History of Animal Plagues. 39 



beasts of burden/ ^ ' At that time a dreadful pestilence {huidhe 

 chonnaill) was ravaging the eommou people/ ^ 



A.D. 565. The whole world suffered more or less from epi- 

 demic diseases for a number of years. The Ligurian plague 

 ra^ed durinir this and the followincj years amono; mankind. 

 Paulus Diaconus writes^ ' Dwellings are vacant and towns 

 deserted, men have disappeared, and there is a great destruction 

 of animals.'^ While the plague was at its height Nicephorus 

 describes a strange fact. ' Certain little marks appeared on the 

 doors and outsides of their houses, on their o-arments, and on 

 their utensils ; some white crusts of a peculiar deposition from 

 the air adhered to all things as damp moulds do on the walls or 

 dwellings, or dew on grass."* This unhappy state of afiairs was 

 more particularly noted in France, Italy, and Germany. 



A.D. 569. ' In this year a great disease, accompanied by dy- 

 sentery and variola/ afflicted Italy and Gaul, and neat cattle 

 especially perished in these countries.' " 



A.D. 570. According to Marius, Bishop of Avranches, an 

 epizooty spread in France and Italy which destroyed nearly all 

 the cattle. This may have been a continuance of that which is 

 mentioned as occurring in the last year. A glandular affection 

 also manifested itself amonsr men/ 



D 



' St ^dus, vol. i. p. 422. 



- St Brigidia, vol. ii. p. 536. In the ancient Irish records mention is often 

 made of the Buidhe Chonnaill, which was a disease affecting both the human and 

 bovine species. 



^ Paid. Diacon. Caps. iv. x.xiii. Muraton. Scrip. Rerum Ital., vol. i. p. 426. 



* Nucplioriis. Hist. Eccles. 



* Grave doubts are entertained as to the etymology of this word, and the ques- 

 tion remains a disputed one as to whether it be the variolus disease that is here meant. 

 Ileusinger thinks that this variola, because it is mentioned with other maladies of 

 a pustular and bubonic nature, was nothing else than the true plague, and he only 

 believes in the appearance of small-pox at a much later period. There can be now 

 no doubt, however, that the learned j)athologist is incorrect : small-pox is fretpient- 

 ly mentioned in the early Saxon writings, Ijolh by its common and Latin designa- 

 tions, and its presence in Ireland is indicated at a period not far removed hum this 

 mentioned by Marius. Ilecker [Aiiiialcn, 1828) is, therefore, I think, <|uite justi- 

 fied in writing ' wir stehen nicht liinger an die pustularfest im sechslen jaiirhundert 

 fur pocken zu erklaren.' For the notices of this disease in early England refer to 

 Saxon Lccchdovis, London, 1866. 



•' Marius. Episcop. Chronicon. Diiclusnc. Scriji. Ker. I'ranc. vol. i. p. 215. 

 ' Ibid. 



