Thanks to you all for your replies. Thanks also to you, Brenda, and if you wouldn't mind I would be very pleased to get the information you spoke of. I was mainly interested in which villages or towns in Sussex (preferably East Sussex) may have recorded the coming and /or the going of the plague - and when the consensus of opinion is as to when the plague can be considered to have, finally and completely, gone from all England - but especially Sussex. My reasons for the questions were that, in the parish of Hooe, in East Sussex, I have been told that the parish registers show that most people in the village died from the plague in 1669 and therefore they concluded that that was the year in which the plague struck but, in my opinion, 1669 is far too late. A few more points are that, according to the registers, there were a few more burials in 1667 than 1669, the burials were spread over the year pretty evenly, and none of the surnames were repeated (so whole families, certainly, didn't die) which doesn't sound like the plague - hence my questions. The plague had disappeared from London in late 1665, so 1669, as I've said, would, surely, be too late for Sussex. It also seems that the incubation period for the plague (whether bubonic or ebola or whatever it was) was only about 4-6 weeks (or so I've read!) so it wouldn't have hung around long once all the people it could infect had been infected and either survived or died - certainly not for two years if it took only nine months (roughly) to clear from London. The fire of London, which occurred in 1666, only destroyed part of the City of London and not the poorer south, east, and north areas so it can't really be claimed that this got rid of the plague, which by the end of 1665, had, almost, gone completely from all of London, anyway. I thought that if anyone had seen a parish register, in Sussex, where the vicar had, perhaps, made a specific note that the plague had come to his village and gone, that would have given me something to work on. Sorry to rabbit on but I, obviously, didn't explain myself too well the first time and thought I ought to put a bit more effort in explaining the second time! I hope I haven't overdone it! Thanks again for all your replies Kindest regards to you all - and a Merry Christmas, John

Just a small correction - it seems that the disease incubated in only 4-6 days and I think I said weeks! Sorry about that! Regards to you all - and yet another Merry Christmas! John

Hi John, This site http://www3.sympatico.ca/gander/Church.htm says that there were sporadic outbreaks of the Black Death into the 17th cent so 1669 is possible. This http://www.ninfield.org.uk/ gives a possible contact for more info. hth, Anne > From: john.newport1@ntlworld.com> To: SUSSEX-PLUS-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 16:28:06 +0000> Subject: Re: [SXP] Great Plague - 1665 - and a Merry Christmas!> > Thanks to you all for your replies. Thanks also to you, Brenda, and if you> wouldn't mind I would be very pleased to get the information you spoke of.> > > > I was mainly interested in which villages or towns in Sussex (preferably> East Sussex) may have recorded the coming and /or the going of the plague -> and when the consensus of opinion is as to when the plague can be considered> to have, finally and completely, gone from all England - but especially> Sussex.> > > > My reasons for the questions were that, in the parish of Hooe, in East> Sussex, I have been told that the parish registers show that most people in> the village died from the plague in 1669 and therefore they concluded that> that was the year in which the plague struck but, in my opinion, 1669 is far> too late. > > > > A few more points are that, according to the registers, there were a few> more burials in 1667 than 1669, the burials were spread over the year pretty> evenly, and none of the surnames were repeated (so whole families,> certainly, didn't die) which doesn't sound like the plague - hence my> questions. > > > > The plague had disappeared from London in late 1665, so 1669, as I've said,> would, surely, be too late for Sussex. It also seems that the incubation> period for the plague (whether bubonic or ebola or whatever it was) was only> about 4-6 weeks (or so I've read!) so it wouldn't have hung around long once> all the people it could infect had been infected and either survived or died> - certainly not for two years if it took only nine months (roughly) to clear> from London. > > > > The fire of London, which occurred in 1666, only destroyed part of the City> of London and not the poorer south, east, and north areas so it can't really> be claimed that this got rid of the plague, which by the end of 1665, had,> almost, gone completely from all of London, anyway.> > > > I thought that if anyone had seen a parish register, in Sussex, where the> vicar had, perhaps, made a specific note that the plague had come to his> village and gone, that would have given me something to work on.> > > > Sorry to rabbit on but I, obviously, didn't explain myself too well the> first time and thought I ought to put a bit more effort in explaining the> second time! I hope I haven't overdone it!> > > > Thanks again for all your replies> > > > Kindest regards to you all - and a Merry Christmas,> > > > John> > > > > -------------------------------> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to SUSSEX-PLUS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message _________________________________________________________________ Telly addicts unite! http://www.searchgamesbox.com/tvtown.shtml