In the mid-fifteenth century, Johannes Gutenberg revolutionized the way information was shared and transmitted throughout society. With the advent of his printing press in 1450, Gutenberg transformed the European continent in more ways than is describable in this blog post. Yet, one exciting transformation that came from his invention was the accessibility and transmission of medical information through text into the household and into the public sphere.
Before the printing press, home-based medical knowledge was largely based upon personal preference and aptitude; whether this was transmitted through oral tradition or hand-written texts, the number of those who had access to medicinal information (other than what they had been provided with) was much less than after the introduction of the printed word. Through the analyzation of medicinal recipe books, like those written by Elizabeth Okeover and others, it is easy for one to sense the impact of the prominent medical theories that surrounded the field at the time. This information, with the help of the printing press, was being transferred into the household and used in recipes by apothecaries and empirics as well as others. However, the printing press also stirred up the controversies that existed amongst the various medical theories of the time. Aided by the printing press, Helmontians, Paracelsians, and Galenic theorists were able to more readily forward their views, practices as well as criticisms. As Andrew Wear points out, many accused learned physicians (who often followed the fundamentals of Galen) of being un-Christian in their practices. This type of criticism was common amongst these groups.
As historian Elizabeth Lane Furdell suggests, not only did criticism come through in print but also did the “practical” applications of medicine. This practicality was shown through the production of almanacs, herbals, and anatomical studies; they often provided advice that became useful for both practitioners and the common household. Furdell argues that because of the upswing in the availability of medical texts, the public began a transition into “self-di
agnosis” and lessened the burden of the “unknowing patient,” which became a common theme in the relationship between learned practitioner and patient.
In the Okeover recipe book mentioned above, the practices of Paracelsus are mentioned and even used in a recipe titled “Paracelsus his plaster.” The author goes on to write about the “vertues” of the plaster and even details its uses. In this case, the recipe book is handwritten and has been identified as being handed down within the Okeover family. Since this was a household medicine book, one question can be drawn from its reference to Paracelsus. Could this be attributed to the increase in medical texts that were printed and distributed throughout England and Europe alike?
Surely, a whole thesis or dissertation could be written upon the subject yet, if I had to formulate a guess my answer would be yes: the printing press led household medicine to become more “learned,” thanks to the distribution of works by minds like Van Helmont, William Harvey, Thomas Syndeham, Paracelsus, and Galen.
– Jonathan Majiros
Recipes and Medicine in Early Modern England 