Evidence for the Continued Use of Medieval Medical Prescriptions in the Sixteenth Century: A Fifteenth-Century Remedy Book and its Later Owner.

Margaret Connolly

doi:10.1017/mdh.2016.1

Abstract

This article examines a fifteenth-century remedy book, Oxford, Bodleian Library, Rawlinson c. 299, and describes its collection of 314 medieval medical prescriptions. The recipes are organised broadly from head to toe, and often several remedies are offered for the same complaint. Some individual recipes are transcribed with modern English translations. The few non-recipe texts are also noted. The difference between a remedy book and a leechbook is explained, and this manuscript is situated in relation to other known examples of late medieval medical anthologies. The particular feature that distinguishes Oxford, Bodleian Library, Rawlinson c. 299 from other similar volumes is the evidence that it continued to be used during the sixteenth century. This usage was of two kinds. Firstly, the London lawyer who owned it not only inscribed his name but annotated the original recipe collection in various ways, providing finding-aids that made it much more user-friendly. Secondly, he, and other members of his family, added another forty-three recipes to the original collection (some examples of these are also transcribed). These two layers of engagement with the manuscript are interrogated in detail in order to reveal what ailments may have troubled this family most, and to judge how much faith they placed in the old remedies contained in this old book. It is argued that the knowledge preserved in medieval books enjoyed a longevity that extended beyond the period of the manuscript book, and that manuscripts were read and valued long after the advent of printing.

Highlights

The Tudor Reader and his AnnotationsThe name of the scribe who copied BodL Rawlinson c. 299 is unknown, though he may have been from Norfolk.[22]
This article examines a fifteenth-century remedy book, Oxford, Bodleian Library, Rawlinson c. 299, and describes its collection of 314 medieval medical prescriptions
The difference between a remedy book and a leechbook is explained, and this manuscript is situated in relation to other known examples of late medieval medical anthologies

Summary

The Tudor Reader and his Annotations

The name of the scribe who copied BodL Rawlinson c. 299 is unknown, though he may have been from Norfolk.[22]. 4v, the left margin carries the added side headings: ‘for lyse & nyttes’; ‘to purge þe hede’; ‘for hede ake’; ‘for þe mygrene’, all written by Thomas Roberts’ hand alongside the originally-written series of recipes for those complaints (see Figure 1) These side headings function as reader’s aids, enabling the searcher (Roberts himself, and other members of his household) to find the desired remedy more quickly. This list of contents, and the marginal headings to which it is keyed, together constitute a user-friendly apparatus that allows efficient navigation of the recipe collection Such strategies for the organisation and quick retrieval of information would have been instinctive to a trained lawyer, and the provision of this information management system was perhaps merely indicative of Thomas Roberts’s habitual reading practice.[29] considerable effort must have been involved in its preparation, and Thomas Roberts’s investment of his time and labour bespeaks a high regard for the recipe collection and the knowledge it contains. Perhaps amongst this range of remedies there were some that were referred to frequently? Did heavy consultation cause this particular leaf to loosen and fall out? Its loss is a slight indication that this part of the collection might have been consulted more than others, but to gain a more reliable sense of what medical remedies were most desired by the manuscript’s sixteenth-century readers we need to investigate the recipes that they themselves added to the volume

The Recipes Added to the Original Remedy Book

Another for the same

Conclusions