UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository)
Reading between the lines: Old Germanic and early Christian views on abortion
Elsakkers, M.J.
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: http://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.
UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (http://dare.uva.nl)
Download date: 18 Jun 2017
Part 1: Article X
ARTICLE X
“Late Antique and Early Medieval Remnants af the Hippocratic Oath:
Early General Prohibitions of Abortion,” unpublished article.
[Elsakkers, unpublished]
271
Part 1: Article X
272
Part 1: Article X
273
LATE ANTIQUE AND EARLY MEDIEVAL REMNANTS OF THE HIPPOCRATIC OATH:
EARLY GENERAL PROHIBITIONS OF ABORTION 1
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. 2 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. 3 The wording of what is considered to be the ‘original’ Greek version, its meaning, interpretation and translation have been, and still are, a source of debate. 4 It is important to realize that, as Vivian Nutton
says, ‘the Hippocratic Oath is not, and never has been, a fixed, unalterable document’. 5 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 convictions.
The literal translation of pessÕv fqÒriov is ‘destructive (deadly, poisonous) pessary’. Émile Littré’s nineteenth-century translation renders pessÒv as ‘pessary’: semblablement, je ne remettrai à aucune femme un pessaire abortif (1844), 6 and W.H.S. Jones (1923) does the same: ‘Similarly I will not give to a woman a pessary to
cause abortion’. 7 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 manuscripts 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 Apostolica 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 instance, 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.
7
Jones 1923, pp. 298-299, and Jones 1924, p. 11.
Part 1: Article X
2
274
abortion, and translates: ‘Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy’. 8 As Rütten says, pessÒv is
then interpreted as a pars pro toto for any method of abortion. 9 The translations of fqÒriov as ‘abortive’ indicate 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 pessaries for a woman’s health that support this interpretation. 10 Von Staden (1996) interprets fqÒriov as ‘dangerous, destructive, deadly’, and translates: ‘And likewise I will not give a woman a destructive pessary’. The modern 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. 11 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 medicamentum, ‘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]’. 12
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.
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 sympathetic 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 quoquam medico, longe praeformans animos discentium ad humanitatem (Sconocchia 1983, pp. 2-3); ‘Hippokrates, der Begründer unseres Berufsstandes, hat die wissenschaftliche Unterweisung mit einem Eide begonnen, in dem bei Strafe verboten 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 translate: ‘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’.
9
Part 1: Article X
3
275
1.19.60. A contraceptive differs from an abortive, for the first does not let conception take place, while the latter destroys 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 engendered 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. 14 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’. 15
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. 16 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 interruption, be it via vaginal, anal or oral application” (Rütten 1996, p. 470). Jones gives a different and in my opinion less accurate translation: ‘similarly I will not give treatment to women to cause abortion, treatment neither from above nor from below’ (cf. Jones 1924, pp. 22-25). As far as I know, the oldest ‘pagan’ Oath without the word pessÒv is in the fourteenth-century manuscript Milan, Biblioteca Ambrosiana, Codex Ambrosianus B 113 sup, fol. 2, cf. Jones 1924, pp. 18-21. This manuscript 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 Hippocratis 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 Unmöglichkeit, - in welchem Falle häufig eine vorzeitige Geburt erfolgt -, die Frauen (durch die Geburt) in Lebensgefahr gebracht werden, 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 angewandt wird, und schwerbeladene Schiffe, wenn sie durch ein schweres Unwetter umhergetrieben werden, einzig durch einen
Part 1: Article X
4
276
translation (early fifth century; Numidia, North Africa) gives a relatively faithful rendering of Soranus’s
Greek, 17 and Muscio’s translation (sixth century; North Africa) is a slightly shortened version of Soranus. 18
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. 19 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. 20
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 conscripsit 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, siquidem 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 inhibenda 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 parturit 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 published 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; Germany?), 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 verabreichen 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. Beccaria 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.
Part 1: Article X
5
277
‘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 consilio, 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 consilio, 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 abortifacients. 25 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. 26
Whereas the Greek text of the Oath - when taken literally - only condemns ‘destructive pessaries’, the late antique 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. 27 Perhaps pessaries were considered unorthodox, and not (or hardly) used for medical purposes in the
Latin West. 28 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.
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 interpretation 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’.
24
Part 1: Article X
6
278
abortivum, aborsorium, aborsorius, abortire and medicamen, medicamentum - although it must be conceded
that abortivum and medicamen(tum) are usually primarily associated with oral abortifacients. 29
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 sometimes permissible. Early medieval secular law, the teachings of the Church fathers and the early medieval penitentials show us that the loopholes the ‘lenient’ viewpoint offers can be stretched, if necessary. 30 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, Soranus gives advice on abortion and abortifacients despite the Oath’s warning not to give advice on deadly poisons. 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 ‘destruction 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, underscores this, because it implicitly forbids suicide. The Latin texts quoted above do the same by linking abortifacients 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 pregnant woman.
In the past most of the discussions of the Hippocratic Oath’s passage on abortion were concerned with the interpretation 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 abortion. 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 manuscripts.
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 abortion than for late term abortion, 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.
Part 1: Article X
7
279
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BARNS, J.W.B., Peter Parsons, John Rea & Eric G.
Turner (eds. & transl.), The Oxyrhynchus Papyri XXXI,
London: Egypt Exploration Society, 1966 (Graeco-Roman 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 Colloquium, 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 Conception, abortion, 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 Wellcome Institute Series in the History of Medicine, 1), pp.
291-307.
HARIG, Georg & Jutta Kollesch, “Der Hippokratische
Eid; zur Entstehung der antiken medizinischen Deontologie,” 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, traduction nouvelle avec le texte grec par Émile Littré, tome
4, Paris: Ballière, 1844 [rpr. Amsterdam: Adolf M.
Hakkert, 1962].
HIPPOCRATES, The Hippocratic Oath: Text, Translation and Interpretation, ed. Ludwig Edelstein, Baltimore:
The Johns Hopkins Press, 1943 (Supplement to the Bulletin 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 euthanasie,” 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 Female 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. 417434.
LICHTENTHAELER, Charles, Die Eid des Hippokrates; 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 préface 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. 293311.
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 Schwangerschaftsunterbrechung bei den Hippokratern,” NTM
Schriftenreihe für Geschichte der Naturwissenschaften,
Technik und Medizin 9 (1972), pp. 73-80.
NIEDERHELLMANN, Annette, Arzt und Heilkunde in
Part 1: Article X
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. 3163.
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 pseudoTheodoreis, (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,” Medizinhistorisches 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
8
280
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 medizinisches Kompendium des 8. Jahrhunderts (Codex Bambergensis 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).