Reading between the lines: Old Germanic and early Christian views on abortion - Article X: Late antique and early medieval remnants of the Hippocratic Oath: early general prohibitions of abortion

UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (https://dare.uva.nl)

UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository)

Reading between the lines: Old Germanic and early Christian views on abortion

Elsakkers, M.J.

Publication date

2010

Link to publication

Citation for published version (APA):

Elsakkers, M. J. (2010). Reading between the lines: Old Germanic and early Christian views

on abortion.

General rights

It is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s)

and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open

content license (like Creative Commons).

Disclaimer/Complaints regulations

If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please

let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material

inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter

to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You

will be contacted as soon as possible.

ARTICLE X

“Late Antique and Early Medieval Remnants af the Hippocratic Oath:

Early General Prohibitions of Abortion,” unpublished article.

LATE ANTIQUE AND EARLY MEDIEVAL REMNANTS OF THE HIPPOCRATIC OATH:

EARLY GENERAL PROHIBITIONS OF ABORTION

The Hippocratic Oath, a Greek text that is reputed to date back to the fourth or fifth century BC, is a code of

ethics for medical practitioners.

_{It has long been used to prohibit doctors from being professionally involved in}

abortion practices. There are many versions, translations, adaptations and interpretations of the Hippocratic

Oath. The passage in the Oath that is used to prohibit abortion is short -

Ðmo…wv d oÙd gunaikˆ pessÕn

fqÒrion dèsw.

_{The wording of what is considered to be the ‘original’ Greek version, its meaning,}

interpreta-tion and translainterpreta-tion have been, and still are, a source of debate.

_{It is important to realize that, as Vivian Nutton}

says, ‘the Hippocratic Oath is not, and never has been, a fixed, unalterable document’.

_{The Oath has been used}

both as an absolute and a selective prohibition of abortion, that is, to prohibit any method of abortion under any

circumstance, and to condemn a specific method of abortion (the pessary), thus allowing abortion in predefined

situations. Often the interpretation of the Oath reflects the author’s opinion on abortion, and his moral

convic-tions.

The literal translation of pessÕv fqÒriov is ‘destructive (deadly, poisonous) pessary’. Émile Littré’s

nine-teenth-century translation renders pessÒv as ‘pessary’: semblablement, je ne remettrai à aucune femme un

pes-saire abortif (1844),

and W.H.S. Jones (1923) does the same: ‘Similarly I will not give to a woman a pessary to

cause abortion’.

_{Both apparently interpret the Oath as a selective prohibition of abortion. For Ludwig Edelstein}

(1943) pessÕv fqÒriov includes any method of abortion. He interprets the Oath as a general prohibition of

1 _{This article is for Thea. I owe a debt of thanks to Erika Langbroek, Rob Brouwer and Wilken Engelbrecht for - as always -}

helping me with my Latin puzzles, and to Jos Biemans, Thomas Rütten, Grace Swart, and Cristina Aresti of the Biblioteca Universitaria in Bologna. For an interesting, informative, and beautifully illustrated introduction to the Hippocratic Oath, cf. Thomas Rütten, Geschichten vom Hippokratischen Eid, Wiesbaden-Wolfenbüttel: Harrassowitz-Herzog August Bibliothek, 2007 (CD-Rom).

2 _{Some scholars argue that the Oath is (much) younger. This is understandable, because no ancient Greek papyri or}

manu-scripts survive from the pre-Christian era, nor are there any substantial textual references to the Oath from this period. The oldest Greek version we have is a fragmentary third-century AD papyrus (Papyrys Oxyrhynchus 2547v), cf. Barns e.a. 1966, pp. 62-65. We know that Greek texts of the Hippocratic Corpus were available in the Islamic East (Syria, Persia) between the ninth and fourteenth centuries, because we have Arabic translations of the Oath that date back to this period, cf. Jones 1924, pp. 29-33, and Rütten 2007 (CD-Rom; Mittelalter). However, none of these Greek texts have survived.

The oldest Greek manuscripts we have of the ‘original’ or ‘pagan’ text are young (they were copied between the tenth and the sixteenth centuries), cf., for instance, Jones 1924, pp. 2-7, Rütten 1996, pp. 459-460, note 6 and Rütten 1997, pp. 70-72, note 11. The two most important manuscripts of the ‘pagan’ text, usually designated as M and V, are: Venice, Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana, Codex graecus 269, fol. 12-12v (tenth or eleventh century) and Vatican City-Rome, Biblioteca Aposto-lica Vaticana, Codex Vaticanus graecus 276, fol. 1-1v (twelfth century), cf. Jones 1924, p. 4 and Rütten 1996, p. 460, note 6. On the three manuscripts of the Christian oath, see: note 15. In the Post-Salernitan period Greek versions of the Oath were rediscovered, and a number of different Latin translations of the abortion passage in the Oath became available, see, for in-stance, Rütten 1996, passim.

3 _{Cf. Jones 1924, p. 10, and Edelstein 1943, pp. 2-3. Edelstein’s Greek is based on Heiberg 1927, pp. 4-5.}

The passage on abortion is preceded by a passage on ‘supplying a deadly medicine’ that is usually interpreted as a reference to euthanasia. It is followed by a pledge to uphold the moral standards of the medical profession, and refrain from giving advice on deadly poisons. In the translation by Von Staden: ‘And I will not give a drug that is deadly to anyone if asked [for it], nor will I suggest the way to such a counsel. And likewise I will not give a woman a destructive pessary. And in a pure and holy way I will guard my life and my téchnē’ (Von Staden 1996, p. 407). Edelstein translates: ‘I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy. In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art’ (Edelstein 1943, p. 2).

4 _{See, for instance, Von Staden 1996, passim, King 1998, p. 139, Riddle 1992, pp. 7 ff., Godderis 2005, pp. 85-103, Rütten}

1996, passim, and Rütten 1997, passim.

5 _{Nutton 1995, p. 519; cf. also p. 518. See also: Nutton in Rütten 1997, p. 116 (discussion).} 6 _{Littré 1844, vol. 4, pp. 628-633 at pp. 630-631.}

2

abortion, and translates: ‘Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy’.

_{As Rütten says, pessÒv is}

then interpreted as a pars pro toto for any method of abortion.

_{The translations of fqÒriov as ‘abortive’}

indi-cate that the word is interpreted as ‘destructive of the fetus’, and not, or to a lesser degree, as ‘detrimental to the

mother’s health’. Here, too, we must be aware of the biases of some of the Oath’s translators, because it is also

possible, and perhaps more accurate, to interpret this passage as a warning of the dangers of using pessaries. The

Hippocratic corpus and other ancient medical texts contain repeated warnings about the harmful effects of

pes-saries for a woman’s health that support this interpretation.

_{Von Staden (1996) interprets fqÒriov as}

‘danger-ous, destructive, deadly’, and translates: ‘And likewise I will not give a woman a destructive pessary’. The

mod-ern translations quoted above indicate that the passage on abortion in the Oath is regularly interpreted as a strict,

general condemnation of abortion, that is, a prohibition of the destruction of fetal life, but that it can also be read

as a selective prohibition of abortion, that is, a prohibition of dangerous pessaries.

The Greek Hippocratic Oath was known in the late antique and early medieval Latin West through a number of

summaries, adaptations, commentaries, references, and translations.

_{The oldest Latin reference to the Oath’s}

passage on abortion is in a commentary we find in the preface to the Compositiones, a medical handbook written

by the Roman army physician Scribonius Largus in the first century AD. Scribonius Largus uses the word

medi-camentum, ‘medicine’, instead of ‘pessary’, thus choosing the ‘strict’ interpretation of the Oath. He interprets

the word fqÒriov as ‘abortive’ (quo conceptum excutitur), and adds a clause that forbids giving instruction: ut

ne praegnanti quidem medicamentum quo conceptum excutitur aut detur aut demonstretur a quoquam medico,

‘that a pregnant woman should not be given by any physician any medicine through which the fetus is expelled,

nor should [it] be demonstrated [to her]’.

In his Gynaecia Soranus of Ephesus, a Greek physician, who practiced in Alexandria and Rome in the late first

and early second centuries, mentions two interpretations of the Hippocratic texts on abortion that were current in

his day.

Soranus, Gunaike…wn - Gynaecia

1.19. Whether one ought to make use of abortives and contraceptives and how?

8 _{Cf. Edelstein 1943, p. 3.} 9 _{Rütten 1997, p. 92.}

10 _{Hanson mentions passages in the Hippocratic Diseases of Women I that speak of the dangers of using pessaries: ‘brings}

risk that the uterus be ulcerated or inflamed, a very dangerous result’ (De Mulieribus. 1.72), and ‘she is ulcerated in her uterus because of harsh pessaries’ (De Mulieribus 1.67), cf. Hanson 1995, pp. 229-200 plus notes 32 and 37. Soranus warns against irritating and pungent pessaries or suppositories, because they can cause ulcerations, lacerations, ‘too great a sympa-thetic reaction and heat’ (1.19.61 - 1.19.65), cf. Temkin 1956 [1991], pp. 63-68.

Ancient medical practitioners were aware of the fact that using pessaries could be fatal if the substances used were poisonous and/or if they were left in place too long. Modern doctors also warn against the prolonged use of tampons, because of the risk of sepsis and toxic shock syndrome.

11 _{MacKinney quotes a number of early medieval texts with direct and indirect references to the Oath (MacKinney 1952,}

passim); the oldest is a letter written by Jerome in the late fourth century (Epistle 52, PL 22: 539). MacKinney also cites a Visigothic law on the way a doctor should behave with female patients and a passage from one of Cassiodorus’s letters; neither of these texts mentions Hippocrates, but both, as MacKinney says, “repeated much of the ideology of the Hippocratic Oath” (p. 28). See also: Hirschfeld 1928, Jones 1924, and Rütten 2007 (CD-Rom).

12 _{Scribonius Largus, Compositiones: Hippocrates, conditor nostrae professionis, initia disciplinae ab iureiurando tradidit,}

in quo sanctum est, ut ne praegnanti quidem medicamentum, quo conceptum excutitur, aut detur aut demonstretur a quo-quam medico, longe praeformans animos discentium ad humanitatem (Sconocchia 1983, pp. 2-3); ‘Hippokrates, der Be-gründer unseres Berufsstandes, hat die wissenschaftliche Unterweisung mit einem Eide begonnen, in dem bei Strafe verbo-ten wurde, daβ nicht einmal einer Schwangeren ein Mittel zur Abtreibung der Leibesfrucht von einem Arzte gegeben oder demonstriert werden dürfe, wodurch er das Gemüt der Lernenden von Anfang an zur Menschenliebe erzog’ (Schonack 1913, p. 5). Two recent translations are freer than the German translation. Hamilton 1986 translates: ‘no physician will either give or demonstrate to pregnant women any drug aborting a conceived child’ (p. 214), and Pellegrino & Pellegrino 1988 trans-late: ‘no physician should give, or even show, an abortifacient drug to a pregnant woman’ (p. 26). Note that conceptum is a neuter noun (n.sg.n.), whereas, for instance, the early medieval penitentials usually use the masculine conceptus for ‘fetus’.

3

1.19.60. A contraceptive differs from an abortive, for the first does not let conception take place, while the latter de-stroys what has been conceived. Let us, therefore, call the one ‘abortive’ (phthorion) and the other ‘contraceptive’ (atokion). (…) For this reason they say that Hippocrates, although prohibiting abortives, yet in his book ‘On the Nature of the Child’ employs leaping with the heels to the buttocks for the sake of expulsion. But a controversy has arisen. For one party banishes abortives, citing the testimony of Hippocrates who says: ‘I will give to no one an abortive’ (oÙ dèsw d oÙdenˆ fqÒrion); moreover, because it is the specific task of medicine to guard and preserve what has been engen-dered by nature. The other party prescribes abortives, but with discrimination, that is, they do not prescribe them when a person wishes to destroy the embryo because of adultery or out of consideration for youthful beauty; but only to prevent subsequent danger in parturition if the uterus is small and not capable of accommodating the complete development, or if the uterus at its orifice has knobby swellings and fissures, or if some similar difficulty is involved. (…) it is safer to prevent conception from taking place than to destroy the fetus (…).13

Soranus tells us that, although some allow abortion if the pregnant woman’s health or life is in danger, adultery

and preservation of a woman’s beauty are not regarded as acceptable reasons for abortion. Soranus does not use

the word pessÒv in this context, but in the following sections (§ 1.19.61-1.19.65) he describes various methods

of contraception and abortion including pessaries and oral abortifacients.

_{The commentaries by Scribonius}

Largus and Soranus both suggest that there were Greek versions or interpretations of the Oath in the first and

second centuries that formulated a general ban on abortion - perhaps there were even texts without the word

‘pessary’.

The three late antique Latin translations of Soranus’s Gynaecia are faithful to their original, and do not use the

word ‘pessary’ either. Theodorus Priscianus (early fifth century; North Africa) gives a condensed version of

Soranus’s text in his Euporiston, and adds the woman’s age as a reason for abortion.

_{Caelius Aurelianus’s}

13 _{Temkin 1951 [1991], pp. 62-63; cf. Ilberg 1927, pp. 45-49. Soranus’s Gynaecia was a handbook for medical practitioners,}

especially midwives, as is evident from the introduction to Muscio’s early Latin translation: ‘Although quite frequently in gynecological matters we have had need of an obstetrix, we have found no studious woman who seemed to have learned Greek letters; but if she had had all women’s things translated into Latin for her, she would be able to understand the sense of the writing. (...) I wished to speak very simply; and, to tell the truth, I used women’s words so that even inexperienced obstetrices would be able to understand easily the matter, albeit when read to them by another woman’ (Green 1985, pp. 137-138; cf. Rose 1882, p. 3).

14 _{Cf. Temkin 1956 [1991], pp. 63-68.}

15 _{The third-century AD papyrus text referred to above has the word pessÒv, and so do many of the late medieval Greek}

manuscripts. Although I assume that there may have been early Greek texts with an absolute condemnation of abortion, the earliest Greek text of the Oath without the word ‘pessary’ is the so-called Christian Oath in Vatican City-Rome, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Codex Urbinas graecus 64, fol. 116 (twelfth century; southern Italy). It reads Ðmo…wv d oÙd gunaixˆ dèsw fqÒrion, ¥nwqšn te À k£twqen, ‘and likewise I will not give women a destructive thing, neither from above nor from below’ (Rütten 1996, p. 470). Rütten says that “this text reveals the explicit prohibition of any kind of pregnancy inter-ruption, be it via vaginal, anal or oral application” (Rütten 1996, p. 470). Jones gives a different and in my opinion less accu-rate translation: ‘similarly I will not give treatment to women to cause abortion, treatment neither from above nor from be-low’ (cf. Jones 1924, pp. 22-25). As far as I know, the oldest ‘pagan’ Oath without the word pessÒv is in the fourteenth-cen-tury manuscript Milan, Biblioteca Ambrosiana, Codex Ambrosianus B 113 sup, fol. 2, cf. Jones 1924, pp. 18-21. This manu-script has: oÙd gunaixˆ fqÒrion paršxw, ‘I will not give to women a destructive (poisonous) thing (substance)’.

Codex Ambrosianus B 113 sup also contains a version of the Christian Oath on fol. 203v, cf. Jones 1924, pp. 22-27. The third version of the Christian Oath is in Bologna, MS Bibliotheca Universitaria Bologna (B.U.B., Bononiensis) 632, fol. 28 (15th c; southern Italy?). The versions of the Christian Oath in the Codex Ambrosianus and the Codex Urbinas are in the form of a cross.

16 _{Theodorus Priscianus, Euporiston, Book 3.6. De aborsu. 3.6.23. Abortivum dare nulli umquam fas est. ut enim}

Hippo-cratis attestatur oratio, tam duri reatus conscientia medicorum innocens officium non decet maculari. sed quoniam aut matricis vitio aut aetatis impossibilitate, sub qua causa praepropere frequenter partus evenit, feminae periclitantur, expedit praegnantibus in vitae discrimine constitutis sub unius partus saepe iactura salutem mercari certissimam, sicut arboribus arescentium ramorum accommodatur salutaris abscisio et naves pressae onere cum gravi tempestate iactantur solum habent ex damno remedium. unde breviter huic loco adnectenda continuo designabo (Rose 1894, p. 240); ‘III.VI.23. Vom Abort. Ein Abtreibungsmittel zu geben, ist keinem Arzte jemals erlaubt. Wie ein Ausspruch des Hippokrates bezeugt, ziemt es sich auch nicht, daß der rechtschaffene Beruf des Arztes durch die Mitwisserschaft einer so schweren Schuld befleckt werde. Da es aber vorkommt, daß entweder durch einen Fehler der Gebärmutter oder infolge einer im Alter begründeten Unmöglich-keit, - in welchem Falle häufig eine vorzeitige Geburt erfolgt -, die Frauen (durch die Geburt) in Lebensgefahr gebracht wer-den, so ist es gerechtfertigt, den Schwangeren, bei denen häufig auf Kosten einer einzigen Geburt das Leben in Frage gestellt wird, eine sichere Rettung zu erkaufen; ebenso wie bei Bäumen ein Abhauen von dürren Ästen als heilsames Mittel ange-wandt wird, und schwerbeladene Schiffe, wenn sie durch ein schweres Unwetter umhergetrieben werden, einzig durch einen

4

translation (early fifth century; Numidia, North Africa) gives a relatively faithful rendering of Soranus’s

Greek,

_{and Muscio’s translation (sixth century; North Africa) is a slightly shortened version of Soranus.}

Besides the late antique Latin translations of Soranus, and a number of early medieval references to the

Hippocratic Oath, we find the Oath’s passage on abortion in at least four versions of an early medieval Latin

text on medical ethics that may have originally been composed as early as the fifth or sixth century.

_{This text}

is not, strictly speaking, a translation of the Oath, but it incorporates passages that seem to have been taken

directly from the Oath. The four texts we have are more or less identical, and they seem to constitute a general

prohibition of abortion, because they use general terms for ‘abortifacient’ (medicamentum, abortivum) and not

the word ‘pessary’. The oldest text is in the Lorscher Arzneibuch, an early medieval medical handbook.

Lorscher Arzneibuch, Bamberg, Staatliche Bibliothek, Codex Bambergensis medicinalis 1 (olim L.III 8), fol. 6r (c. 795; Lorsch)

(…) non etiam datum medicamentum mortalem nec ad mulieribus persuasus abortivum dandum neque interesse tali consilio, sed inmaculate et sancte perseverare.21

‘[he should] also not give a deadly medicine, nor be persuaded by women to give an abortifacient, nor be concerned with such advice, but remain pure and holy’.

Codex Sangallensis 751, St. Gall, Stiftsbibliothek, p. 356 (second half ninth century; Italy?)

Non etiam dandum medicamentum mortalem nec mulieribus per suae vapores [per suae vapores = persuasus?] abortivo dandum nec in terris sed [in terris sed = interesset?] tamen [tale?] consilium, sed inmaculati et sanctitate perseverare.22

Schaden ihre Rettung erreichen können. Ich will deshalb an dieser Stelle die anzuwendenden Mittel angeben (Meyer 1909, p. 291).

17 _{Caelius Aurelianus, Gynaecia, 82. Utrum medicaminibus conceptionem prohibentibus vel factam rumpentibus utendum sit}

vel quomodo? Inhibens medicamen a corrumpenti plurimum differt. illud enim prohibet, illud factam detrahit conceptionem. Ypocrates denique [cum libro quem vocavit] cum corruptiva dari medicamina prohibet, libro quem De puerili natura con-scripsit discretionis causa iussit feminas suo saltu naticarum fibras pari plantarum percussu pultare. set de hiis fuit apud veteres magna certatio. alii enim usum medicaminum corrumpentium prohibentes aiunt nulli debere dari pregnanti, siqui-dem sit medicine salvare potius quam vexare, nascentiumque profecto natura fuerit nutrienda. alii adulteri conceptus causa aut servande pulcritudinis uterum rumpere noluerunt. illa vero danda probant que periculum partus declinant, ne parve matricis causa et minus implere volentis officium mortis sequatur effectus; vel si in ore matricis aliqua fuerint condilomata procreata; vel horum queque similia impedimento fuerint. quibus et nos attestamur. set nunc quoniam a corrumpentibus in-hibenda sunt securiora, de hiis primo dicemus. quibus enim convenit corrumpere conceptionem illis erit melius prohibere (Drabkin & Drabkin 1951, p. 28).

18 _{Muscio, Gynaecia, 57. Oportet nos rebus aborsoriis uti? apud quosdam non oportet. medicina enim quoscumque natura}

coeperit, sanare debet, non interimere. alii vero volunt uti aborsoriis, sed nec si cupiant quae sunt adulterae neque propter lucra, sed si condylomata vel aliqua impedimenta in orificio matricis mulier habeat et sic concepit, melius est aborsoriis exterminare quod conceptum est, quam cum dies partus venerit, cum exitus infanti denegatur, periculum mulieri quae part-urit inpingat (Rose 1882, p. 20); ‘57. E’ opportuno che si usino preparati abortivi? Alcuni ritengono non opportuno: la medicina, infatti, in qualsiasi modo la natura abbia concepito, deve curare non sopprimere. Altri, però, vogliono che siano usati i mezzi abortivi, ma non per assecondare i desideri delle adultere, né per bramosia di guadagno, ma solo se la donna sia rimasta gravida, pur avendo condilomi od altri impedimenti all’orificio dell’utero; è meglio (allora) allontanare con abortivi il prodotto del concepimento, poiché qualora venisse il giorno del parto, vi sarebbe pericolo di morte anche per la madre, insieme all’esito infausto del bambino (Radicchi 1970, p. 63).

19 _{Hirschfeld 1928, p. 357.}

20 _{Three of the texts quoted below were published by Hirschfeld; the fourth text (the Copenhagen manuscript) was first}

pub-lished by Laux (Laux 1930, p. 421). Hirschfeld quotes five early medieval manuscripts with approximately the same text (Hirschfeld 1928, section II, p. 357), but only three of his manuscripts contain the Oath’s passage on abortion. The passage is missing in the fragmentary Brussels, Royal Library of Belgium, MS 1342-50, fol. 1v-3r (late 11th or early 12th century; Ger-many?), and Rome, Biblioteca Angelica, Codex N.1502 (V.3.9), fol. 1r (13th century).

21 _{Stoll 1992, pp. 64, Hirschfeld 1928, p. 369. Stoll translates as follows: ‘Er soll auch kein tödlich wirkendes Mittel}

ver-abreichen noch sich von Frauen überreden lassen, ein fruchtabtreibendes Medikament zu geben; er soll auch keinen Rat in dieser Hinsicht erteilen, sondern rein und heilig bleiben’ (Stoll 1992, p. 65). MacKinney translates: ‘Do not allow women to persuade you to give abortives, and do not be a part to any such counsel, but keep yourself immaculate and sacred’ (MacKinney 1952, p. 19).

On the manuscript, cf. Beccaria 1956, pp. 193-197 and Stoll 1992, pp. 13-16. The Lorscher Arzneibuch (c. 795) is a medical handbook that contains texts that may have been used for teaching purposes plus a large recipe book, which suggests that (part of) the Hippocratic Oath was taught in the medical curriculum in Lorsch.

22 _{Hirschfeld 1928, p. 369; a comma between terris and sed in Hirschfeld’s text was removed. On the manuscript, cf.}

Bec-caria 1956, pp. 372-381.

As the suggestions added between angled brackets show, the text in the Codex Sangallensis 751 is corrupt. The ‘mistakes’, especially in terris sed > interesset, seem to be an indication of (syllable for syllable) dictation.

5

‘Neither to give a deadly medicine, nor be persuaded by women to give an abortifacient (or: ‘nor to give an abortifacient to women because of their passions’), nor be concerned with such advice, but to remain pure and holy’.

Gamle Kongelige Samling 1653, Copenhagen, Kongelige Bibliotek, fol. 72r-76v (eleventh century; Italy?)

Non etiam dandum medicamentum mortale. Nec a mulieribus persuasus abortivum dandum neque interesse tali con-silio, sed inmaculate et sancte perseverare.23

‘Neither to give a deadly medicine. Nor to be persuaded by women to give an abortifacient, nor be concerned with such advice, but to remain pure and holy’.

Codex Turicens C. 128/32, Zürich, Zentralbibliothek, fol. 103v-104r (eleventh century)

Caveat ne alicui mortale medicamen inferat neque mulieribus unquam abortiri debeat, propinet neque intersit tali con-silio, sed sit inmaculate et sancte fidei custos ac sedulus perseverator. 24

‘He must beware that he does not administer to anyone a deadly medicine, nor should he ever be obliged by women to perform an abortion, [nor] should he supply a drink [an oral medicine], nor be concerned with such advice, but he should be pure and holy, a guardian of and staunch persister in the faith’.

In all four versions the ‘original’ order of the Oath’s passages on lethal drugs and abortion was rearranged. The

passage on ‘supplying a deadly medicine’ (the so-called ‘euthanasia’ passage) is now immediately followed by

the passage on abortion instead of the promise not to give advice (on euthanasia), so that neque interesse tali

consilio and sed inmaculate et sancte perseverare now refer to giving deadly medicines and to giving

abortifa-cients.

_{The Lorscher Arzneibuch, the Codex Sangallensis 751, and the Copenhagen manuscript all shortened}

the Hippocratic pledge to uphold medical standards of conduct (‘and in a pure and holy way I will guard my life

and my téchnē / art’) to sed inmaculate et sancte perseverare, ‘but to remain pure and holy’; the Codex Turicens

adds a pledge to also uphold the faith. The textual reorganization in these early medieval Latin versions of the

Oath’s passage on abortion suggests that an abortivum, ‘abortifacient’, was also considered a ‘deadly medicine’

or poison. The classification of abortifacients as potentially lethal poisons is exactly why Roman law and most

Old Germanic laws punish supplying poisons and abortifacients - to be more specific, these secular laws punish

endangering another person’s life.

Whereas the Greek text of the Oath - when taken literally - only condemns ‘destructive pessaries’, the late

an-tique and early medieval references to and citations of the Oath’s passage on abortion prohibit all methods of

abortion. None of the late antique or early medieval Latin texts discussed above, including the translations of

Soranus, mention the pessÕv fqÒriov, nor do they give us any information on why the ‘destructive pessary’

was omitted in the Latin texts on the Oath. It seems as if the pessÕv fqÒriov was silently edited out with the

text’s transition into Latin - note that it is already missing in the earliest Latin text on the Oath by Scribonius

Largus.

_{Perhaps pessaries were considered unorthodox, and not (or hardly) used for medical purposes in the}

Latin West.

_{Or perhaps the Hippocratic Oath reached the Latin West through a Greek textual tradition that did}

not mention pessaries. Or maybe the Latin text was deliberately disambiguated so it was clear that all methods

of abortion were condemned. This tallies with the use of Latin terms that can denote any method of abortion:

23 _{Laux 1930, p. 421. For a description of the manuscript, cf. Beccaria 1956, pp. 119-124.} 24 _{Hirschfeld 1928, p. 369. The manuscript is not mentioned in Beccaria 1956.}

25 _{Cf. note 3 for the ‘original’ order.}

26 _{The Lex Cornelia de Sicariis et Veneficis (LCSV), an ancient Roman law on poisoning (81 BC), was known in the early}

medieval Latin West through the Breviarium Alarici or Lex Romana Visigothorum, a code of Roman law compiled for the Roman subjects of the Visigothic king in 506. Most Old Germanic laws have laws on poisoning that punish the supplier, cf. Elsakkers, Reading Between the Lines, chapter 1 below, Niederhellmann 1983 and Elsakkers 2003.

27 _{Scribonius Largus’s text does not seem to have been written under influence of early Christianity, see also: Kudlien 1970,}

p. 95. Riddle 1992, p. 8, calls Scribonius’s text a ‘misreading’ of the Oath; it is, however, probably simply just another inter-pretation of the Oath.

28 _{Very few recipes for pessaries are mentioned in the late antique and early medieval recipe books discussed in Elsakkers,}

Proicit, Purgat et Sanat, unpublished. Here, too, the pessary seems to have been edited out. See also: Elsakkers, Reading Between the Lines, forthcoming, chapter 4, ‘Methods of abortion; pessaries, suppositories and infusions’.

6

abortivum, aborsorium, aborsorius, abortire and medicamen, medicamentum - although it must be conceded

that abortivum and medicamen(tum) are usually primarily associated with oral abortifacients.

The early Latin texts on the Oath’s passage on abortion do not consider it ethical for medical practitioners to be

involved in abortion practices; doctors should not supply abortifacients, help a woman get an abortion or give

her advice on the subject. Barring exceptions. In the passage quoted above Soranus implies that there was a

‘strict’ and a ‘lenient’ standpoint on abortion; adherents of the latter viewpoint argue that abortions are

some-times permissible. Early medieval secular law, the teachings of the Church fathers and the early medieval

peni-tentials show us that the loopholes the ‘lenient’ viewpoint offers can be stretched, if necessary.

_{Soranus was}

evidently a caring and pragmatic physician. He knew that abortion was committed, and, although he considers

contraception preferable to abortion, he tried to give recipes for abortion that are relatively ‘safe’. In fact,

Sor-anus gives advice on abortion and abortifacients despite the Oath’s warning not to give advice on deadly

poi-sons. Soranus condones abortion if pregnancy presents a danger or threat to a woman’s health, and Priscianus

notes that the age of the pregnant woman can also present difficulties. This brings us back to the translations of

the Greek text quoted at the beginning. I said above that the modern translations seem to focus on the

‘destruc-tion of the fetus’. I would argue that the ‘original’ Greek Oath also, perhaps mainly, focuses on the mother’s life

and health, and that its prohibition of a pessÕv fqÒriov, a dangerous, often deadly, method of abortion,

under-scores this, because it implicitly forbids suicide. The Latin texts quoted above do the same by linking

abortifa-cients and deadly poisons. The Oath is concerned with preservation of life; ‘whose life’ and ‘whose life comes

first’ is where opinions differ. The interpretation of the Oath seems to have always been a point of discussion,

and to this day there are still pro-lifers (who are concerned with the legal protection of the fetus and its right to

live) and pro-choicers (who advocate a woman’s right to control her own body and to decide whether or not to

induce an abortion). The former focus on the fetus’s life, and the latter focus on the (mental) health of the

preg-nant woman.

In the past most of the discussions of the Hippocratic Oath’s passage on abortion were concerned with the

inter-pretation of the Greek text, especially the words pessÕv fqÒriov. This brief look at a few late antique and early

medieval Latin texts on the Oath shows us that the much disputed Greek text pessÕv fqÒriov was omitted in

the late antique and early medieval Latin texts. The Latin texts quoted above advocate a general prohibition of

abortion, but the translations of Soranus’s Gynaecia indicate that there were ‘strict’ and ‘lenient’ views on

abor-tion. How widely the translations of Soranus’s Gynaecia and these versions of the Oath were known in the early

medieval West, whether the Oath was taught or sworn, can not be determined without more research. It is quite

possible that there are more early medieval versions of (part of) the Oath hidden away in as yet unedited

manu-scripts.

29 _{The Lorscher Arzneibuch, the Codex Sangallensis and the Copenhagen manuscript, Priscianus and Muscio use the word}

abortivum ‘abortifacient’, or aborsorius, -ium, ‘abortive’, Caelius Aurelianus uses the words medicamen and medicamentum, ‘medicine’, and the Codex Turicens uses the verb abortire, ‘to abort’.

30 _{The early medieval penitentials and the Old Germanic laws often demand a much lighter punishment for early term}

abor-tion than for late term aborabor-tion, and the penitentials are often lenient towards poor women. Most of the Latin Church Fathers also consider early term abortion to be a less serious sin than late term abortion.

7

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BARNS, J.W.B., Peter Parsons, John Rea & Eric G. Turner (eds. & transl.), The Oxyrhynchus Papyri XXXI, London: Egypt Exploration Society, 1966 (Graeco-Ro-man Memoirs, 45).

BECCARIA, Augusto, I codici di medicina del periodo presalernitano (secolo IX, X e XI), Roma: Storia e letteratura, 1956 (Storia e letteratura, raccolta di studie e testi, 53).

CAELIUS AURELIANUS, Caelius Aurelianus Gynaecia; Fragments of a Latin Version of Soranus’s Gynaecia from a Thirteenth-Century Manuscript, edited by Miriam F. Drabkin and Israel E. Drabkin, Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1951 (Supplements to the Bulletin of the History of Medicine, 13).

DEICHGRÄBER, Karl, Der Hippokratische Eid, 3. Aufl. Stuttgart: Hippokrates Verlag, 1972 [1. Aufl. 1955].

DRABKIN & DRABKIN 1951, see: Caelius Aurelianus. EDELSTEIN 1943, see: Hippocrates.

ELSAKKERS, Marianne, “Abortion, Poisoning, Magic and Contraception in Eckhardt’s Pactus Legis Salicae,” in: Amsterdamer Beiträge zur Älteren Germanistik 57 (2003), pp. 233-267 (Quod vulgo dicitur; Studien zum Altniederländischen, Hrsg. Willy Pijnenburg, Arend Quak & Tanneke Schoonheim).

EIJK, Philip van der (ed.), Hippocrates in Context; Papers read at the XIth International Hippocrates Collo-quium, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, 27-31 August 2002, Leiden: Brill, 2005 (Studies in Ancient Medicine 31).

GODDERIS, Jan, Eed van Hippocrates; historische beschouwingen inzake de opdracht en de begrenzingen van het medisch handelen, Antwerpen-Apeldoorn: Garant, 2005.

GREEN, Monica Helen, The Transmission of Ancient Theories of Female Physiology and Disease through the Early Middle Ages, Princeton NJ: Princeton University, 1985 (PhD. Disseration).

HAMILTON, J.S., “Scribonius Largus on the Medical Profession,” Bulletin of the History of Medicine 60 (1986), pp. 209-216.

HANSON, Ann, “Paidopoiïa: Metaphors for Concep-tion, aborConcep-tion, and gestation in the Hippocratic Corpus,” in: Ph.J. van der Eijk, H.F.J. Horstmanshoff & P.H. Schrijvers (eds.), Ancient Medicine in its Socio-Cultural Context, vol. 1, Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1995 (The Well-come Institute Series in the History of Medicine, 1), pp. 291-307.

HARIG, Georg & Jutta Kollesch, “Der Hippokratische Eid; zur Entstehung der antiken medizinischen Deonto-logie,” Philologus 122 (1978), pp. 157-176.

HEIBERG 1927, see: Hippocrates.

HIPPOCRATES, [Works] with an English transl. by William Henry Samuel Jones, London-Cambridge MA: William Heinemann-Harvard University Press, 1923 (The Loeb Classical Library) [rpr. 1948].

HIPPOCRATES, Hippocratis Opera, ed. Johan Ludvig Heiberg, Leipzig: Teubner, 1927 (Corpus Medicorum Graecorum 1.1).

HIPPOCRATES, Oeuvres complètes d’Hippocrate, tra-duction nouvelle avec le texte grec par Émile Littré, tome 4, Paris: Ballière, 1844 [rpr. Amsterdam: Adolf M. Hakkert, 1962].

HIPPOCRATES, The Hippocratic Oath: Text, Transla-tion and InterpretaTransla-tion, ed. Ludwig Edelstein, Baltimore:

The Johns Hopkins Press, 1943 (Supplement to the Bul-letin of the History of Medicine, 1).

HIRSCHFELD, Ernst, “Deontologische Texte des frühen Mittelalters,” Archiv für Geschichte der Medizin 20 (1928), pp. 353-371.

HOOFF, A.J.L. (Anton) van, “Antieke artsen en euthana-sie,” Hermeneus: Tijdschrift voor Antieke Cultuur (Themanummer De patiënt en zijn artsen) 17 (1999), pp. 122-127.

HORSTMANSHOFF, H.F.J. (Manfred) en J.J.E. van Everdingen (red.), De eed van Hippocrates, Alphen aan de Rijn: Belvédère-Medidact, 2004.

ILBERG 1927, see: Soranus. JONES 1923, see: Hippocrates.

JONES, William Henry Samuel, The Doctor’s Oath; an Essay in the History of Medicine, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1924.

JOUANNA, Jacques, Hippocrates, transl. from the French by M. B. DeBevoise, Baltimore-London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999 (Medicine and Culture) [original French ed. 1992].

KING, Helen, Hippocrates’ Woman; Reading the Fe-male Body in Ancient Greece, London & New York: Routledge, 1998.

KUDLIEN, Fridolf, “Medical Ethics and Popular Ethics in Greece and Rome,” Clio Medica 5 (1970), pp. 91-121. LAUX, Rudolf, “Ars Medicinae, ein frühmittelalterliches Kompendium der Medizin,” Kyklos 3 (1930), pp. 417-434.

LICHTENTHAELER, Charles, Die Eid des Hippo-krates; Ursprung und Bedeutung. XII. Hippokratische Studie, Köln: Deutscher Ärzte-Verlag, 1984.

LITTRÉ 1844, see: Hippocrates.

MACKINNEY, Loren C., “Medical Ethics and Etiquette in the Early Middle Ages: the Persistence of Hippocratic Ideals,” Bulletin of the History of Medicine 26 (1952), pp. 1-31.

MEYER, Theodor, Theodorus Priscianus und die Römische Medizin, Jena: Verlag von Gustav Fischer, 1909.

Mudry, Philippe, “Éthique et médicine à Rome: la pré-face de Scribonius Largus ou l’affirmatioin d’une singularité,” in: Hellmut Flashar & Jacques Jouanna (eds.), Médicine et morale dans l’Antiquité; dix exposés suivis de discussions, Genève, Vandoeuves 1996 / Genève : Fondation Hardt, 1997 (Entretiens, 43), pp. 297-336.

MURRAY, James Stuart, “The Alleged Prohibition of Abortion in the Hippocratic Oath,” Echos du monde classique / Classical Views 35 N.S. 10 (1991), pp. 293-311.

MUSCIO (Mustio), Sorani Gynaeciorum vetus translatio Latina nunc primum edita cum additis Graeci textus reliquiis a Dietzio repertis atque ad ipsum codicem Parisiensem nunc recognitis, ed. Valentin Rose, Leipzig: B.G Teubner, 1882.

MUSCIO, La ‘Gynaecia’ di Muscione: manual per le ostetriche e le mamme del VI sec. d. C., trad. italiana e note con testo latino tratto dai codici e ampio glossario [di] Rino Radicchi, Pisa: Editrice Giardini, 1970. NICKEL, Diethard, “Ärztliche Ethik und Schwanger-schaftsunterbrechung bei den Hippokratern,” NTM Schriftenreihe für Geschichte der Naturwissenschaften, Technik und Medizin 9 (1972), pp. 73-80.

8

den frühmittelalterlichen Leges, Berlin-New York: De Gruyter, 1983 (Arbeiten zur Frühmittelalterforschung, 12).

NUTTON, Vivian, “Beyond the Hippocratic Oath,” in: Wear e.a. 1993, pp. 10-37.

NUTTON, Vivian, “Hippocratic Morality and Modern Medicine,” in: Hellmut Flashar & Jacques Jouanna (eds.), Médicine et morale dans l’Antiquité; dix exposés suivis de discussions, Genève, Vandoeuves 1996 / Genève : Fondation Hardt, 1997 (Entretiens, 43), pp. 31-63.

NUTTON, Vivian, “What’s in an oath?” Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of London 29 (1995), pp. 518-524.

PELLEGRINO, Edmund D. & Alice A. Pellegrino, “Humanism and Ethics in Roman Medicine: Translation and Commentary on a Text of Scribonius Largus,” Literature and Medicine 7 (1988), pp. 22-38.

PRISCIANUS, see: Meyer 1909.

PRISCIANUS, Theodori Prisciani Euporiston Libri III cum physicorum fragmento et additamentis pseudo-Theodoreis, (accedunt Vindiciani Afri feruntur reliquiae), ed. Valentin Rose, Leipzig: Teubner, 1894, pp. 224-248.

RADICCHI, see: Muscio.

RIDDLE, John, Contraception and Abortion from the Ancient World to the Renaissance, Cambridge, MA etc.: Harvard University Press, 1992.

ROSE 1882, see: Muscio. ROSE 1894, see: Priscianus.

RÜTTEN, Thomas, “Medizinethische Themen in den deontologischen Schriften des Corpus Hippocraticum; zur Präfigurierung des historischen Feldes durch die zeitgenössische Medizinethik,” in: Hellmut Flashar & Jacques Jouanna (eds.), Médicine et morale dans l’Antiquité; dix exposés suivis de discussions, Genève, Vandoeuves 1996 / Genève : Fondation Hardt, 1997 (Entretiens, 43), pp. 65-120.

RÜTTEN, Thomas, “Receptions of the Hippocratic Oath in the Renaissance: the Prohibition of Abortion as a Case Study in Reception,” Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Science 51 (1996), pp. 456-483.

RÜTTEN, Thomas, Geschichten vom Hippokratischen Eid, Wiesbaden-Wolfenbüttel: Harrassowitz-Herzog August Bibliothek, 2007 (CD-Rom).

SCHONACK, See: Scribonius Largus.

SCHUBERT, Charlotte (= Triebel-Schubert, Charlotte), “Bemerkungen zum Hippokratischen Eid,” Medizinhis-torisches Journal 20 (1985), pp. 253-260.

SCHUBERT, Charlotte, Der Hippokratische Eid; Medizin und Ethik von der Antike bis heute, Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2005.

SCONOCCHIA 1983, see: Scribonius Largus.

SCRIBONIUS LARGUS, Compositiones, ed. Sergio Sconocchia, Leipzig: Teubner, 1983.

SCRIBONIUS LARGUS, Die Rezepte des Scribonius Largus, übers. von Wilhelm Schonack, Jena: Verlag von Gustav Fischer, 1913.

SMITH, Dale C., “The Hippocratic Oath and Modern Medicine,” The Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences 51 (1996), pp. 484-500.

SORANUS, Sorani Gynaeciorum libri IV: De signis fracturarum: De fascii secundum Soranum, ed. Johannes Ilberg, Leipzig: Teubner, 1927 (Corpus Medicorum Graecorum, 4).

SORANUS, Soranus’ Gynecology, transl. & introd. by Owsei Temkin, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University

Press, 1956 [rpr. 1991].

STADEN, Heinrich von, “‘In a Pure and Holy Way’: Personal and Professional Conduct in the Hippocratic Oath?” Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences 51 (1996), pp. 404-437.

STOLL, Ulrich, Das ‘Lorscher Arzneibuch’: ein medi-zinisches Kompendium des 8. Jahrhunderts (Codex Bam-bergensis medicinalis 1), Stuttgart: Steiner, 1992 (Sudhoffs Archiv, Beiheft 28).

SUDHOFF, Karl, “Eine Verteidigung der Heilkunde aus den Zeiten der ‘Mönchsmedizin’,” Archiv für Geschichte der Medizin 7 (1914), pp. 223-237.

TEMKIN, see: Soranus.

WEAR, Andrew, Johanna Geyer-Kordesch & Roger French (eds.), Doctors and Ethics: the Earlier Historical Setting of Professional Ethics, Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1993. (The Wellcome Institute Series in the History of Medicine - Clio Medica 24).