HOLLAND, Robert

Physicians and Irregular Medical Practitioners in London 1550-1640 Database. Originally published by Centre for Metropolitan History, London, 2004.

This free content was born digital. All rights reserved.

Citation:

Margaret Pelling, Frances White, 'HOLLAND, Robert', in Physicians and Irregular Medical Practitioners in London 1550-1640 Database( London, 2004), British History Online https://prod.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/london-physicians/1550-1640/holland-robert [accessed 22 November 2024].

Margaret Pelling, Frances White, 'HOLLAND, Robert', in Physicians and Irregular Medical Practitioners in London 1550-1640 Database( London, 2004), British History Online, accessed November 22, 2024, https://prod.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/london-physicians/1550-1640/holland-robert.

Margaret Pelling, Frances White. "HOLLAND, Robert". Physicians and Irregular Medical Practitioners in London 1550-1640 Database. (London, 2004), , British History Online. Web. 22 November 2024. https://prod.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/london-physicians/1550-1640/holland-robert.

In this section

Robert HOLLAND

Biography

Name Robert HOLLAND
Gender Male
Primary occupation medical apothecary (Apothecary)
Period of medical practice 1613-1643
Date of death 1643
Address Fenchurch Street 1623 1631 1640
Other notes Trouble 1623-37. See Underwood 276-8 & passim. See Barrett. ?NOT the same as 400 Henry Holland, apothecary of Wood Street.

Known London address

Wood Street
Date 1622
Fenchurch Street
Ward Langborne
Date 1623
Fenchurch Street
Ward Langborne
Date 1631
Fenchurch Street
Ward Langborne
Date 1640

Censorial hearings

m Palm Sun 1623
Entry SAUNDERS (qv, 648) reported that Mrs Nokes of Wapping, a midwife, had obtained julep and cordials from Holland in Fan Church Street, and had given them to Mrs Southen of Wapping.
Action taken ?
Verdict case not completed
28 March 1629
Entry H appeared and asked to be licensed. However, he was found guilty of 'much slackness' and dismissed.
Attitude of the accused asked for College membership
Action taken Request refused - not licensed. Dismissed.
Verdict guilty
Sentence Dismissed
22 Dec 1629
Entry H paid £5 fine, the judgement on him was rescinded and he was 'received into the favour of the College'.
Attitude of the accused submitted to the College
Action taken Forgiven and taken into favour on payment of £5 fine.
Verdict case not completed
23 Sep 1631
Entry H, apothecary of Fenchurch Street, was said by Dr HODSON to have given medicine to Mr Thackroe.
Initiator of the complaint college member
Action taken To be summoned.
Verdict case not completed
Number of crimes 1
25 June 1633
Entry Dr Hamaeus said that H let blood.
Initiator of the complaint college member
Action taken ?
Verdict case not completed
23 Dec 1633
Entry H denied combining with BUGGS (130, qv) against the College, but admitted having made medicines after his return from abroad last Michaelmas - e.g. for Mr Blande.
Action taken ?
Verdict case not completed
18 Oct 1634
Entry The President asked if H was suspended. He was told that he was not.
Action taken ?
5 Nov 1634
Entry Dr SPICER said that H in Fanchurche street 'prefers Dr Buggs stranglye'.
Initiator of the complaint college member
Action taken SPICER to supply particulars.
Verdict case not completed
25 June 1635
Entry [Apothbiz.] In list of boycotted apothecaries.
Action taken Discommuned (boycotted).
3 July 1635
Entry 'Robert Holland Apothecarye dwelling in Fanechurche street is to bee cited.'
Attitude of the accused absent
Action taken To be summoned.
Verdict case not completed
20 Oct 1637
Entry Censors visited H's shop and found bills from 'empiric and ignorant mountbanks', diaphoenicon and catholicon mixed, and 'a mingled invention of spiritus T and tincture of Castoreum' (not done according to the Pharmacopoeia Londinensis). These were destroyed.
Initiator of the complaint college member
Second initiator of the complaint college member
Third initiator of the complaint college member
Action taken Bad drugs destroyed. (H to appear.)
1 Sep 1626
Entry H was accused by Henry Leck, gardener, but brought Dr Spicer's bill and witnesses.
Initiator of the complaint person unconnected with the patient or the case
Attitude of the accused denied
Action taken ? [Presumably vindicated.]
Number of crimes 1
26 Oct 1637
Entry H appeared. He was reminded of his promise of better conduct. Shown a bill of BUGGS's found in his shop, he could not read it in true Latin.
Action taken ?
Verdict guilty
Sentence Warned
7 Sep 1627
Entry H was accused of giving 21 pills to Mr Edward Gill of Cheape. He denied it and was dismissed.
Attitude of the accused denied
Action taken Dismissed.
Verdict case not completed
Number of crimes 1
2 Nov 1627
Entry H, called Henry Holland erroneously (according to a note in the margin of the next entry), was charged by Dr Clarke and Dr Saunders with practice in the case of the late Mr Buffield, of Mr Haslewood's son, of Mr Gardiner, of John Hide and of one Throckmorton. H was ordered to appear.
Attitude of the accused absent
Action taken Ordered to appear.
Number of crimes 5
22 Nov 1627
Entry H appeared and was accused by Dr Goulston, Dr Spicer, Dr Saunders and (especially) Dr Clarke of malpractice and of passing himself off as a physician. His defence was inept and all the 21 Fellows present undertook to boycott him.
Initiator of the complaint college member
Second initiator of the complaint college member
Third initiator of the complaint college member
Attitude of the accused denied
Action taken To reappear.
7 Dec 1627
Entry H was gravely charged by Dr Saunders and others.
Initiator of the complaint college member
Action taken Fined £5 and to be imprisoned unless he paid it.
Verdict guilty
Sentence Fined £5 and to be imprisoned unless/until he paid
m S Thomas 1627
Entry H to be interdicted.
Action taken To be banned (interdicted).
1 Feb 1628
Entry H confessed giving rose aloe pills to one Gells of Cheapside, and a powder to a boy.
Attitude of the accused confessed
Action taken ? (See next?)
Number of crimes 2
7 April 1628
Entry H appeared and denied the charges. Dr Raven affirmed against him.
Attitude of the accused denied
Action taken ?
Verdict case not completed