was the unproblematic end to the event of theplague. Yet, the return of these individuals was greeted by numerous pamphlets andbroadsheets that attacked the behaviour of the 'run-aways' on moral grounds. Theywere also ridiculed for wandering about the countryside, shunned from peripheralcommunities while plague raged in London, and now destitute on their return. 168The attack on the runaways also received visual expression in prints such as JohnGoddard's stinging critique utilizing a mocking carnivalesque fool above a few linesof verse beginning with the ironic "Welcome Home Brother" (FIG.12):You that of late have lefte your habitation167Pepys diary, Latham and Matthews ed., entry for September 14, 1665.1681 have discovered many of these critiques for 1665 in the Museum of London, Guildhall Library, andthe British Library. For example, John Crouch's poem London's Bitter Sweet Cup of Tears is highlycritical of the runaways, as are Lamentio Civitas; London's Complaint Against her Children in theCountry, Londini Lachrymae; or London's Complaint Against her Fugitives, and the long broadsheetpoem entitled The Run-Awayes Return; or, the Poor Penniless Pilgrim. This broadside poem wasanswered by a similar broadsheet entitled The Run Awayes Safe Refuge: or the Poor Penniless PilgrimsAnswer to Their Miserable Comforters their Fellow Citizens in London.110And in Barnes Stables Hayrickes, tooke your station:With scornes and taunts though other men doe meete youAt your returne the Foole doth kindly Greete you,And though your Coyne and Credit scanted bee,Your honest Cooze will keepe you Company. 169Goddard's print satirizes those individuals who left the metropolis during theepidemic in terms of the financial burden they imposed on themselves, and thosewho stayed, by the destruction of trade and commerce. In 1665, those that leftRestoration London during the plague imposed another kind of conformity oruniformity on the social body, that of fiscal impoverishment, and Goddard's poemends by stating that the runaways may have made destitute by their flight, but suchactions also served to put similar strains on the honest citizens who stayed.These critiques of the runaways are consistently marked by references to thedestruction of trade and commerce in the City. For example, in London's BitterSweet Cup of Tears„ John Crouch complained that the rich left the poor behind todie, and thatThe like destructive and unequal FateLeft London Streets too Wide and desolate;Threw out the wealthy int'th'open AireAnd leaves the Needy to Heavens angry care!Trade interrupted, and the royal burse,169The artist John Goddard is another figure of whom there is very little record or informationavailable. The British Museum Print Room has a series of the seven deadly sins with virtuallyidentical typography and verse style, and similar type of image, as the print concerning the runaways.The seven deadly sins seem to be mocking critiques of overdressed court figures or aristocrats. There isalso, in the Museum's collection, a frontispiece for Cicero's Book of Old Age, translated by a WilliamAustin, quite possibly the author of The Anatomy of the Pestilence, and a frontispiece for a work byRalph Austin, entitled The Spiritual Uses of an Orchard or Garden of Fruit Trees (1653). Bryan'sDictionary of Painters and Engravers contains the following entry: "Goddard, John, was an Englishengraver of the seventeenth-century. He engraved some frontispieces, maps, and other subjects, for thebooksellers. One of his best prints is the portrait of Martin Billingsley, a writing master, dated 1651,which is prefixed to his copy-book. Stratt mentions a small upright print of a woman standing, underwhich is inscribed Vetura, and another its companion".111Quitted and Empty as the Cities Purse. 170The broadsheet The Run-Awayes Return begins by asking those who fled about therare sights they might have seen in the country, and whether they spent theirfortunes in search of entertainment and lodgings. In addition, this long anonymouspoem, criticizes the runaways for turning away from God by fleeing their justpunishment for sin, and now deciding to return to the City once the infection hasdied down:With Empty Pockets turne back againSo that it seems in London those might stayWho had no money, you might Run-Away:But now your Purse is Penniless, you driveInto our City, as Bees to their Hive;You may be gone the same way that you went,Unto the Country Loobies, where you spentYour Money, and your Credit, Go be gone,And eat your Christmas Pye with Dull Sir John;With Sir John Lack Latin, who ran away,And left his Sheep for to be made a Prey.It was your Duties to have NourishedThe bodies of the Poor; the other FedTheir Souls with Food, and not to go away,But in their Troubles by them for to stay.Now if your Purse or Credit will hold out,You may go Wander all the World about;We are as glad your Backside to see,As for to have your Paltrey Company:Return, Return, unto your Countrey-Jone,For little Kindness here you shall have shown.The runaways returning to London like bees to a hive is a particularly aptdescription of the last image in Dunstall's visual narrative. The writer of this text170John Crouch, London's Bitter Sweet Cup of Tears (London, 1666), 4.112must have been close to the mark with this rather harsh critique, for it elicited abroadsheet response in the same style. Entitled The Run-Awayes Safe Refuge; or thePoor Penniless Pilgrims Answer to their Miserable Comforters their fellow Citizensin London, this broadside sought to correct the 'errors' of the first broadsheet, "Andbring out Matters Publique Face to Face". The author refutes the claims of the firsttext by saying that country people were honorable and treated them well in theirtravels, and they never saw houses rifled or men gambling while the dead lay allaround as they would have in the City. Most interesting, this broadside seems toargue that those who fled the City were in some sense the financial controllers ofthe economic life of the urban centre: "You say our Credit's lost, it may be sod Andso likewise is yours, for ought we to know".It may be worthwhile to turn to the information supplied by the yearly billprinted on Dunstall's and Sellers' broadside to get a clearer picture of such internalconflicts. Since the City within the walls was, on the whole, the commercial centre,and these critiques of the runaways are mostly couched in terms of trade andeconomic hardship, I want to see if the statistics for some of the individual parishescan tell us anything more about who might have made use of the Bills of Mortality,and would find the picture of the social body as mapped out by this broadsheet anacceptable representation of the 'reality' of the plague of 1665. As M.J. Power hasascertained, only 1.5% of the residents inside the walls of the City were described aspoor in the hearth taxes of the early years of the Restoration. Close to the river thepoor made up 5.2% of residents, while outside the walls the ratio increaseddramatically to 45.3%. 171 What emerges from Power's study is that the majority ofresidents inside the City walls were involved in some form of profession orbusiness. Power finds 216 different occupations listed in the hearth taxes for this171 Power, 204.113central area, divided into three distinct groups: dealers, victuallers, and professions,those involved in the primary selling of commodities and services, and includingthe specific occupations of the likes of merchants, brokers, grocers, bakers,tobacconists, vintners, apothecaries, doctors, and scriveners; second are craftsmen,being those producers of commodities who also may be involved in selling, andincluding individuals working in wood, metal, textiles, and leather to name a few;and thirdly, the semi-skilled, those who generally travel to work, including buildersand carriers. 172 The primary selling groups have the largest homes, those with themost hearths, with the craftsmen living in smaller dwellings, and the semi-skilledin the smallest.Using Power's analysis, and it is limited by the small number of parishes thatlist occupations in the hearth taxes, one sees that vocations tended to cluster inspecific parishes, with the professions grouping the most. From this one can thenextrapolate, with the help of the yearly bill printed on Dunstall's and Sellers'broadside, which occupations abandoned the City during the plague. In the parishesof St. Stephen Walbrook and St. Benet Sherehog, home to doctors, includingNathaniel Hodges, apothecaries, and the wealthiest merchants with an average of6.5 and 5.1 hearths per dwelling respectively, Stephen Walbrook had 17 recordedplague deaths for the entire year, and Benet Sherehog had one. These parishes seemto have been predominantly empty during the plague of 1665, indicating a publiceagerly scanning the Bills of Mortality for any sign of a sick metropolis, and takingprompt action in removing themselves. Moving into the less wealthy parishes of St.Magnus Fish Street, St. Margaret New Fish Street, and St. Michael Royal, home of amore mixed bag of occupations including dealers, victuallers, woodworkers andbuilders, plague deaths for the year begin to rise from 60, to 66, and then to 116 for St.172Power, 214.114Michael Royal, which had a 3.6 hearths per dwelling average. Deaths from plagueincrease as one moves from the wealthier parishes occupied by the most successfulmerchants and professionals to those inhabited by smaller merchants andcraftsmen, indicating parishes more populated while the sickness was in London,but this is by no means consistent. For example, the parishes St. Mary Woolnothand St. Martin Ironmonger were both occupied by metal workers, and yet the formerhad a sum of 38 deaths from plague, while the latter had only 11. The answer surelylies in the fact that Martin Ironmonger was occupied by the elite of the metalworkers, the goldsmiths, who probably found it more expedient to follow their richclients out of town. Most striking, is the numbers for a relatively wealthy parish justoutside the City walls to the north, St. Botolph Aldersgate. This parish, with anaverage of 5.1 hearths per dwelling, was occupied by a large majority of printers andbinders, and counted the highest number of plague deaths amongst the parishescompared here — 753. 173 Even though the population of London had without adoubt risen during the seventeenth century, the parish of Benet Sherehog had moreplague deaths in 1625 than 1665, despite the fact that the total plague deaths for theyears were 35,417 and 68,596 respectively. For Botolph Aldersgate the opposite is thecase, for the parish counted 307 plague deaths in 1625, and 753, as mentioned above,in 1665. Clearly, then, accounting for the minor inaccuracies and misreportings inthe Bills, flight from the City's central parishes occurred on a much greater scale in1665. 174The picture that emerges of the City during the plague, is a metropolis inwhich some vital members of the economic life of the City are absent, while othersremain. A significant number of trades that group in a parish might remain, while173Be11 (1924) cites a letter from Sir Roger L'Estrange to Lord Arlington of October 19, in which theformer states that eighty members of the printing trade had died of the plague up to that point (216).174For an account of the runaways during the plagues of 1625 and 1636, see Wilson, 155-160, and 162-163.115the majority of members of the same trade from another parish decide to flee. Therecan be no simple blanket statement that the rich fled and the poor were forced tostay, for when one comes to analyze the printed representations emerging as a resultof the plague, a much more complicated picture begins to appear involving conflictsbetween merchants who stayed and took over the clients of others, craftsmenangered over the loss of their major markets and the handlers of their goods, andconflicts within similar trades themselves. While it was certainly in the interests ofofficial power to allow the production an image of the social body that supported itsprograms to control the plague and the City, such as Dunstall's and Sellers'broadsheet, at the same time this representation could incorporate the individualinterests of those citizens of the City opting for flight as an option, by making theaction unproblematic in the closure of Dunstall's visual images, and legitimizing itscientifically through its manipulation of statistics as part of the cycle that returnsthe City to health.Though there were competing visions of the social order during the Londonplague of 1665, one based on the policy of strict household segregation would havebeen the government's trump card in the struggle to preserve order in the City. Atthe same time, making flight from the urban centre unproblematic would aid inhaving the wealthier and more influential merchants and professionals identifywith and support this view. If the official program could be shown to be a failure, inthat the number of infected increased rather than subsided, or inconsistent, in that itbroke down at the height of the epidemic as I have shown, then government'srepeated confidence in the program would have been unjustified. 175 Dunstall's andSellers' broadsheet naturalizes this program of household segregation as part of itscycle from sickness to health. The plague as a disrupting force could not be denied,175See Slack (1985), 252.116yet the forces of social order and restraint had to be shown as effective inminimizing the disruption to the social life of the City. The picture of the socialbody created through the use of visual representation and the statistical map of theurban center in this broadsheet, notwithstanding the discontinuity of the plague,emphasized order, rationality and methodical exactitude. Despite the presence ofcompeting views within the print culture of London at this historic moment, thebroadsheet supported the means taken by civic authority to control the disease andpreserve the wholeness of the social body. At the same time, it diffused the issue ofindividuals looking out for their own interests — interests potentially harmful tothe community — in the images of flight, by making this activity unproblematic inthe visual and numerical representation offered up by the sheet. In the end, bothissues were represented as essential operations in the preservation and restorationof health to the City.It has been the intention of this thesis to explore how a particular broadsheetform produced in London during the plague anatomized the social body of the Cityafflicted by the epidemic. The plague brought with it its imagined and real threat tosocial order and stability, and in 1665, the outbreak of epidemic proportions occurredin the cultural context of the Restoration, a historical moment exceedinglyconcerned with the problems of political and religious peace. The broadsheetproduced by Dunstall and Sellers, being the most sophisticated example of a culturalform having developed in response to the plague, offered the contemporary viewera visual narrative of the infection through the City in 1665. In addition, it offered astatistical narrative for the City through the present plague and through historicalmemory by way of the inclusion of statistical information from two previousepidemics for each of the urban centre's parishes within and without the walls. Inits narrative and visual constructions, the broadside imposed an order on the social117effects of the disease and the spaces of the City contrasted by other accounts from thesame period. The City and the plague were corrected, classified, catalogued, andordered. They were made visible in text, picture, and statistic at a time when makingsomething visible meant producing truth and uncontested knowledge about certainobjects and phenomena.Dunstall's pictures proclaimed their truth by association with Sellers'statistics. This thesis has shown that the origins of statistical knowledge lie in theirconnection to the problem of the preservation of social order during the plague, andto their use by individuals in a plague stricken City to plan or justify their behaviourduring an epidemic. During the Restoration, statistical knowledge received its mostrigorous theorization as part of the discourse of natural philosophy, proclaimingitself capable of aiding the production and preservation of social peace through amethodological platform advocating a communal, and therefore consensual,production of knowledge in a historical context recently besieged by two decades ofinstability. With the Restoration, statistics, or 'political arithmetic' as it was calledthen, came to be implicated in the production of detailed knowledge about the socialbody with proposed uses for trade and government. Political arithmetic also,through the use of the print medium, itself tightly constrained during theRestoration, called up an audience receptive to its political and ideologicalunderpinnings. With the breakdown of order in the City as a result of the epidemicof bubonic disease, this kind of knowledge could be mobilized in a representationalproject that attempted to assert a conceptual order on the infection and the city. Indoing so, for example, Dunstall's and Sellers' version of the plague could functionto erase social tensions exacerbated by the disease, and to naturalize severe andrepressive attempts by government to control the infection and the City's urbanspaces. But this erasure of social tensions could not be complete, and thebroadsheet's internal contradictions allow for the potential of disparate readings.118The previous pages have examined attempts to construct consensus througha potentially widely based print culture and literate society during the specificmoment of the plague, with its threat to the individual and social body. Inundertaking such an investigation, printed ephemera originating within the realmof popular culture have been reappraised and shown to be implicated insophisticated representational strategies tied to discourses of political and scientificresonance. Plagues of epidemic proportions ceased to appear in England after 1665-1666, and consequently, the form of print culture at the center of this analysisdisappeared as well. Though the plague broadsheet disappeared, the function itserved perhaps being no longer necessary, statistical knowledge did not. The sameJohn Sellers, furthering Graunt's dream of the uses of statistical inquiry, came outwith a broadsheet a few decades later that claimed to provide the total amountsspent on provisions for all the parishes within the range of the bills of Mortality fora year, month, week, even down to the minute. 176 Statistical knowledge stillprofesses to represent a truthful view inside the opinions, beliefs, tastes andbehaviour of the social body, and claims to represent consensus, though it is nolonger so blatantly referred to as 'political arithmetic'.176John Seller[s] A Moderate Computation of the Expenses in Provisions spent in the Cities of Londonand Westminster, and the places within the Weekly Bills of Mortality, for a Year, Month, Week, Day,Hour, and Minute, founded upon this modest Supposition, that there may be but a Million of Peoplewithin the said Cities and Weekly Bills of Mortality, observed by a scrutinous Enquiry in most of theParticulars (London, 1691).119• '•4^•S.-os03741imi, ;:: I106411110W--at''''.1.1.16110&41:1#0044114i4J-4,-.1J 1.1^11 1124.1 ')`L;,ofigur, „1.-^- 7-i.!•41",OP?! .1k . ...410e''...76M0/104V00116*- _- , '7*^11•••••RtiGcrove,,,, of P.a ... ia dwfaut Yfor th ;ityof LoKnoN, And Parithes Adjacent :b^‘4, 041r, hcr#tetatry PertNIC dkri 7V.-611, rotry oi t4off 1" 0.^rrsis••Ptvcr, Ox^tk^the Violtaie .1 tatin the Lao Ycar,^Tit;.^14 6.^WI.^ • , . _ 16^116/1P °Ill 1.1 7'•^aso• P , go- 11- "' IC--^1..".?4.18.;4_,.. .1` . P • i'"• ^-,1=:- 1 Prom 70.6,.• ...,, svieoolls• 11 1  74 it 14 glg. g"^angst ime7bli 10 4 . W 4, II i 71 I -10.1444 IN NW,•■ .,..,„0: i d.. 147 464 I. ya^;z 1 14 r ''.,^1111:11. kr 11I•1. jpagls •47 171 9 • ,i, yr 1{ ^**/111111 ,1. I• ..:,,,s rrraNIF.^44 24 4 4^2^22^1:^12,24143^10 71 zy^2 ..... 77^*3111110‘ • mrP17i;1..1.404 74c e9.1 4,4 4,1 tri 4 111 4'"^Pr*. ACM, OM 4212 2 4 11 , 7 .1.41 19 ^Of.•111•111•1717q1• . ....4,.443.1t^it^•^1^0^11s^s^,1,111 0,slic+1,41e IL, i40; 17^. • ..:1 ",^fpo1,1,,t4p tugLI 641401 du-119e^II, ."7 17^I .0 •1 1^JON 1,1•11^1.* 17 , 11 7^4,11`^41"^••06 1141.11494 4411 2, ^•^• 44, 2 .40941,W^12^•••. 21. #4 44 to^1^• 1^a '^7.71(5417.97.71(5417.97/^*^1^•! s^' •441 4 04441u •• 7! •44 74 71 10. 1 ' 14144-4104014141-011 i/1 slg sg^1 ` g3 :"!^1. 'fr. r^744 it tj I, , 4, • ^111 ss kind 00141.1* '94' 1 4411'^9 g '11 "g847.1.4»•16611.174;4 111 It, 4,.. 1 1. I ;70^4.1110r14(.4r404 too in' III 71 1 4, \ 41) ^•,,,,...9w, i 4 "1. 7, 47^9 .4 7'TO 414 64 I , 22' j 114^Sr& 441, 14.4140^104 177, 11,9 // 171 .01 gs tb .1 6 o•etic 14 4 : 4, 44^4:•19 1 13^ont ^26 to^7 , ; 21^I. Pop, 444 , 1^pi 74. .6^4 94^1. 4...e. vandm# 1 .,#, +t, 74 .T 44 1 1 . 1^.....el • too. lbarr 01, 147 44' 0 ", ;* '^9 4,^04941' , Y^.^4221 22^9 . 2 4 1.4* 1 ii ••0 4r•IIWP^54 .. II, I 41 /111 , ,,,•6111.40,4•( -2•1 1,0 1,.4 4, 4 , 1 2414^44,00 1•6e9 74 46! 10 44 ^ 7I .7 :1 111111111 4,•t 41, 301 I-. .11 ".140 11,0,0,4^tO ) ili to., e .. 4 .4. 7'. , • f .1,, , 441 174 104 04 4q 945 .“_^• .,,,,•rimoilli, ( 49 , 14 7 ,,,,- 4„ ,i ,,, .^. IQ.•111•4,,tpors^oif ,s, ss ,^4 4;14 7^,^r' ' 1.., ft^11^if^ 144 ,^(01 •° 1 ,012, a; 24 ;101,11 , 4,1 ,4 14^, co: 44( 15••• ,r ' • IP t 11 17 ,4 1 ; 1: 1^*Otto Oft** soet ;•o 64 soist41,1•7 1 31 .91^r 11^'^1 41 •1^iliflq441 01140"1 . 51 " ' t ", 11 ^7• .41' ta r,ts 44^•14 4 sg^1 61 41^440 •04 ^op1 4- la) I. 93 S ,'17 4(4‘rilt731.'n1L .1 t"; 1 3 1 O I”' r. 1,Itz t."'l f!. !gr. i '44" ; 7  : i '71 : 61: i ' 'r :1 ^I,70 ,, ,^.1,1 .1Pertits 12.t Pr 0141-111" t 41c0Isiert t014•11 o• /6..„,43r,lox+1.14, 4,16,1 st. ++r, ol••ii, IV Pro, ■• •re••••erw'ere. , #, letrts: of1 •^,07 s•-s 40101• 1 4•10•44 071-.1 , ot - too 114 Will< s^ •. ,.- 1, •.1 4 IN ' ^ 4 4etIY Att... 4,.........--. ^__.. • t 4 tt 0 ,^tIl ‘''' ^.I44 / . 4^ ., 44.1^04 ;',. 41. 11 01 1 1 :11 7 1 4 so./ ••, 4•, •^I :,^• . to r:0 4.^- I. . ,^. ., 74 4 , 11,:, , 1,1 ..— e .....• ,.., h . F ■, ,,,,,,,, .^,,^,,,I ,•,• „^„ , , ,,, r a •01., c^•"7^4 I I • ., o , ; 1,,^.^• 4^'• 4^- -^- ,1 g is ^7. 1,-, ^.r7 I 0^,.,60,1•14 , , ••1^is, ^•^.6 ,^..o • Is^n. . *Pa "i ^•4 •^ii 9^•^g .7, o , o .^. o ,^/.0, ,^•^r4•71^to I II ' 1. 0^. -A 041,4 ... le.s, , 1 e , • : ',I PI g.11- 1:0 ' .111 oi 1 o ti o^.^. ,^s , - 0421 64 40SitalVtls I^4 r^,44 4. 4^• •,^0,• ,,,,,,,,, ,^1 , „ ,^, 14 1 < • '71 .4^41 • 'I , ,^, :^t^7 4 It^Cielte, ■ ,!' , , ^4 , 7s ^14,, 01 4 i .-^, '^■ ' 1^1.•^1^•^' r^. 1• i„ , r • , ,,,^6-0 10,0'. ..• ,, t • .'•: 14 It 467 n 0 rittms, inn, f 'V 1 0 pima, #74,,#,,, T. ,# „ , , . ,,,.4.tty ll4f., ,44.. 0., .1t,,^... .,^.""` L..I x tr.ttstor ot ot P•a:■•• ., 71 ,  -pop -lo i Pi 1 seosoors,rao 41 40,G6174 it • •. *Shur, ti t t y • opt .., ,. .■-• • , 0. ra I , .•;.. , .si .117.: ,.^.•' ,;.;9:1.1a;) -.te.,, ^7...1/.-1iC7-:17•1 v ot,^4 In, M4,44, 1 4 4. 4 1 4., 4 .,,,,, ^,,, • 4•,• • h. f. ;,[ 4 4 ,,, .t^41, ,4 • -14,....41.054.1011111WW HO, 4 7 77 *tic so, s-o,A 177 ,4. l• sas .14 4, 1 g ■ ..' ' ,^t.,44' '''■ .. C • ' $1 WI ■ Is ,. lot 6,,^, .6^377 , 6411063 P^ II'P.^/ 971 00 s ,..,, „ ,,,', h 1 0 40..0164 ft,^, '4 I •^, s •^1 4 ., z1 1^i 4' +tow Coo* t in ',! • 1 • :. 7.. t 011-, Vrtakef, alt P+. 11 f. 141 ',10brr1,- 4t -9t 15 o -,, , ,^ ..1,6 rrcItv pen,..t , , ,,,14.,t, tr. ,,,,•. 11 . . PM k p ,, 6, t • ,,,, ,reer ilk p .1-14 47ss•;1^i z t o ■ 01 . 't^,... v •14 •-,1 8.4144.4 '7 ,.., &Irk d In Owl fl Partilx,g'1^and At flt-C Paitissuk, ,,,gos, Cr11 1•701,^< 61 - 9, isto 1,•• IS 91 Os^• 1-4 • g' •1,44 PgsP4^'Ls • g 1 1 g^_^-^,^ , 4,,. s .•-•' g s^41,, ' 4 4' • it 0/.. 4.1041^111141tt^.471, 7i' 3r I, p...ttewe ■ , ,, A..... s. CA( 4 6 o - , , 174,,,,,teof^4,t4, ,, I... 4 . 2 ,0i .4 01kt:111 1.17V Inho Cr/frrfFIG. 1: Plague broadsheet by John Dunstall and John Sellers, (1665-1666).i10:t,,,,i,,,,.• lo.,,,b^•, ,• , ,,^7^10 . .,IO Jou•^t It)q 9 se, 14 t•^ett 71a^a; too 46 : I 06, , , e re fr•^4,4.u^44, 41 10it^,1 1 40 446C..;Vse*I--- „.,-, -1;;,-.•-t-gt- •.,f^II^41 o r,• mtft• „ is at' • 1,4 6. i .8 . 41414 • C• r,!•• 6,1 A, .41 ^"0 0 .4,,,^it•014 ‘..' • 4,,. •■„ 4w,,^• . .4.S - -^7 s^•• 7. 06, ••••170 444 ogron 9441^• 9 1 5/ , at^7 , -4.^s^• r!titsr 1114114.4 / •^o ,/ s 1 1: 4* 4 0 1 P.Osreinsa•Yrs^•,,,, 4 ,i .,^6,, •gs'sg1,0 4: gs ,111 44 sis 16^•^SI^OI^1941. 2brinmi^a it si^I Po ,*^m1.16.n 641.17.1 ,60 i 4, 1 0, r o 017[1.oV: 1. fl13 fg^1tOot r . 43, 10'114 Or i t ^•7^14411214./...411- ••`' 7 , ^f 1.' , ,, 1 4 j 0161691169^11, 41 g*^g • 14^441, s91 sisV .111 90(141•70^xi, 4 ^0^6 , !, 1^/1•1■• 219•4117^I' 24 1 , 42 n: 7 1 1 11kniteildigantt 4,4 It+i If 4. ,p 04,4 P r14 ,441^0^10^•, 33 I” s g^4 •II )•^p.m.. 841#1. 11^#ii # 7^. ;. .7'L' • tt.a.c7^stt • 17, 11, -7 ,• .•2^s4CI 41 7^11-1/ 46.144$0•11t rob41^1+6 Op ,_6014Il• 441 '41. ;11 • I^01 i•^47^111/71, Ir(At 11017^s6 ■;1 W. :':1 V ? V:^'71 '4^;7411^P^,7161 11; ;I ' 1'57 '14” .• t III . . , t til.^94 14 I. 7^1 i 71^; 7^. 4 0.4nOorlo^1.- • •• 44 .., ' II^t^j$^1.1,^6 y^II$ u..^I'11',,,, 163 19^7,11,4''^6g4„r . ..No-7: .1 g C-44^1st I I,^64^. 16.^lie,,. a Loro4,91,. 78 4, ■ •^,^7+^;6e^L 0:4 ^e ,^1 7^ if 1 -1 'g0^41^11^Is 1 s<4 1 74 i1 r' ■11^44 1121, 1 4 , J^11 r4 , f ,,,,t f tramt. ii 4. ,11 r( ,.. i 4,1ISIL^NO.^se.L.^,14147, ..,^!6 ;It^"„ 1.11"4 iFijr■ i!ijr o l ijiir,3 1",' ,1^4,^4, 6. 14141^..I•.•iv' 4-^le iirtn i 7• • ;-•-•,• .,.6,,Ises 11 ;^I• 1 4 1 7^024 ^.•^.4 1:120PRINTINGCOLL C^1)lit OF 1-1 S YO^, and the ^6ra'softhis^1,'TV^'7 ) 9 TV! E.TT^N I^ ineth to the‘1.--ts,.:1; and is a Flowerihecr1.664.•^ HkRICE, I1rNy jOHN STRE rE for t1.4 AUTM ORXI V.FIG. 2:^Frontispiece for Richard Atkyns' The Originaland Growth of Printing (1664)121In click following particulars, Vi4.The irC4ir,feThe Smi,je,:7 PartThe Sign:ifcc. ..voc• f Ott('‘ 4 Pi': ,:r?Eai 1frbe Authorai.:d rite Cvnitg ;rent; thert:f.'^c7i6g; .zica 06. 'ercaticns on the fart'-•. A ;,.;^).; " • .^P^4*.nd Civrocti ;,,,er • t- -cj.x.:77::::;: and a■Y'-‘rci to Mr. Nat h:Hteige:, concerningAfeaicin.e.By C.fore homf-04,M. D.7-..;LL riiS . Lyterrte avertite Pefiem.printed for Nath: Crcmch, a the.R.;ie and Crown in Exchanse-Alkynzar^6 6 6FIG. 3: Frontispiece for George Thomson's Loimotomia;or the Pest Anatomized (1666)122yMuttituil (Iry front L • .1 deo b Wort iro beets k 10 rdt*70;^'11rrryrnp- thFIG. 4: Scenes of the plague in London, anonymous print (1665)123The Difeafes tosti Cafittilties this Week,;Lc hrr 15501 by a ftll in the3, Sr. Mary Vlicc1-15—^C51lbed  18^hxitomesConlumption^ 26Cottrui CgtgDropne^FtartsFlo% and 5=11-poxF ,ax.^FrightedantGreof —Griping in dr Gats^larpoPthtunc^I:71amtogkvil^Lettrargl LivergrownNapeP:trpirs^Qurnlic Itrcters  23Riling of the Lights—^i 8RaptureSciarvy^51:anglesSpcced FCAVGT-Sttfbalf1.- .-1-SZCIV----Stopping Of the itocruch t 7Stranguey55kddtaiy ^Sarkis ^Teo-Throfh TilBckUlcerVomiting ---420Bo+ cl.5^--- 4Aged ^ ,41t,555-ed+n ,^Et.Dkcn8331348, 1 I791a^ 21^ 4.3755116643a741 1I- Windt^Wotmes^Chrifined) females-- Si^Females-279 t Pligl/C-4 237MI/Itt^9 1 N111,-1 -- 2 777bettered in the Burials this Week^ 249Parifhet clot of Plagne---- 17 Parifhes ltdcded^93all----171 111--- .5 58 $141 4trizt ofbrad fit forth y Osier of rLr Lent Maier^aldernea,A penny Wheaten Loaf to cormin Nine Ones and a half, and donehalf-penny White Loa•es the like weight.1 London 35^From the t 5 of Augnfl to the 2s.^16651111- •58^Ilan Wotan, 1 1114,0-113&• • , ' 3At},,24.," StOr=F4ir811r451.t6ti54r5` 6..18 S71°12488.-15' Gi.c40/ 5'1'141- 95' 1146,--------;t I5' J... Oakspkitt-758 low, Gasktirlat':^358 1654 Ear^.75.' ph. Ett6,611 ---,9' Mtn 746stri---- t5' ILititrins Colusto-Ss', K5=5.,/,, cnt5.5/5. I75' L... jlt•-ty- ,8S' Uwe..s , Eri.,0•7, Ettm.,,,, ts' 146,4611-8116146,-; t 7,'1 41n.4,S541 3,rSit,.-- ,"^St Mott. Lialpte -4St 141run Opn-----, is" Martin OartiiitS--- tSt Maritit Vir.6,- 1 , 7S' Una.. EtiettfttretitP••81.4i7 74I1461515t•IltrtAlltallovrt Hm^Athtilottt L61.1.,:1,1, LittitatitAxt -A.144;fattt Stt^i—iAi-ham.. diit W^t 358 12tailia 1+14716ot--115' Ntamilo 01-Kulti/tit, 8S' Nieces! Sertihro.-- Is5' Misina Cnr -r.:,:-.=3s'.1.titlaci COMirt4hrit 75' Mew( Qut0-41.1iSt. -758 Mids.! (Ztitt,...--, t5` Ftlitar111,4•71-7.St MitIv70: W.,.,ettt,0,-.0s'5:0555..^!IS.I' A.,.. 1 i eb:rmi---. 1a.5' 9.11:31ct, Unittrtait.-#5' 15r./.6.-re War4t4tx-1 1 7tt--.5' Am A44.3 3S' Az^8'^, 8 1 i7 5'0174 ^131.„161tut- s^t5' 1.4,06677trsli—, 85' Altiett•41.464,14,- 85' Sia,itimps,rti= St 14141-64 Nil:trey ---.1.4^35' Ask.'8. i5' Strgtret 144,--1104 0,,,,,,,,,,,,,,....41 5' ttid551.5.5,,___,^'S' hilsinitat Ca:ts1,24-- I. a=^ttatm---7.58 Mam^Pri 58 tlicia,4,5 014.tt-- I^tSt ficar.5' &wet Gtvehtittlt. , 5' *Art Absitarsch..-21. 5' aim lierttri,-- 7^4S' Sathelwirtt:dang5' Strati PulfrhatiS' Benny16 3 5'1107 Alittemkiii,^1 r^Sst ,t, mgt.., -- 1 1^15, 05., 55,5_,^,5" Owe Sii.cifitttt...-11;^1V 1387;73' 8811.11.0.CluiSt Clxit88 7 225' May L 1544.------;11^'6s' 5455 a,515+5,---- , 1 r5' P.a. Stotti,s , p,,,,c,.5L5______t,^rSt CStifta1lwrs--------1 1 4' 44,7 Caitc,itch---i. S'Prwr Corliiii---7^6S' C.-9e. Eitath^2 2 1 $ PCtt P.,41.1.4ri-5^x85' Mtrykiiil-----5' Mary 114eartetu.— 15' Di'74i3 &dd.,' r . 5' Ptitr P.* I^0it Citta1kta Edk-----17St Edmund 1.44Intlith. 1 15' Edslereeem —It5' Rii.5 -----4-6j5` 1407 S.,..111ra,"' -'t Z W1712/T-rx11.2 tr'S 5` Scran o5L.55554,55,, i-^5 ,^1 1S` keret WIIt-,c....... ,s' 5.6,4i4 ..--, 1^06 5' ALto7 36,1641,-- t 1 S' 71,Teas A,S7,,_----.5 7S' Feta. it t 1. 5' Ilarcin Itutaiwitart15' ClIbtrit Fast:4.6-44trinity Itttitis.----- 5Or4ore iv II. 97 PAii, .4:1444r 5— 34^15,..t,4--_ 535 t04,0_„„__ 399'5' And,. i.0„,,,,, --4 a il,sio.>` S.a.e. Sidp01----/8 4 6,r 7 iStneati 51.4..rari-- i 1 60 1s `S. titst29.4.4 •Otta,-11 8 ,5.15' 84,01 S154.4.,-,8 Sas5.` Dud!. Weft^149—4-4163V S. 5...feittints 11.7,71.403 475' 8trateiatew Ltik-11S89 ft 3^1 IS" 7,catts 51461.64-a 4 12Occegt S4■4,1141.6--3o 16'7. 1t 915' Ttitirty Mitiatie•-•-•-ij8 515647:^1147.18tit1=681 P6=6,11---""757 34640 ailicifttic--51^i S" 08'. =1....81•88-"-11;47a7 -i As .S.PdelcuSt.-----,1970 031 ,5' Olatt^5-1,7 5 I 319no.i.#.1b rim 06 P.1.40.7 tiAlat LW ..44- 61 iteridiiiutirt iirt14,1140-1 &SI 7t,40,_,1 9S8 Ot4,..", 6.&e.t5---18 °4Pa^{SA?...^:if,0 75 , ,-466,71' P.418,--•,t ; 19 5' 41trt^--10 45NN,,,812^i 58 Lritra61 531oreslitett- , 251 0 69 r 1.4,,, I N,,,*,p,..,, (90 ,0a.f...6a pkno, ____ 7]' ^551 Janet Cesium( - 170 071S' Miialiden ficemen1;.4.157 13658 Im.b. tert it. 454c.;40^34^St 14 ,7^rinfmn..-74 12Nehr4Ste 7rt, Itt nr-i--,37 t 2 73Orri^im do to tat P.11. /.• UttkItectod51.try-- 49 14.4- 1 5 7 1 1'14.---t 144it. Caen. Dta.--k,4 i78i5 , 24105551 05 54.— t55J3195 5' hlsoect St,f/nyeLlWay p ( 9 ,S. PIXIC-07enGerelara g 316 1 s' menrar.,5---, I I 40^.1.7545a +55 P5555,..:5--- r3cwartut at 5 Pelle t, Pm City 444 16411 if Wariselcr- 17 56.44.-. 593 Plgy,- 485A^ t 1-11t S4.4 al, Oa^:It,EtSt1 FIG. 5: London Bill of Mortality, August 15-22, 16651241_,r.kl. )0^S ‘Drroefful 1/11/a/ton :Or, A C o Lie^o of All theBills of MortalityFor this Prerent Year :Beginning the 27th of 'December 166 4. nndending the 19 1 h. of Derronber Following:Alan, Thi. 9 ETI ErkA L or blvle yaw.: II 1 LI.:According to the Report imide to theKIN G's mom Excelirid Majetly,my el. camp...7 or r...ifh.("krii^Inntion. (TvT./ 7.) nPe hitlej anti sit. to hr re,I4 1 It Cefff living in ,11441.6.-PriMer kt th, fiwi t'ompo.y^5.FIG. 6:^Title page to London's Dreadful Visitation (1665)125FIG. 7: A memento mori from an earlier plague126FIG. 8: Spoon commemorating the plague of 1665127rerarMP .^ OLO...OM 'Xi,i3^IF•ji. '^ toiolo0 , , tvo. ,0 .' fot0 ,.ra ,LO Dk AVE MERCY UPON US.„this is the humble P. 1 ,:,^ ci,ty^merkely linplorir;;!lis )t Itic bounty for the cefratic.n.-LOA^t". NV I mgnIng, Arnotir,11 17 t vV rthn lanientalle Llilot I) c tlis^Ltriphs.1A 17 '13^tilt GC.' 4 1. oNnnN, hid the PAnilles Jr11,1,e Pt to riltif,,n1C14., •^oiltr•^•Pee 'orwl4••^11^••lea 1413^. 11,^•^Ott^OlOrrierI A.^rWe^, r 1, ,^4'. •^re ,^...,rwr .01^ itille*:,■1;;411-1, re It'i .0her^rr^14.1.1^i•..a.,,..' • 0 i.0'A* tio. .„,^r,.0::;:er fr a^bhform^' 141.,i r^Ogg :631.17,...,117,^'7 r •^4,WI, ••^vor^' ^, ' 7   ^':.,,,,,,,,.:.: ,, , I, r fr• trr.^lril', n r. t 'r envaaah th 4 P.', 1 h i'.4 ,^Ha .e we k, wk led been, chit thou canil notw,,, Afford ? 0 n thy latch fo h t ^.•■• , I., :t.•.. n ,^/ ■^In 0.1, in: , t doe not onte oin6onit, • 111prvilb :: ::: ,,,,,,,..,^* : 31::^,^I,:, 1 ■ 2,^,, . , . 1 ,...1, it,. 1,1 ' rVir 77 I .tnd lilt fwette wins* I^HA.. Ploy mid revoke thy dreadful' rentenee :., o■ , , . ,, ',VI rn,.. gr. n11, t i due not (Willy call^ririll D UTWhn°17:h"C011h.iftCe4n1.:t idbe)Crifli'ltf,A";dfleh);f°7eperl'mhn:tan"vnor7ele,:"1.^A: . '':^,". ^;::ri Thoohth pMeer 0^(till,^mercy^we MAK, We cry,rm. U.^haveLord^nicety, or ire dye.urd with fix Pc(Illence,^it,^ , • li ,^,,,4 '.,^',:,^;1,77, 7 7 1. 7i 7*^, ,,^•-i -,,,,,,,,,„,,,,t„,..ih,“ Anotaig,^.^..^Lea it p St. / lifILIBP'411p03117133 Pit/lir -Mt I vp..17,7 I • , , ' Ito /Ion /Al Ett er,,,,iri•tit, (turf, 0 Coati thou/01mm1...^,^.,74 j^1117,4 r7 i.0.1111011 at tr.,'''''.... " ' 1 " i " ff•nse Been tehelioot chlkiren onto thaw t^New Hindt gad Ood) tbm we me dull a/Kielty,^1,.... .:. ,...., 1 ,,,,... ,:,:.,, thl.4,1..,.”.“6,‘, ..4:1,:il I . J., ...1 ,:ll^.h.,Ter Oar . wresthed ftun look tairourobr,teeny Frew^we mat, (Or thil WI pray,af,,;,,„,,,^,r:,,,  rp••^A mendmeat leave their^e iii•I.),^? • IRIS o.o.,11^Ii,r lfg teholto not ,trett nnabla^'a:til t .1 1 r, ' ■ ;7 ,,.. rut. I iiiii : ro WM:bed Smell untograce trot Nit,^L010 To^*ay good without thy ay& I"r ein1 r i strt V i r .4.^..'^- to - 4 41 1, •• / Trovv77.1,■InrOf rriNkr1 ..;4, ■;1:: ^:4lo ....I q L ...I . • E.  if 0/1 Thou coomniretation on our pyiaft,I .,... 4 O. 1.777.,  M peg We want, rei keti (icit reticfe)A..., • o•-.4, the .....11.„4441 Irn 114f/Pp PaqnatrtI•11•11."..." Pt • „ow LIMB filidt fr We dot boyobiy Cake,^Now WLos W. hare ivied, now IX• lint wail Writ^N•n*, Phil dear It , did' Pnitici , n1•40.110/4"..t.spert-^Nett, bank. tkat th7 flptirr.11 throne./pats Our mliery be thy ttroor ihowne,Logo (Iota thee% ?tint for rtittedy iithal' cthal to *Type, and without crytiI, 111 Can Win" teriere , let [It not cry^:r-'41.7 O,,,'.14 1:.' ,: ' :: :: :. ,O'' : ' ;:::,^''' ',i' ; :I: 1 4, ,■ , . .',',,, ‘:: ^' ' ' ',. .L , . :::: ,,,,:: , o:::,..::::::,:„$ i ti. ^.7' ti' '''''" ' t 71.7 N.....7 ri,ror..", "1 "4...^: i Mr..' ' OWE CatIllitPW file41616611,0 make Army To htkti 0 1st thy trend. err; . ,,,,,,,,°6'177,t, .7, '':!:,^'Ili: ii. : ':: : •:, w1:!,:: "'A,'^, , 7.^4 rk..., , I ,l^$ ;1;7 MAy enter: Thou onprinell diy Pare Orr ohlfirles retied, 0 httlt^'ptirhhonlrettito Firm Ts D.^ods i leek and odyi WI t Ott,. IA if t / 1 t ,„ ,L,t r,,,: '. 1, :: ,,L .47  Thm:VICC9gy famor far, '^Unto thy ntercyl Sidon-1i h undone Ill •^N....,,,, ; ;„ j.: ,^,,, ^, , ,^■ ,,,,,,, ,„, ^,,,, ^...^•,,,,,, •,;^:•.•^1 o1 ,^• .A '.4 . 1 '''^I• I 0 xi., O Itilcities wedst abhor ,ht.^1 I^tr.^. t ,M • om to./rile CIO wit WI y,,but.i.wd 4... "'" 1** ''''' * N'''' '• ' 4'^'' ' ,, : .: : , 1Mom Sep , (..u. t.^ : ^,,tor, , 1 '.^..1 o ,^•^A Potter it bt urcil it this dot of Clam& ot rhottality. ^...,,1.7-,^s^141^.1,,0.....n1If MI. ;^:;,■^!ritiIreloo, I . ,..t ... 1 ,,, „ . (1/.4.0,1 tosi3O1■1 /AJL.• eettonxiZslm, 1 it tie. Pew,. ak, 'Lyon ‘,1114.41.4e.1.. erfr.dertbet.. DE.7„,„;;; :‘'^ 7: : ""'; ' ,,' ;^I -7 I 1st to i V.^119 . •••,11,,  raraaseaar^d. l, -,,,,eas is^A f^awl Artfabeweril tAr retlekem and fideirtffir t-Lildres • s-4. for^.0., ,,,,„„ ^, „..„,,,, : ,„,,,,,^ , iii :1 :::,•••• ' , 1 ''''^t. ..,,.. ,,, A 'of j),,,,),1,1,,,r4 jwIth riot irtl,f0.14,fioli of t4r Nil thine mart td..!:,..., p' 4.rt...ple , ,,fi i Arxe 0,0 .:,,,,I, ,”,,. ,,..4 ,. . ,^' ,,,' , ,^, ,I... ,• , .f^i ftt1,,^o ,„,o ,r, Irl yl•Oalti 9..«, ,.,4,..pn•Lrwr VII11,11,4.4 i•V J11/0 "1(4 1,04, Sail. Oloo, 4,011.///4. IA/ ,14. ,do,,,,,,,, 0". ,,.......^00. /ot,',,, „ / ., I , '.1 ... YO , .....1 rk.eli. Pl. ,JI•777 G0,^4 ow avid teen it^ii,,r i. tn, A i .1. i. kiffIrt,o04, 0.1 ...it ill ef 4,4 ;tall, , bat ft'ls roil. „,,,.^-, , 7 ,.. ,,,.,,+.n.. ......,,,r.,.. , ..,,,, t1,,,, hoettorde/ irrab SW NMI W RM . r,,, , ,,,,hini 1.plirothikok.s. ,... 1 .', : tr.( 1/11.11 a/ Al 1-.t ft ,A,/1o ark{.pi,g.,, ,,, :47.,r4 ^;or^11141% , ixo 0...Woopool 7.4 14...#71,1771, rtri,org oulpartrog of.... 114,r, el01.0,1,, 4[..h.• , .1440.0.1•04.4,1 III At! sr,1411.1., hr.., ftly 41.. , owi, grO.011 , of ,..' ,:.:?' ', :, 1: 'T.,..1•O.^' Api,,,, .....Ø.,,,, /V. 111,11.10/7 OW 4.".1( i......1 r - -,,,,,,,, irtx dome amiffeove bovr 4.17 srIcifily, opt A., in 0 siggor11,, wee A.r,r A ,,, n ,, , 3, I , ., It/0 op, fee11 ,0 /is. t4 ,..r •/ al- Oft.14.  1Wifitotta ttly.,,/, (t,,,, OW rtmerit ifaeitArypte .' thy g',/,o1 itertet Of 'fret, muf r,c, il.tfin,f AI 10,k. pr. 7 ,,, . ',. ft. • t ' I I t^ot/ It,-Ir 41 1. • tO • ' ,,,,,..4.71", :v." .4.,,,.././... C.,,,,,, , ;,,,,,, {.,-,,,„,k., .. 4....1 @for ,tilirt ALI...0111 01.4 Chi rorpt II ^ 1.11,.t.4.7.7 Ad/ 'Rube, / h, .o. or "h . ; • ,, ' ",".;,' ' :'!^,"„^ ,;,...„ „ .•,t,,,„ to.l.... rA.1.11.4 n, 4, ralasirralrita fe.e,ftt 41 .1'4 de 1 kr, 1,11(,4.1.0,, .17 • ,^kr* k ' ....4,./'.9. ''' .' . .4..' . 1:1,1 Of ,Or i',./it,trii, .,,e ,^,, ,,, , + , ,■•^, e....,«1 . 11.1. 1,7.,A' ^I t • 3, "Pio 71 yr wr..01,f . .,411 (.2..pl, of ihno. kohly ort vais,.....1,11,0401,11irn , ir.4,07irtvii (114.,,, , ,,primeti 4.1 yer,r..{.0”..lon . to boll^ '^ .1•1^1.4e•O •••■ r^I 1., ,^o to^•^■.......it , , I ^,,., • A ., , q., oo,. jh,,,„ ,k.rpsa af Ora rroasarsoarraranara. .4, ta... 441 /Cala •rt lige Ile ..f,',1, we-Mime, ,. cd,,l , b... fok-,h,f ,,,,,g1 ,,,,, i       ^r^i i^, , j j j , j j^9 ,I. ...... I o 1, 17 O .1■14.•■ •■ P...11. , ,^ I,• ry•rr7 t b., 4 ,no 13,171 CAW/ ,...o17,1.1/ r. 'TO 10410•i . Or oi:erwarl, ,00rohgfi ott,Iihno lotAriririO 11.7., fif //of, 1, 3 1 A •7 or • t I' t I . too ,/,, 4/././ roi r.,-, r•'''''' ', .l , '' ' /•.p. il... ■,,,..,,,, ; , , h• ttofm m Att./.., rah, e IrIlr ofaiIIII11 ri r Arr-uy 1.,,e/rorr to r fr hoe 4,, .....5 7 'AV 4/; 1+r ,1 1,7 ,'17,7, 7t 1,7,1,11,1,^' .^,^.110 ,-...st^..0,e^gr.,.^•^„^,^•S.......,.., • og, ggg, '1 , ..,,. O -.go, II .10.4 (n11.4,•,i, Artrtir^0.0 ref rpirsigkrt eel 81 3,111ta eilittlae,...e,, .,..ngo re.lipozre^/ 4.^i. if 4. , 0 ,(7, rt o:, .14, I • •4I^• ^.0' .-- 3 ' ■ ii. ii'' •^',', 7,.. ,,,, '•• ',le MIA111of lowe/..(.1- 1,14e e^0t.' ../.emorly porta^as^./to ?G^/he in. i "ger, •,...1 *.kele .4, .1 ',kw is ,a ,,,,n ,i, j„„,„ '. ,"' .^,l , J ' '" p • ,,, I • i • '^: . I ...' re•t, 1 , 1.11111 0,1•1.110111 no11 4.111.41,IIVAIIre, ,orha..4111” 4,1, r,,onotrt,tit. ..,g,S,,N I•1,1i, Ohl n.•.11,, I, ,,,. /,^„., ,,^,,,^• , MI •, Po ..1 , . ' r . 11 ,7444,/ triorfj ,•hrovn br“.f figm•ItIntho al,, • i ',,ohly (..44019! rhototorelt. , , T. of ra,„1, ,. .1.,, , ,,,,,, , r  r; I ,,, , j, II.St • • t^. I t^I t^too Nor t pot ^7 pm,/ 0,,  1/, WI, I 4.e# 71,11.....1itvol :fl.,,,,, ,, kill 9 re , rrpfxr0rt,•,1 141, clam ,' ,/.-,,, p i-,,,,,,.,/,, e ). „, i., ,,,,,, IA, ,01 1,, ,,,, / . , ^1 ,^ , ,-,I,,1 ,a77, roil / Aft i. qt If Viill let, INIlett1(1, yo hol•f••• the re...fie I IA.I1 r! Ire, It ' le the 1..h.1:: ,-: ,, ....,I  ^. • 4, , ,ii ,, ^1",, , !boa t. 1 Id - 41,41 r1,0,,, ,1 1, ,,,, Irg 'Aloe a", perpee,l.rdtg dr,r•,,,,,,,i,,, rC 1 4 .1. • !..1.,..,^-I i II • ,1 II ''',•■ •'^.o.f.J, , II. ,,I r 1.., r i .,115 ',IC ,•• 1 -1,14,,,,,,,, ,TI.,.. , t),,,holo,, .,,,IV 1g4, gho y , ,,,,' ., to, o t,/ , / 5. I / j, i , . , .o 1- .1.11/ 1011, t. , t air,"^.77 •rr ka.a;!.7 Pk , pl/el C•ol , 11,1 Tiro,. ({!.T enn ,, , ,t, lr 17 li f •le• 3, ....1. . IO; hr .. , •-1^•1- r . ri •^:r !Io o t.' oor Oi re 1.44 ',on or 4.1 ..r. I O oltf 11111 r1 ,1O1111111, II-44,11 741, 1 1, 11111 . 1h. • 1,, i , • .... rr , .g. •1 ,^ '^a.,..1,,,,OlonhoOrfO,..,lo4 ., .,,,,,, ,41(11,, 4 1411 1.1,1.1 '. 57 lit, Aloe% lkere l tl t , t, et', I 331 43 t. • e l t o . e ,t '^.3 le 11•1•4e1 el , .r, .• oe 3,, to' . oy .133 , I c•313t I, ed• ft, , -, , ,To oo a, ^f , 7 , . ■• ,1 ,' .I1 , . i • 3 4 Ill, le. It /,4,4 43.1.14 , A', O , A,, .,■ ^,1 ., . 40 I' r l ol I hal401-CrihrOoitlSmith 6rIal.,FIG. 9: Plague broadsheet, 'Lord Have Mercy Upon Us' (1636)••",rot:^ re.trarArri t.,rrlar':rt ars', I ' r1)01i.tr..^14:^1^0 ,,t:AO:4•••rror,I, 4.'1'; •qnee.6/ 6.!re.otet/A....3si::.:.^.",: I 0 I' '.i Silty, th ; ■ irt too thr11111 , AO I.vrorf,70:Sop 33to t o0 , A ao ,.., ■^ri •^f '' "^'" .0.1 , '., Vir .( h.., I I tr.trr,r1 ..c nru tweete 0,4,•, , - ,?..^Till /V070 • 1,11011R 111' thy Rod,,. , 7^I ' '^i • , ri 7: . rr,,,,, arr,r, .1 .01 ,t1T moans,' nd (bowsn - - I . t ...^''' . II' , ‘ )•.,/,‘,T. ry r p.,,,,( (PC lye Selo."N .^•^, .1^I •^'^.^'^'^'^'bi'i* " i^i^•I weer, ii hill in Rote in *oft who wlil128•••:.^ ,""--••■^•^.^•to'^ ,a ft•^•^ •rd.r.tact•4 1^6 0.^001 •-^.4^.14^ J: . ..M=1;111LONDONS 111111111111111Mantat.1 kat^13 VP MERCY  U PON Us.R •latem orSo^7•5.grst, txYrfrliSsirt in I _warn, u ith the ntinthtt td tick that *veerh rd ofAhArmetnc r•,. TheFlflIatberen of 1,keiltrat Us As 1711, Aro^fe,coasi in ti.rry^cl.471.^ TM *6 RUN ple110;11. th“^oes 0117 .4.10111, tEret# “..•,2•• RN- .1444-% “ . ' • -.4.m t.,..5.....1.... t........, ....••••...• 0.0, ••••■•,,, ,1, 0404 / 4t1.• •• 24/1•^■•• . "II^.24., 0 ; or • •j••• u, HWM . .4 w)... .. ,.. •...:Z.: 1; !.■ .i,,,,,..• •.^I0 aa.,.. ••0;^;:s •/ 1 , ■...1 P^....•^•■••17: +. . 0: ....'' f ;11^;^ ;! o::::-'.. .::', ;:,1;:.^ ,^,..; .....,,^.^... .,,^",.. .., •I /4•0^•..6..b....0^... .., rrII•1. .1 .^•1,4:,NN.N. N^!!! .:: .1..."1 ■ ;24 .• .,,l,r •.1.• r...t-'4ZW°.-.,• 1 .^'•r„;:, t )1a).r'rlrt riat r itAttt:t.:::.,,:',:^: 't;;;;i7;^7,•,'fri•.•. !, • -. 7^• ::‘,, ;$4 Pr.tt0 p)voril'...... ,........, , .•.-g"•• D F. '^'Lc. ■-•00‘.; ,,^• XI• •^01.7.1;1.7.. ."'.^,. ^.^,•• 10,1 aullse.• 1 r■ • ,•., la.ri. 11.1, ...II,^tti v•004, 0 ,,,..1.11.0 .• 0,-0.U.,. , •^..1.14,2 (4,211 I.,. •••,1a, 00 ...../ ,• 10 g, 11, 00.44, I... L.I.T.4.6 4641.4,4.k ■-■• .^' ^1.. a....1. 1, . Mr, A...0 ....r... ,,,  ,,t,^1"..• Gal 10•••r••• .0 • 1. 1 ,01:01 A- 1. , ',.^••• i• ,..•0•11.•••••••••010r0100,10111^I, v^e1,,,twas kwathe,,t,, ,..6* ,. ,,1•01,1iT am torteir .,,,,IM .:1;, .....^• ^.10 ....0... 160. • mr •Inn2.•011.144.44^1.7.747.:^' ' : 0 1-.1.40,0 . ,•..13 0000 ,.,. r., f r t..0 t.• 011•■•00••••11, 000.10....., , 1' " 1#1,,.. I. 2.... e....-,,n,......,,,,^A f.l.g.f...... ■•••■ #1•11d ,..,{ t...,,,,fee'' ' ' rr • . '' '4 .... J ., ‘,..##.... ,}402C.^2. I..41 ...awl /1.0016 IL/ 7004•• •^...,,... .1 - n• • •.1 . 1 a... I roi1.00.^ir .60411.1•411.t,,e...000,01/00,„.., I.. • . .,. 2 .• •••• •,. ....., a t . ,s, .g., t^* II* /2./... .(• ,•,' 4 . "•"" ."' '• A-^„,^• . • •:^I .4.,^ C...1^L..-•••••• • •.^• -•^• 1,I ^ • ', •14^ 4,4`•^..•,^V.■ 14, I, 4..^"r ''.......04 (.•^'yA,•■••• • .^•^4 ,^6.,-^.,,, ,.,^,t^1.-0.^.-.: .p:•■•••••■ •^I ., i , •^111,^I f #.,' ,^$....^ra., ...,........... 1^• • .^*^MI,^.1,^1,3^.,1^I....^2.^•#.1t.^..:":::::::::: .,,,,,i,^,,^2 '''' ''1 ‘"- '... • •. . . .. ANNN •I Ci^.. ',N.' 4• , 1.N. l• t”.11 . ^"V,:.:^ ,1^ ; ^■ ^.....7^. ,"..'^•^: .,*.... •.^... ',.^I....,^.^•,,, ..,^00, ■Ii• •^•01.0 111 aft ••• •^I. ...••^•,. ^•.#^#'^...... 4'^' •^#1014. , 1 ....^.4.. • •. •I • • ■ :. •.^:II..^..^•^•o.^t......... I,. ....,... ,^,.. .,.14. to j./ 4•■•:..: " • ' 1 '-'^'''' ' ' •••• '-'•^..70,.... .0:11.:10.,^i.,•••••,. ,,1 ,.;^ ■•S......^., i . 4.^1-.^..• . . • 1 . • . '-` '"--*^b..^.^.,0 .0 •• 11.0 0•••••• *^s:••■••:;1^ , 1 ; .. 1 '17: 11! :.1 .11...;•! i^'"^b... •: ::,^ !••••••••0. • • • 1  • ••^6...A ., oo, {V • .• ,1^a te"...1 •••■ v.^.0.1 12 ..8, , 41, 1 1•■•,.. 4 0.1....- ,,1 1.0, . 1 -.0^••••• •f„.., ••e,c4......,1 •.•^.1,4 .‘, .1,„ ..,*^ .010. • o`TI.  . :1 .• .., .. .. • • . . IN ii . . .. . 7!.  .01: . . ‘,i i. ••  .1 i^-.7.•••••71410•4.6•••■••C•,,•11.0.•••,,••••• ..4 7.4. ,, q , .rt*,^6•••itp4 s1!• a^ -^ ,tJr 14■1^•7 •P.7^ „ t',44^t` • ,LO•.* sr AT- 441. II f,raS..^*ph.^7t^izr^s•-• Ar,‘,/fp 00 7 my ,044t,^F^- rjr.. AtorLti ,.,`Lit' 0...4.^01 •#00.1. •N .16 ••, o •A t Mr • c.^' :'.. '1^ ,,_0."^0 a 0. • - 1001.^W. • •  0.^..1"." ' 1 i ' 'ri...,,,“..„ •^1,:^■ ::: ;'• .4 : r^,A, •...,, HamI.. ii;t:'';, i: 7„,„.■ .. P.14,....^•r .1 10^• ,^7^;^/• • 01..1., 0 10 .0  If.4., • ..■.,..-1,-........, 3.•.-• if .^/0.g.* •-• ••••..„. i , ,,,,•awl IA N• :OA r '^.‘"i•^',art I,,^X 0.1,06,•••••^. A•166 V 4 040 1•01.0 •••••^•,-01 p i -. 0 Or p••• 14., i .11se." 40.V • .^1: eir ; 't ,.fan" 4",.s.,,,,,n^U.N., .... •1104.... -.1.,•.„,„.100 .0 :001.0,0:0. 016 pt..^0.0.1 •s- I. 110••• ' : '.3 1 6.*g.,•:ts;':. :, ..• I /4 t.i.0.0 •• .•-•^.,^.0 .' ..l f10..4 .1 . 60•01 ... '' 'I ", ,'"11000^e • •^611 •.../ +-aor....,i .j ix _te• ,,,,,.. , • A,..^• i40444 t• If^1^4 I^-41. 4MINA ••••• «^«^b**te 111^"74ii 1...1 . 00,,,. Mi„,^1•_ 'rAA• , `':` , 'i^' J^t^/...4,^.^7'^IFIG. 10: Plague broadsheet, 'London's Lord Have Mercy Upon Us' (1665)129lh^\^( r,41:^.r• I,ry.Lr1.^41 612,^ ty ti% Us.t^It it ttrt^i)tt , tt - ,^\^XI Alcorn/It °I^rAl 11:+va -1 , 1^,,r^ti^( trt, tti 1 oaten , • r t to^fit! Ott,. 0,0110^t^I ttt ^t t,Itt.^doott^ .^ 4A^r^°-.t.. rpttlte,nt.trtawf '.4■ 11,1(^ A^+,)33.•t•2^• ttt ,‘.".**A"^I 6^7.21 ett I^tn.^tt^ ti t ttf , •5^•• I 4.,^yam o2 1,4424.^t.tt^n e^"{A I .t4,••I vs• .4 .^ 44,4 .^1 7 1- A to, IP' r rerfrosaLtI4 1 , s Lk, kLii,r074 m 74.0.f..firtrt. 1 1 1)CI1! 21 AWN, 2 4,I4^ 4•-^r '114^(—X; •.""4* 4$^-toFIG. 11: Plague broadsheet, 'The Mourning Cross;Lord Have Mercy Upon Us' (1665)It • MI JAArtatIP4,10101#Smn.rrror Englands130BROT HEl^. ^.( , oti Mot or tale, ICatie. I t your kt-;gtata_t 'h -rltt .:817e417e., Sk1118,Jitiyetc tJ, ri,C,keyourjitztte. nt/it'lliller'iles a flila tint. tit-ercilt- 011;tr mfrt' cii;t met_.^ Z(CtIr reitirriet497;cre ilith 47nriE tireitt lie,/Mit theligityourt, cu, if an erC;ttlit.ftilatti 2 I - Ftt4I"1........;-. ,---^--^,....-4....^,,-' j our honer1 t ort wilt I ;eye you. t...Prtyilally^---... ,,,,_, ,^4 iirorrnit lisiVarilGREETING THE RUNAWAYSFIG. 12: 'Welcome Home Brother', satirical print greeting the 'runaways (1665)131BIBLIOGRAPHYA Brief Discourse Concerning Printing and Printers (London: Printed for a Societyof Printers, 1663).Amelang, James, A Journal of the Plague Year (New York and Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, 1991).Arthur, T. J., "Anatomies and the Anatomy Metaphor in Renaissance England"(University of Wisconsin Ph. D. thesis, 1978), summarized in DissertationAbstracts International , 39 (1979), 4263A-4A.Atkyns, Richard, The Original and Growth of Printing; Collected out of History, andthe Records of this Kingdome, Wherein is also Demonstrated that printingappertaineth to the Prerogative Royal; and is a Flower of the Crown ofEngland (London, 1664).Austin, William, The Anatomy of the Pestilence; a poem, in three parts; Describingthe deplorable Condition of the City of London under its merciless dominion(London: Nathaniel Brooke, 1666).Bakhtin, Mikhail, Rabelais and His World tr. Helene Iswolsky, (Bloomington:Indiana University Press, 1984).Bartel, Roland ed., London in Plague and Fire 1665-1666 (Boston: D. C. Heath andCompany, 1957).Beier, A. L., and Findlay, R., London 1500-1700. The Making of the Metropolis (NewYork: Longman Group, 1986).Bell, Walter George, The Great Fire of London in 1666 (London: John Lane, 1920)., The Great Plague in London in 1665 (London: John Lane, 1924).Birch, Thomas, The History of the Royal Society 4 vols., (London: A. Millar, 1756-1757).Bloom, J. Harvey, English Seals (London: Methuen, 1906).132Boghurst, William, Loimographia; an account of the great plague of London in theyear 1665 (New York: AMS Press, 1979).Bosher, R. S., The Making of the Restoration Settlement (London and New York:Dacre Press, 1951).Browning, Andrew ed., English Historical Documents 1660-1714 vol. 8 (London:Eire and Spottiswoode, 1953).Buck, Peter, "Seventeenth-Century Political Arithmetic: Civil War and VitalStatistics", Isis 68 (1977), 67-84.Bullein, William, Dialogue against the Fever Pestilence, first published 1564,republished by Early English Text Society, extra series no. LII, (London, 1888).Burke, Peter, "Popular Culture in Seventeenth-Century London", in Reay ed., Popular Culture in Early Modern Europe (London: Temple Smith, 1978).Calendar of State Papers Domestic (London, 1864).Calendar of State Papers and Manuscripts Relating to English Affairs Existing in theArchives and Collections of Venice (London, 1933).Calvi, Giulia, Histories of a Plague Year; the social and the imaginary in BaroqueFlorence (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989)., "A Metaphor for Social Exchange: the Florentine Plague of 1630",Representations 13, Winter 1986, 139-163.Capp, Bernard, "Popular Literature", in Reay ed., (1985).Carmichael, Ann, Plague and Poor in Renaissance Florence (Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 1986).The Caterpillars of the Commonwealth Truly Dissected and Laid Open; the Froggesof Egypt, or the Caterpillars of the Commonwealth Truly Dissected and LaidOpen with the subjects Thankefullness unto God for their deliverance fromthe nest of vermine (London, 1641).133The Catterpillars of this Nation Anatomized, In a Brief yet Notable Discovery ofHouse Breakers, Pick Pockets, &C., Together with the life of a Penitenthighwayman, discovering the mystery of that Infernal Society, to which isadded the manner of hectoring and trapanning, as it is acted in and about thecity of London (London, 1659).de Certeau, Michel, The Writing of History (New York: Columbia University Press,1988).Chartier, Roger, Cultural History: between practices and representations (CambridgeU.K.: Polity Press, 1988)., ed., The Culture of Print; power and the uses of print in early modern Europe(Oxford: Polity Press, 1989).Cipolla, Carlo, Faith, Reason, and the Plague in Seventeenth-Century Tuscany(Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1979).Clark, T. J., The Painting of Modern Life: Paris in the Art of Manet and his Followers(New York: Knopf, 1984).Clinch, George, English Costume (London: Methuen & Co., 1909).Cock, Thomas, Hygienie; or a Plain and Practical Discourse Upon the First of the SixNon-Naturals; viz: Air; with Cautionary Rules and Directives for thePreservation of People in this time of Sickness (London: Philem. Stevens,1665).Company of Parish Clerks of London, London's Dreadful Visitation; or a Collectionof all the Bills of Mortality for this Present Year (London: E. Cotes, 1665).Corporation of London, Court of Aldermen, Orders Conceived and Published by theLord Mayor and Aldermen of the City of London Concerning the Infection ofthe Plague (London: James Flesher, 1665).Cressy, David, Literacy and the Social Order: Reading and Writing in Tudor andStuart England (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press,1980).134Crouch, John, London's Bitter Sweet Cup of Tears (London: E. Crouch, 1666).Crow, Thomas, Painters and Public Life in Eighteenth-Century Paris (New Havenand London: Yale University Press, 1985).Daly, James, "Cosmic Harmony and Political Thinking in Early Stuart England",Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 69, pt. 7, 1979, 3-40.Eagleton, Terry, Criticism and Ideology (London: New Left Books, 1976).Early English Books 1641-1700 (Ann Arbor: University Microfilms Inc., 1990)England Anatomized, her Disease Discovered, and the remedy prescribed , in aSpeech by a Member of the (so called) Parliament (London, 1660). Reproducedin Somers Tracts vol. 6, (London, 1811).Femia, J. V., Gramsci's Political Thought (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981).Foucault, Michel, Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972-1977 , Colin Gordon ed. (New York: Pantheon Books, 1980)., Discipline and Punish, Birth of the Prison (New York: Vintage Books, 1979).• The Archaeology of Knowledge (New York: Pantheon Books, 1972).Fraser, Peter, The Intelligence of the Secretaries of State and their Monopoly ofLicensed News 1660-1688 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1956).Golgotha; or a Looking Glass for London; with an humble Witness against the CruelAdvice and Practice of Shutting up unto Oppression; by J. V., grieved for thePoor, who perish daily hereby (London, 1665).Graunt, John, Natural and Political Observations Mentioned in a following Index,and made upon the Bills of Mortality; by John Graunt, Citizen of London;with reference to the Government, Religion, Trade, growth, Ayre, Diseases,and the several Changes of the said City (London: T. Roycroft for J. Martine, J.Allestry, and Tho. Dicas, 1662)., Reflections on the Weekly Bills of Mortality for the cities of London andWestminster, and the places adjacent but more especially, so far as it relates to135the Plague and other mortal diseases that we Englishmen are most subject to,and should be most careful against in this our age (London: Samuel Speed,1665).Greaves, Richard, Deliver Us From Evil; the Radical Underground in Britain 1660-1669 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986).Grosz, Elisabeth, "Bodies-Cities", in Sexuality and Space , Beatriz Colomina ed.,(New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 1992).Gunn, J. A. W., Politics and the Public Interest in the Seventeenth-Century(London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, Toronto: University of Toronto Press,1969).Hall, Stuart, "Notes on Deconstructing the 'Popular'", in People's History andSocialist Theory R. Samuel ed., (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1981).Harcourt, Glenn, "Andreas Vesalius and the Anatomy of Antique Sculpture", inRepresentations 17, Winter 1987.Harris, Tim, London Crowds in the Reign of Charles II; Propaganda and Politicsfrom the Restoration Until the Exclusion Crisis (Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 1987).Heydon, J., A Quintuple Rosie-Crucian Scourge for the Due Correction of thatPseudo-chymist and Scurrilous Emperick, Geo. Thomson, being in part aVindication of the Learned Society of Physitians (London, 1665).Hill, Christopher, "Partial Historians and Total History", in The Collected Essays ofChristopher Hill (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1986), 3-9."Sex, Marriage, and Parish Registers", in Collected Essays , 188-210.Hodges, Nathaniel, Loimologia, sive, Pestis nuperae upad populum Londinensumgrassantis narratio historica authore Nathanaele Hodges (London: D Kemp,1665).Hooke, Robert, Micrographia: or Some Physiological Descriptions of Minute Bodiesmade by Magnifying Glasses (London: James Allestry, 1665).136Hull, Charles Henry, The Economic Writings of Sir William Petty together with theObservations upon the Bills of Mortality more probably by Captain Graunt(Cambridge: The University Press, 1899).Hunt, Lynn, Politics, Culture and Class in the French Revolution (Berkeley:University of California Press, 1984).^, ed., The New Cultural History (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989).Hunter, Michael, Establishing the New Science: The Experience of the early RoyalSociety (Woodbridge: The Boydell Press, 1989)., Science and Society in Restoration England (Cambridge: University ofCambridge Press, 1981).Hutton, Ronald, The Restoration: A Political and Religious History of England andWales 1658-1667 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985).Jacob, J. R., Robert Boyle and the English Revolution: A Study in Social andIntellectual Change (New York: B. Franklin, 1977).Jameson, Frederic, The Political Unconscious (Ithaca: Cornell University Press,1981).Jones, J. R., Country and Court; England 1658-1714 (London: Edward Arnold, 1978)., ed., The Restored Monarchy 1660-1688 (London: MacMillan, 1979).Kenyon, J. P., The Stuart Constitution 1609-1688: Documents and Commentary 2nded. (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1986).Kitchen, George, Sir Roger L'Estrange: A Contribution to the History of the Press inthe Seventeenth-Century (London, 1913).Kroll, Richard, The Material Word: Literate Culture in the Restoration and the EarlyEighteenth-Century (Baltimore and London: John Hopkins University Press,1991).Lacey, Douglas R., Dissent and Parliamentary Politics in England 1661-1689 (NewBrunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1969).137Lamentio Civitas; London's Complaint Against her Children in the Country(Southwark: Robert Rogers, 1665).Laslett, Peter ed., The Earliest Classics: John Graunt and Gregory King(Farnborough: Gregg International, 1973).L'Estrange, Roger, Considerations and Proposals in Order to the Regulation of thePress (London: A. C., 1663).Londini Lachrymae: or London's Complaint Against her Fugitives (London: R. D.,1665).Mack, Arien ed., "In Time of Plague: The History and Social Consequences of LethalEpidemic Disease", in Social Research 55, no. 8, (1988).Maxwell-Lyte, H. C., Historical Notes on the Use of the Great Seal of England(London: Harrison and Sons, 1926).McKeon, Michael, "Politics of Discourse and the Rise of the Aesthetic inSeventeenth-Century England", in Sharpe and Zwicker eds.The Newes; Published for Satisfaction and Information of the People, WithPrivilege (London: Roger L'Estrange).Nicholson, Watson, The Historical Sources of Defoe's Journal of the Plague Year(Boston: Stratford Company Publishers, 1919).O'Brien, Patricia, "Michel Foucault's History of Culture", in Hunt ed.Ogilby, John, The Entertainment of His most Excellent Majestie Charles II, in HisPassage through the City of London to His Coronation (London: Tho.Roycraft, 1662).Pelling, Margaret, "Appearance and Reality: Barber Surgeons, the Body, andDisease", in Beier and Findlay eds.Pepys, Samuel, The Diary of Samuel Pepys , Robert Latham and William Matthewseds. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983).The Phanatick Anatomized (London, 1672).138Power, M. J., "The Social Topography of Restoration London", in Beier and Findlayeds.Reay, Barry, Popular Culture in Seventeenth-Century England (London: CroomHelm, 1985).Reedy, Gerald, "Mystical Politics: The Imagery of Charles II's Coronation", in PaulKorstin ed., Studies in Change and Revolution: Aspects of EnglishIntellectual History 1640-1800 (Menston: Scholar Press, 1972).Richardson, Ruth, Death, Dissection, and the Destitute (London and New York:Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1987).Ross, Sutherland, The Plague and the Fire of London (London: Faber and Faber,1965).The Run-Awayes Return: or the Poor Penniless Pilgrim (London, 1665).The Run-Awayes Safe Refuge: or the Poor Penniless Pilgrim's Answer to theirMiserable Comforters their Fellow Citizens in London (London, 1665-1666).Seaward, Paul, The Cavalier Parliament and the Reconstruction of the Old Regime1661-1667 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989).Seller[s], John, A Moderate Computation of the Expenses in Provisions spent in theCities of London and Westminster, and the places within the Weekly Bills ofMortality, for a Year, Month, Week, Day, Hour, and Minute, founded uponthis modest Supposition, that there may be but a Million of People within thesaid Cities and Weekly Bills of Mortality, observed by a scrutinous Enquiry inmost of the Particulars (London: J. D., 1691).Siebert, Frederick Seaton, Freedom of the Press in England 1476-1776 (Urbana:University of Illinois Press, 1952).Shapin, Steven, and Schaffer, Simon, Leviathan and the Air Pump (Princeton:Princeton University Press, 1985).139Sharpe, Kevin, and Zwicker, Steven eds., Politics of Discourse: The Literature andHistory of Seventeenth-Century England (Berkeley: University of CaliforniaPress, 1987).Shrewsbury, John Findley, A History of Bubonic Plague in the British Isles (London:Cambridge University Press, 1970).The Shutting Up of the Infected Houses as it is Practised in England Soberly Debated(London, 1665).Slack, Paul, The Impact of the Plague in Tudor and Stuart England (London andBoston: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1985).^, "Metropolitan Government in Crisis: the Response to the Plague", in Beierand Findlay eds.Smith, Paul, Discerning the Subject (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press,1988).Sprat, Thomas, The History of the Royal Society of London for the Improving ofNatural Knowledge (London:, J. Martyn and J. Allestry, 1667).Thomson, George, Loimotomia, or the Pest Anatomized (London: NathanielCrouch, 1666).Loimologia; A Consolatory Advice, and some Brief Observations Concerningthe Present Pest (London: L. Chapman, 1665).Vincent, Thomas, God's Terrible Voice in the City (London, 1667).Walker, James, "The Secret Service Under Charles II and James II", in Transactionsof the Royal Historical Society 4th series, vol. 15, (1932)., "The Censorship of the Press During the Reign of Charles II", in History newseries, 35, (1950).Webster, Charles, The Great Instauration: Science, Medicine, and Reform 1621-1660(London: Duckworth, 1975).140Williamson, George ed., Bryan's Dictionary of Printers and Engravers , new edition,(London: G. Bell and Sons, 1920).Wilson, F. P., The Plague in Shakespeare's London (London: Oxford UniversityPress, 1927).Wilson, Luke, "William Harvey's Prelectiones: The Performance of the Body in theRenaissance Theater of Anatomy", in Representations 17, Winter (1987).Young, Robert, White Mythologies: Writing History and the West (London andNew York: Routledge, 1990).Zemon-Davis, Natalie, Society and Culture in Early Modern France (Stanford:Stanford University Press, 1975).Zwicker, Steven, "Lines of Authority: Politics and Literary Culture in theRestoration", in Sharpe and Zwicker eds.141


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items