Woman in Science: With an Introductory Chapter on Woman's Long Struggle for Things of the MindZahm, J. A. (John Augustine)
HistoryChristian
Woman in Science: With an Introductory Chapter on Woman's Long Struggle for Things of the Mind
Zahm, J. A. (John Augustine)
Women -- History; Women scientists
One of the most noted of them was the Benedictine abbess, St. Hildegard,
of Bingen on the Rhine, who was eminent not only as a theologian but
also as a writer whose treatises on various branches of science are
justly regarded as the most important productions of the kind during the
Middle Ages prior to the time of Albertus Magnus. Besides this, she not
only wrote many books on _materia medica_, on pathology, physiology and
therapeutics, but, as a practitioner, she gloriously sustained the best
traditions of her sex in both theoretical and practical medicine.
Her work entitled _Liber Simplicis Medicinae_, which deals with what in
the Saint's time was called "simples"--for the belief was then current
that each plant or herb was or provided a specific for some
disease--contains accounts of many plants used in _materia medica_, as
well as statements of their importance in therapeutics. Her descriptions
often indicate an observer of exceptionally keen perception and one
whose knowledge of science was far in advance of her epoch. The same
observations may be made respecting Hildegard 's work, _Liber Compositae
Medicinae_, in which she treats of the causes, signs and treatment of
diseases.[188]
Still more remarkable, in many respects, is a treatise in nine books,
entitled _Physica_ or _Liber Subtilitatum Diversarum Naturarum
Creaturarum_, which, among other things, treats of the various elements,
of plants, trees, minerals, fish, birds, quadrupeds, and of the manner
in which they may be of service to man. Of so great importance was this
book considered that several editions of it were printed as early as the
sixteenth century. No less an authority than the late Rudolph Virchow,
the founder of cellular pathology, characterizes it as an early _materia
medica_, curiously complete, considering the age to which it
belongs.[189] And Haeser, in his history of medicine, directs attention
to the historical value of the book, declaring it to be "an independent
German treatise, based chiefly on popular experience."
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account