I THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA *

Three texts on women's medicine - the Liber de sinthomatibus mulie­rum, De cuTis mulierum, and De omatu mulierum - are believed to have come out of the famed medical center ofSalerno in the twelfth century. They were to achieve an influence throughout medieval Europe unlike any other medieval texts of their kind, pre- or post-Salemitan 1 •. Yet most medievalists, even historians of medicine, will never have heard of them and will conse­quently be surprised by claims to their pan-European historical importance. This is because the name they are most commonly associated with is that of « Trotula » alternately understood as the title or the author's name.

* This study grew out of a project begun by the late John F. Benton of the California Institute of Technology. Benton had compiled a handlist of ninety. nine Trotula mss and had

.begun to collect fIlms of many of them .. After Benton's sudden death in 1988, his widow, Elspeth Benton, graciously allowed me to take over all the materials he had collected. My deepest thanks, therefore, go to her. and to Robert Benson and Rosy Meiron for facilitating the transfer. I would like to take this opportunity, too, to flclrnowledge Professor Benton's debts to Joan Cadden, Luke Demaitre, Consuelo Dutschke, Carolyn Jordan, Katherine Tachau, and Steven WiIliams, who supplied him information on various manuscripts.

My own debts are to Richard H. Rouse and Patricia Stirnemann for their repeated and invaluable aid with paleographical matters, and to Theresa Webber for her close analysis of the earliest manuscripts. A special note of thanks to Linda E. V oigts and Alexandra Barratt for information on the Middle English manuscripts; to Genevieve Brunel.Lobrichon of the Institut de Recherche et d'Histoire des Textes, Section Romane, for information on the French and Anglo-Norman translations; and to Julian Plante, former director of the Hill Monastic Manuscript Library, for his help in obtaining several microfilms from libraries in Eastern Europe. Thanks, too, to Luke Demaitre for translations of the Dutch texts, and to Klaus-Dietrich Fischer, Ann E!lis Hanson, and Francis Newton for their comments and advice. Naturally, none of these scholars is responsible for any errors of judgment or interpretation that may: remain. Funding was provided by the Josiah Charles Trent Memorial Foundation; the National Endowment for the Humanities; the Institute for Advanced Study, Prince ton ; and the Duke University Arts and Sciences Research Council.

1. For reasons of space, Latin manuscripts of the Trotula texts are cited by the number under which they appear in the Appendix to this article. Manuscripts of vernacular transla­tions and Latin renditions (whose shelfmarks are also listed in the Appendix) are cited according to language, version·and manuscript using the following abbreviations: Catalan (Cat), Dutch (Dut), English (Eng), French (Fren), Hebrew (Heb), Irish (Ir), Italian (Ital), Latin prose (LP), and Latin verse (LV). Hence, for example, Germ2a refers to the first manuscript of the second German translation, Germ2b the second manuscript of the same version, and so on. Full descriptions of both the Latin and the vernacular mss will be found in M. H. GREEN, A Jum4list of Latin and vernacular manwcripts of the so-called Trotula Texts,

. in Scriptorium, forthcoming in two parts, 1996-97.

120 MONICA H. GREEN

It is under « Trotula's » name that the texts are found in the medieval cata­logues of the private libraries of Richard Fournival and Charles V of Fnince, and in the institutional libraries of-the Sorbonne in Paris or St. Augustine's monastery at Canterbury. It is « das Buch Trotula » that Johannes Hartlieb claims to be rendering into German in the 1460s, and the authoress « Trotula » that Chaucer lists as one of the authorities in Jankyn's « book of wikked wyves » in his Canterbury Tales (The Wife of Bath's Prologue). And it is the alleged author « Trotula » who has exercised the talents of many modern commentators eager, alternately, to assert or deny her existence.

No modern edition of the Trotula 2 has ever been essayed, and aside . from the 1985 article of John F. Benton (to be discussed momentarily) no

attempt has yet been made to sort systematically through the textual tradition of the Latin treatises 3. Manuscripts have, of course, been cited by a variety of scholars, sometimes in the course of other work 4 • In 1906, the Chaucer scholar George L. Hamilton published a brief article which attempted to identify « Trotula » and speculate why Chaucer had included her name in Jankyn's « book of wikked wyves »; he cited six manuscripts as evidence for the variety of titles the text went under. Ten years later, the French philologist Paul Meyer noted both Latin and French manuscripts of the Trotula that he had come across in his researches. In his 1921 inaugural dissertation in Leipzig, Hermann Spitzner briefly noted nineteen Latin manuscripts, mostly from German collections; he also noted two medieval French translations. Manuscripts of the Trotula were also listed III the comprehensive handlists of scientific and medical manuscripts

2. I will henceforth use Trotula (in italics) as a title, « Trotula " (in quotation marks) in reference to the alleged author. See Section B.l.b below for my explanation.

3. For an analysis of the medico-theoretical content of the ISM and the DeM, see M. H. GREEN, The transmission of ancient theories of female physiology and disease through the early Middle Ages, Ph. D. dissertation, Princeton University, 1985, Chapter v. The discussion there is based on ms 87, a copy of the transitional ensemble.

4. H. P. BAYON, Trotula and the ladies of Salemo : a contribution to the krwwledge of the transition between ancient and medieval physick, in Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, t. 23, no. 2, June 1940, pp. 471-474, claimed there were more than two dozen manuscripts in British libraries not listed by Spitzner, but he did not provide any shelfmarks. In a later article, The masters of Salemo and the origins of professional medical practice, in Science, medicine and history : essays on the evolution of scientific thought and medical practice written in honour of Charles Singer, ed. E. ASHWORTH UNDERWOOD, Oxford, 1953, t. I, pp. 203-219, he cites from two Cambridge mss (mss 13 and 15 below). K. C. HURD­MEAD (Trotula, in Isis, t. 14, 1930, pp. 349-367), intending to supplement Spitzner's list, added two erroneous citations to mss in Paris, Bibliotheque nationale. These are not corrected in her later book, A history of women in medicine (Haddam, Conn., 1938; repr. New York, 1977). See the Appendix to my Handlist of Trotula mss for other erroneous citations.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA 121

compiled, respectively, by Dorothea Waley Singer in the 1910s and by Lynn Thorndike and Pearl Kibre in the middle decades of this century. Most recently, J. B. Post noted several previously uncited manuscripts in libraries in Oxford 5. In all, these citations identified some sixty copies of the Latin texts, plus another half dozen copies of medieval French and English translations. Editions of the medieval Dutch, Irish, and Italian translations plus the Latin verse rendition have appeared over the course of the last 150 years, but in the absence of any comprehensive study of the Latin source texts the editions of these derivative works have not added substantially to our knowledge of the Trotula's overall textual history6.

The biggest obstacle to an accurate understanding of the textual history of the Trotula, ironically, has been the Renaissance edition on which virtually all modern scholars have depended. Manuscript cataloguers have repeatedly noted that the texts in front of them corresponded imperfectly to that edited by Georg Kraut and printed by Johannes Schottus in 1544 (and subsequently reprinted twelve more times before the late eighteenth century) 7. Perhaps most astute in their observations were the cataloguers

5. C. L. HAMILTO'l, Trotula, in Modem Philology, t. 4, 1906, pp. 377·380; P. MEYER, Manuscrits medicaux enfrant;ais, in Romania, t. 44,1915.1917, pp. 161·214, at pp. 206.7; H. SPITZNER, Die salernitanische Gyniikologie und Geburtshilfe unter dem Namen der Trotula, inaugural Diss., Leipzig, 1921, at pp. 19·21; D. W. SINGER, HaTullist of western scientific manuscripts in Great Britain and Ireland dating from before the sixteenth century, manuscript fllecards deposited in the Manuscript Reader's Room, British Library, Box 31; L. THORN DIKE and P. KIBRE, Incipits of mediaeval scientific writings in Latin, 2nd ed., Cambridge, Mass., 1963, passim; and J. B. POST, Ages of menarche and menopause: some medieval authorities, in Population Studies, t. 25, 1971, pp. 83·87, at p. 85.

6. All the vernacular versions 'will be described in detail in Part 11 of my Handlist (see n. 1 above). The editors of the Boec van Medicinen (Dutl), Der Mannen ende Vrouwen Heimelijcheit (Dut2) and the Segrete cose delle donne (Itall) did not identify their texts as translations of the Trotula.

7. Experimentarius medicinae (Strasbourg, apud Joannem Schottum, 1544), containing Georg Kraut, ed., Trotulae curandarum Aegritudinum Muliebrium, ante, in & post partum liber unicus, nusquam antea editus. Quo foeminei sexus accidentes morbi & passiones. Infantum & puerorum d partu cura, N~tricis delectu, ac reliqua ijsce adnata. Dispositiones utriusque Sexui contingentes. Experimenta deniqui uariarum Aegritudinum : cum quibusdam medicamentis decorationi Corporis inseruientia, edocentur, pp. 3·35. Subsequent editions were as follows: (2) Paulus Manutius, ed., Medici antiqui omnes qui latinis litteris diversorum morborum genera & remedia persecuti sunt, undique conquisiti, & uno uolumine comprehensi, ut eorum qui se medicinae studio dediderunt commodo consulatur (Venice, Aldus, 1547), f. 71 rO·80 vo. (3) Benedetto Vettori (or Benedictus Victorius), Exhortatio ad medicum recte sancteque medicari cupientem; ejusdem medicatio empirica singulorum morborum; ejusdem doctrinalis empirica de febribus. Rationalis methodus atque compendiosa ad omnes fere morbos curandos internarum partium humani corporis per Camillum 11wmasium. Trotulae antiquissimi auctoris; curandarum aegritudinum muliebrium ante, in, et post partum., liber unicus nuperrime opera liberorum Aldi Manuti in.lucem editus (Paris, J. Foucherius, 1550);

122 MONICA H. GREEN

of the Royal collection at the British Library, who observed in 1921 that the printed edition seemed to have conflated what they believed were two separate texts (two texts.of, they speculated further, differing authorship); not only that, but even the extant manuscripts differed radically from one another 8. Yet these discrepancies, as glaring as they were, have usually been passed over by modern commentators who have chosen to debate the alleged author's identity and gender (still assuming a single author) rather than concern themselves with the contents or development of the texts 9.

(4) repr. (Paris, J. Foucherius, 1551). (5) Second edition (Venice, Vincent Valgrisius, 1554); (6) repr. (Venice, Vincent Valgrisius, 1555). (7) Third edition (Venice, Vincent Valgrisius, 1565). The same collection was also published twice in Lyons: by (8) Sebastianus de Honoratis, 1558; and by (9) Simphorianus Beraud, 1572. (10) Caspar Wolf (also known as Hans Kaspar Wolf), ed., Gynaeciorum, !wc est de Mulierum tum aliis, tum gravidarum, parientium et puerperarum affeciibus et morbis libri veterum ac recentiorem aliquot, partim nunc primum editi, partim multo quam ante castigatiores ... (Basel, Thomas Guarinus, 1566), contains Trotulae Muliebrum liber, coIl. 215-310. (ll) Republished with additions and corrections in 2nd edition: Gynaeciorum, sive de Mulierum affectiblis commentarii Graeco­rum, Latinorum, Barbarorum, jam olim et nunc recens editorum, 2 vols. (Basel, C. Waldkirch, 1586-88), I : 89-127 (this is according to the pagination as printed; the first two texts in the collection were not paginated). (12) Israel Spach, ed. Gynaeciorum sive de Mulierum tum communibus, tum gravidarum, parientium et puerperarum affectibus et morbis libri Graeco­rum, Arabum, Latinorum veterum et recentium quotquot extant, partim nunc primum editi, partim vero denuo recogniti, emendati (Strasbourg, Lazarus Zetzner, 1597), pp. 42-60. (13) Trotulae curandarum aegritudinum muliebrium, ante, in, et post partum libellus e recen­sione Aldi emendationibus atque animadversionibus illustratus accessere Henrici Kormanni quaestiones de virginum statu ac iure observationibus auctae (Leipzig, Johann Gabriel Bueschell, 1778).

The four modern translatio'ns are all based on Kraut's text: E. MASON-HoHL (trans.), The diseases of women by Trotula of Salemo : a translation of « Passionibus mulierum curan­dorum ", Hollywood, California, 1940, English translation based on the 1547 Aldine (Venice) edition; C. MANCINI (trans.), Il De mulierum passionibus di Trocta salemitana, Scientia Vete­rum 31, Genova, 1962, Italian translation, year of edition unspecified (Mancini only says that it is a copy from the Biblioteca Canevari); P. CAVALLO BOGGI (ed.), M. NUBIE and A. Tocco (transs.), Trotula de Ruggiero : Sulle malatie delle donne, Turin, 1979, Italian translation based on the 1547 Aldine (Venice) edition; and most recently, Trotula de Ruggiero : Sulle malattie delle donne, ed. P. BOGGI CAVALLO; critical text, translation and glossary by P. CANTALUPO, Palermu. 1994, a revised Italian translation again based on the 1547 Venice edition though here with a very small sampling of variants from mss 66 (an incomplete copy of the standardized ensemble) and 115 (a copy of the proto-ensemble).

8. G. F. WARNER and J. P. GILSON, Catalogue of west em manuscripts in the Old Royal and King's collections, t. 11, London, 1921, pp. 13-15, 51, and 54-55 describing mss 36, 37 and 38. Warner and Gilson distinguished only between the LSM (which they referred to as Trotula de passionibus mulierum) and the DCM (Trotula minor). Regarding authorship, they noted (p. 14) « the writer of the first tract seems to speak as a man, says he compiles from Hippocrates, Galen and Cleopatra, and quotes Cophon [sic] among others. References to the practice of Trotula and the 'mulieres Salernitanae' are confined to the second tract ».

9. For summaries of debates about the, « Trotula Question », see S. M. STUARD, Dame Trot, in Signs: Journal of women in culture and society, t. I, 1975, pp. 537-42;

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA 123

A breakthrough in our understanding of the Trotula came in 1985 when John F. Benton published an article recounting his initial findings from a survey of the Trotula manuscripts 10. The reason why the Renaissance edition by Georg Kraut bore such an inexact relationship to the material that had circulated for four centuries in manuscript, Benton argued, was that far from being the unifie4, fairly orderly text that Kraut presented, the Trotula was in medieval manuscripts a much more messy affair. Indeed, it was not one text but three: one solely on gynecology and obstetrics (which Benton referred to by its incipit, Cum auctor); another also on women's diseases but encompassing cosmetics and other matters as well (which he again referred to by its incipit, Ut de curis); and.a third strictly on cosmetics (which he called De omatu). The three texts, very much dissimilar from one another in style and content, originally circulated independently. They were linked together around the turn of the thirteenth century, however, and in this rather awkward and at points redundant assemblage circulated widely throughout medieval Europe. Georg Kraut further compounded the confu­sion in 1544 when he rearranged and compressed all the material into sixty­one discreet chapters, thus obscuring any last indications that the Trotula had once been three completely distinct texts 11 •

. The present study, a prolegomenon to critical editions, builds on Benton's findings 12. At the core of my analysis is the rich body of evidence found in the extant manuscripts, whose numbers have grown substantially upon intensive investigation: 122 Latin manuscripts (comprising a total of 142 copies of the texts), plus fifty-five copies of twenty-five different verna­cular translations and Latin verse and prose renditions 13. These show that the Latin texts existed in fifteen distinct versions, with the various vernacu­lar translations branching off from this « tree » at differing stages.

and J. F. BENTON, Trotula, Women's problems, and the proJessionalization of medicine in the Middle Ages, in Bulletin of the history of medicine, t. 59, 1985, 30-53.

10. BENTON, art. Clt. 11. Using a copy of the standardized ensemble as his base, Kraut rearranged the text

beginning with menstrual.disorders and ending with a single long chapter on cosmetics. (In my concordances of the several versions of the Trotula texts (Tables I-Ill), I have noted the location of the material in Kraut's edition immediately after the paragraph incipit.) Several medieval editors had likewise attempted ordered syntheses of the Trotula : ms 73 and its apograph, ms 79, which is based on the transitional ensemble (see Section B.2 below); and mss 61 and 68, which are both based on the standardized ensemble (Section B.5).

12. An edition of the standardized ense~ble will appear in M. H. GREEN, 'The diseases of women according to Tro tula , : a medieval compendium of women s medicine (forthcoming). Critical editions of the independent TEM, LSM, DCM and DOM are in progress.

13. In addition to these, I have found over a dozen references to lost manuscripts in medieval catalogues; inve~tories, wills, etc. A list of these other citations will appear in M. H. GREEN, Women and literate medicine in medieval Europe: Trota and the 'Trotula' (Canlbridge University Press, forthcoming).

124 MONICA H. GREEN

I shall outline fIrst, in Section A, the development of the three indepen­dent Salernitan texts on women's medicine: the Liber de sintlwmatibus mulie­mm (hereafter, LSM) and its Urtext, the Tractatus de egritudinibus mulie­mm (TEM); the De cum muliemm (DCM); and the De omatu muliemm (DOM). I will then, in Section B, sketch out the development of what I shall call the Trotula ensemble, that is, the assemblage of all three texts into a single compendium. This ensemble went through its own manifold pro­cesses of development, being extant now in six distinct versions (what I shall call the « proto- ", « meretrices group ", « transitional ", « intermediate »,

« revised », and « standardized » ensembles). Manuscripts of each version share common features : the presence or absence of a given recipe or passage, the same peculiar reading or arrangement of material. The concordances in Tables I-Ill layout the major shared features of all the Latin versions, while Figure 1 shows diagrammatically their overall genealogical relations. Finally, in Section C, I briefly describe the medieval vernacular translations and Latin re-writings in relation to the Latin tradition. Detailed descriptions of all known Latin and vernacular manuscripts are being published separately 14.

While critical editions will be necessary to pinpoint the exact familial relationships between the extant manuscripts, recognition of the Trotula's many distinct forms even now helps solve the principal puzzle faced by modern cataloguers. The texts were indeed quite malleable, showing a series of medieval editors at work combining, altering and adding to the texts as they saw fIt. Knowledge of the mouvance of the texts also helps us explain the question of attribution, a conundrum which has dogged scholars for over four hundred years (Section B.l.b below).

A few general comments about the Latin texts are in order. Although the lines of textual development are generally quite clear, there is still a great deal of uncertainty about the specifIc historical circumstances of the many redactions of the Trotula. None of the texts have colophons indicating date or locus of redaction 15. As I argue below, moreover, the authors are all unknown (Section B.l.b). No manuscripts save perhaps ms 32 (a prototype of the revised ensemble from the second quarter of the thirteenth century) are contemporary with the probable dates of composition nor, with but few exceptions, do any come from the presumed locus of original composition, southern Italy 16. Thus, all the versions can be dated only relation ally : the

14. See n. 1 above. 15. See, however, my discussion of the Hebrew translation of LSM 3 in Handlist; this

rendition may date from 1197-99, which would not only make it the earliest translation but would also provide a precise terminus ante quem for the redaction of LSM 3.

16. Extant mss from Italy are 3, 4, 5, 24, 30, 63; 80, 86, 93, 94,98, 106, 107,

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROrULA 125

translations from Arabic into Latin by Constantinus Mricanus (d. <ante 1098-99) form the tenninus post quem for the TEM/LSM and the DOM, while the assumed floruits ofthe Salernitan masters Matthaeus and Johannes Fer­rarius and Copho, who are cited within the DCM, provide a terminus for that text. An end date for the development of the whole ensemble tradition is <provided by the earliest manuscripts of the latest form, that is, the standardized ensemble which is founq in copies from the mid-thirteenth century. From the composition of the earliest forms of the independent texts, therefore, to the redaction of the latest version of the ensemble there must have been a space of some 100 to 150 years.

Even less certain is the geographic origin of the various versions. The texts have always been associated with the southern Italian port town of Salerno, site of the most important medical center in twelfth-century Europe. While this association remains plausible, it must be admitted that none of the texts gives certain evidence of it. Even the DCM, which cites several Salernitan practitioners, has features that complicate a determination of origin. Wherever they originated, almost all the versions of the Trotula enjoyed a pan-European circulation, both in Latin and in vernacular dress. Already by the early thirteenth century copies of the independent texts are found in Spain, Germany, France and England, and they very quickly eclipsed most of their early medieval predecessors 17. As for the locus of the various redactions of the ensemble, that, too, is uncertain. The earliest copies of the proto-ensemble come from France and perhaps England (mss 38 and 42). The intermediate ensemble is distinctive in having as many Italian copies

109 and 113. Of these, only mss 63 and 86 seem to be of southern Italian origin, and both of these are copies of the relatively late intermediate ensemble.

17. The gynecological works written prior to the twelfth century included the Gynaecia of Caelius Aurelianus, Muscio, and pseudo-Cleopatra. Although these can in fact be found with the Trotula in some mss (mss 14,16,31,64,65,72,73,79,87,93,113 and 122), their influence waned considerably from the thirteenth century on. On Caelius Aurelianus and Muscio, see A. E. HANSON and M. H. GREEN, Soranus of Ephesils : methodicorum princeps, in W. HAASE and H. TEMPORINI, general editors, Aufstieg und Niedergang der romischen Welt, Teilband n, Band 37. 2, Berlin-New York, 1994, pp. 968-1075. The Gynaecia Cleopatrae has never been edited (the so-called Hamwniae g,naeciorum (published in several editions of the large gynecological collection entitled Gynaeciorum libri, Base!, 1566; Basel, 1586-88; and Strasbourg, 1597) has only excerpts, many of which are erroneously labelled); see M. H. GREEN, The De genecia attributed to Constantine the African, in Speculum, t. 62, 1987, pp. 299-323. For very different reasons, beginning in the early fourteenth century the Trotula also frequently circulated in Germanic-speaking areas with pseudo-Albertus Maguus, Secreta mulienun,' a speculative natural-philosophical tract pn «woman's nature »; written in Germany probably in the late thirteenth century: mss 5,22, 26, 29, 58, 61, 82, 88 (fragment), 114, and 121. For an overview of medieval gynecologi­calliterature, see M. H. GREE~, Recent work on women's medicine in medieval Europe, in Society for ancient medicine review, no. 21, 1993, pp. 132-141:

ca. 1070-1080 Constantine translates Viaticum

uoo

ante 1187 Liber ad

Almansorem trans. in Spain

1200

mid-13th cent.

1500

DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA

~Tr~ta~ Practica secundum Trotam : Salernitan compendium

: De egritudinum curatione TEM

1 I I

'it LSM 1 ~CM 1 ~D,?M 1

1 / 1 DOM 2 ,'/

T2~M3~ DT2a//// ~i,to-elnsemble ,,//

meretrices group ~ 1/

transitional ensemble

Group Lt___ 1 intermediate ~ ---~Group B

ense~ 1 / ~ revised .

ensemble

1 standardized ensemble

1 1544 editio princeps

by Georg Kraut

DOM3

Key TEM = Tractatus de egritudinibus mulierum LSM = Liber de sinthomatibus mulierum DCM = De curis mulierum DOM = De omatu mulierum

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA 127

as it does, though in this case, too, the earliest extant copy comes from northern Europe (ms 12). England in particular seems always to have favored the texts; nearly one-third of the extant Latin copies come from there, while the Anglo-Norman and Middle English translations give further witness to the texts' insular popularity 18. Only in Spain do the texts seem to have had little influence, though whether that is due simply to the vagaries of manuscript survival is unclear 19.

A. THE INDEPENDENT TEXTS

1. The TEM and LSM

a. Tractatus de egritudinibus mulierum (TEM) (2 copies)

title 20 : Hic incipit tractatus de egritudinibus mulierum.

incipit : Quoniam femine non habent tantum calorem ...

explicit : ... synistram mamillam habet grossiorem et hec de elS sufficiant.

mss : 41, 87; cf. Fren1 and LPi

The text that was to become the Liber de sintlwmatibus mulierum and, ultimately, the most well-known part of the Trotula ensemble, existed first in a much more simplified form - apparently a rough draft. This Urtext, the Tractatus de egritudinibus mulierum, is a humble, straight­forward work. Citing as its authorities Galen, Hippocrates, Dioscorides, Justus, Paul and Constantinus 21 , the TEM is itself anonymous in all four

18. Thirty-seven Latin mss were defInitely composed in England, with another fIve either in England or northern France. A further six, possibly nine copies of Continental origin migrated to England prior to 1600.

19. With the possible exception of ms 54, which is of indeterminate southern European origin, there is only one extant Latin ms of Iberian origin; and this may come from Catalonia (ms 2). (Mss 106 and 107, thpugh now housed in Seville, are both of Italian origin.) The only references I have thus far found to lost mss in Spain come from Catalonia and Majorca: one that belonged to Bernat Serra (d. June 1338), surgeon to Jaume 1I and Alfons Ill, kings of the Crown of Aragon (my thanks to Michael McVaugh for bringing this to my attention); and the other to Joan Galceran, a tailor and surgeon in the Majorcan town of Sineu who died in 1544 (J. N. HILLGARTH, Readers and books in Majorca, 1229-1550, Paris, 1991, item.873). The only known vernacular translation from the Iberian peninsula is in Catalan (Catl). .

20. Becau~e of their historical importance, I cite all variants of titles, colophons and other rubrics in order· to highlight variations in attribution and entitling. The incipits and explicits of the texts themselves present only the most common forms.

21. The references to Galen and Paul and several to Hippocrates and Dioscorides merely replicate citations in the Viaticum.

128 MONICA H. GREEN

extant witnesses 22. It covers menstrual disorders, displacements of the womb, other uterine conditions, infertility, contraceptives, regimens for pregnancy, and difficulties of birth (cf. Table I, 'if 3-114). It is a bookish production, drawn primarily from the Viaticum of Constantinus Africanus (d. ante 1098-99), a monk at Monte Cassino 23. The Viaticum is a transla­tion from the Arabic of the Zad al-musafir wa-qut al-o/iqir (<< Provision for the Traveller and Sustenance for the Settled ») by Abu Ja'far A~mad b. Ibrahim b. Abi Khalid al-Jazzar (d. 979 AD). In Latin dress the Via­ticum was to become one of the most influential compendia of Arabic medi­cine in the medieval universities. The TEM draws on Book VI of the Viati­cum, which had discussed diseases of the reproductive organs and the joints 24. The author of the TEM has simplified many of the more technical explanations of the Viaticum, using an informal vocabulary that perhaps reflec­ted vernacular usages 25. In some instances, these usages seem to have induced the author to reread the text ofthe Viaticum in quite a novel way. For example, the Viaticum had drawn an analogy between the menses (which in medieval medicine were always interpreted as a purgation) and the resin which often exudes from trees 26• Calling the menses « women's flower» (flos), the TEM drew quite a different parallel between women's purgation and trees: the purgation is called « women's flower ... because just as trees before they have flowered do not bear fruit, so women before the time of this purgation do not conceive » 27.

What is perhaps most interesting about the TEM is its juxtaposition of the new, heavily theoretical Arabic medicine with some of the most traditio­nal, theory-less material to circulate in early medieval Europe. In the chapters on menstrual disorders, conception, fertility, contraceptives, and childbirth, the TEM author drew recipes from a hodge-podge of material

22. The running head of ms 87, f. 96 vO·97 r O, Experimentum Hugonis, refers to the preceding text, [ExcerptaJ de libro magistri Hugonis de Plazentia, f. 95 rOa-97 rOb.

23. Most recently on Constantinus, see Constantine the African and 'Ali ibn al-'Abbiis al-MaiUsi : The 'Pantegni' and Related Texts, ed. C. BUlt"iEIT and D. JACQUART, Leiden, 1994.

24. For analyses of Viaticum, Book VI, see GREEN, Transmission, chapter v; and G. Bos, Ibn al-Jazzar on women's diseases and their treatment, in Medical history, t. 37, 1993, pp. 296-312.

25. See ri. 37 below. 26. Vzaticum 6 : 9 (as printed in Opera omnia Ysaac, Lyons, 1515, pars 2, f. 164 vOb) :

« multos humores ... cum menstnris exeunt sicut in arboribus sepe uidemus quarum humores cum gummis egrediuntur. » I have compared the 1515 edition against an early ms of the Viaticum, Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Laud. misc. 567 (s. xii I, England) and find that they are in general agreement.

27. TEM:« qui [sc. this purgation] ideo flos earum dicitur, quia sicut arbores ante quam florescant non faciunt fructum nec femine ante tempus purgamenti Hlius concipiunt. "

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA· 129

that circulated, in various forms, under such titles as De causis feminamm (<< On the conditions of women ») or Liber de muliebria (sic) (<< Book on Womanly Matters ») 28. Devoid of symptomatology, etiology, and differen­tial diagnoses, these texts merely name the condition and offer instructions for preparation of a remedy. The TEMs employment of these differing sources leads to the unevenness. of the text: whereas sections drawn from the Viati­cum had offered more extended discussions of symptoms and causes, sec­tions drawn from the early Latin receptaries merely offer strings of one brief recipe after another. Although the final product may not strike us as parti­cularly sophisticated, the TEM is nonetheless a very careful, reasoned first attempt to creatively synthesize (and not merely reiterate) the best that this author felt the Latin and Arabic traditions had to offer.

The TEM cannot predate Constantinus Africanus's Viaticum (pro­bably translated in the 1070s or 1080s), though what its terminus ante quem is remains to be determined. Likewise, its alleged Salernitan origin remains to be confirmed as there is no explicit statement in the text to support it. The author mentions a remedy made for the queen of the Franks ('If 25 : Item quod regine Francomm factum est), but says nothing about how this information came to himlher. This reference may, in fact, be a rhetorical embellishment as the recipe itself is simply derived from the Viaticum 29• The principal sources used are similarly of no help in confIr­ming Salernitan origin. Constantine the Mrican had made his translations from the Arabic at the Benedictine monastery of Monte Cassino, not far from Salerno, and his works provided the principal stimulus to the new theore­tical developments that were to distinguish twelfth-century Salernitan medicine. Still, his works were widely circulating throughout Europe at least by the mid-twelfth century, principally via their dissemination among Bene­dictine houses; already in the fIrst half of the century, gynecological selec­tions from both his Pantegni (a translation of the medical encyclopedia of 'Ali ibn al-'Abbiis al-Majusi) and the Viaticum were circulating indepen­dently 30. Like~ise, the only other source consistently used, some version

28. Versions o(these texts have been edited by F. P. ECERT. Gyniikologische Fragmente aus dem friihen Mittelalter nach einer Petersburger Handschrift aus dem VIII.·IX. }ahrhundert, Abhandlungen zur Geschichte der Medizin und der Naturwissenschaften. Heft 11. Berlin. 1936.

29. TEM'If 25 : « Item quod regine Francorum factum est. » LSM1 : « Item quidam medicus fecit regine Francorum ... » In the standardized ensemble. regine has been corrup­ted into inregione. In an English translation made probably in the later fourteenth century (Erig1). the medicus is transformed into « a Jew».

30. Florence Eliza Glaze is engaged on a study of the twelfth-century dissemination of Constantiniana in Benedictine communities; I thank her for sharing her preliminary fmdings with me. On the independent circulation of the description of the genitalia from the Pante­gni. see GREEN. ·The De genecia attributed to Constantine the African. art. cit. Paris, Biblio-

9

130 MONICA H. GREEN

of the Liber de muliebria, is known to have been available north of the Alps· from at least the turn of the ninth century31. Somewhat surprising, if a Salernitan origin is to be maintained, is the author's apparent ignorance of the wider body of early medieval gynecologicalliterature which was surely available in southern Italy at the time. There is no trace here of the G}naecia of Caelius Aurelianus or Theodorus Priscianus or that attributed to Cleopatra; the only parallel I have been able to discover between the LSM and the G}naecia of Muscio (which was probably available at Monte Cassino itself and which had been adapted into two new texts before the twelfth century) is the passing statement that the parturient woman should not be looked at by her attendants, lest she become ashamed 32.

The TEM is now extant in its original form in only two manuscripts, one of them fragmentary. In both cases it is found with other Trotula texts: with DCM 2 in ms 41, and with the transitional ensemble and several presalerni­tan gynecological texts in ms 87. Its transmission is similar to that of the independent LSM and DCM in that it appears only in a French and an English copy. Its circulation in these two areas is further confIrmed by two adapta­tions: Frenl, which dates from the first half of the thirteenth century if not earlier; and LP1, a LatinlEnglish prose reworking of the text made in England, probably in the fifteenth century.

b. LSM 1 (2 copies)

- title: Trotula maior de passionibus mulierum, causis et curis earum­dem sequitur tractatus, et primo prohemium (ms 67); Incipit Trotula de infir­matibus mulierum (ms 77)

- incipit: Cum auctor uniuersitatis deus in prima mundi constitutione ...

- explicit : ... et habet sinistram mamillam grossiorem.

Followed by two additional recipes: ('If 114a) Ad eductionem fetus ... ,

theque nationale, lat. 7029, an Italian ms from the early twelfth century, situates the gyne· cological chapters of the Viaticum next to elements of the Articella and an adaptation made from Muscio's Gynaecia, the De passionibus mulierum B.

31. The two earliest mss of these texts (indeed, the earliest of any early medieval Latin gynecological texts) are Glasgow, Glasgow University Library, MS Hunter 96 (T.4.13), s. viiilix, with Omnes infirmitates mulierum, De muliebria, and Curas ad causa mulierum; and Petro­grad, Publicnaja Biblioteka im. M.E. Saltykova-Scedrina, MS lat. F.v.VI.3, s. viii/ix, with De conceptu (i.e., the beginning of the Hippocratic De morbis mulierum I), De diuersis causis mulierum, Liber de causis jeminarum, Liber de muliebria causa, Liber de muliebria, and an excerpt from Vindicianus' s· so-called Gynaecia.

32. TEM (9f 92), .. Ad latus eius sint obstetrices, nee aspiciant uultum eius quia sepe pudor nocet. » Cf. Muscio, Gynaecia, ed. Valentin ROSE, Sorani Gynaeciorum uetus transla­tio latina, Leipzig, 1882, p. 23, ll. 11-12 : « [obstetrix) faciem suam retrorsus avertat, ne pariens verecundia se concludat. »

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROrULA 131

('If 114b) Ad matricem constringendam ... et mutabis bis uel ter in die. Optimum est.

- mss: 67, 77.

It was perhaps the original author of the TEM who later went back to the TEM and reworked it, sometimes quite drastically. into the ftrst redaction of the LSM33. Fitst the author added the remarkable prologue ('If 1-2) which describes the nature of the sexes in terms reminiscent of Genesis and explains why women are especially subject to diseases of the reproductive organs. Here the author recounted, with little modesty, how for the sake of women slhe « sweated with considerable labor » to extract the more useful portions of the books of Hippocrates, Galen and Constan­tine 34. The list of authorities is inexact, but the author clearly did labor assiduously in revising the text.

The whole text was rewritten, sometimes contracted but more often expanded 35. Some chapters were signillcantly amplified by the addition of new recipes or the elaboration of old ones. Whereas the TEM, for example, had simply prescribed as a contraceptive that as many grains of barley be put into the woman's afterbirth as the number of years she wished to remain infertile, the LSM specilled that this remedy (with caper spurge substituted for barley) was for women who had already been badly tom in childbirth and feared another pregnancy; the author also went back to hislher original source to add the additional hint that « if she wishes to remain infertile forever, let her put a whole handful of grains» 36.

Attempts to raise the level of sophistication of the text are apparent throughout the revision. The vocabulary was systematically changed, often reverting back to the original usages of Constantine' s Viaticum 37. Most

33. Despite the thorough overhaul of the vocabulary, my sense is that this revision was done by the original author, for slhe has clearly gone back. to the same original texts (the Viaticum and the early medieval recipe collections) - and no others - for fuller readings and additional information. At the very least, .this redactor's fidelity to the original text suggests a close association with the original author.

34. LSM 1 : «Vt ergo ex libris Ypocratis, Galieni, Constantini pociora decerperem labore non minimo mulierum gratia desudaui. »

35. LSM 1 adds only eleven brief recipes to the original TEM ('If 18, 24, 78, 95, 96, 97, 99, 100, llO, ll4a and ll4 b) while suppressing two others ('If 78c, a fertility enhancer employing powder of small hare, and'lf 86a, a contraceptive employing cabbage stalk). Nevertheless, its text reflects a 20 % increase in total length. See the concordance in Table I.

36. TEM ('If 87) : « Item mittat. in lecto tot grana ordei quod (sic) annis concipere noluerit. ,. LSM 1.: « Item si aliqua mulier lesa est in partu et pre timore partus non uult amplius concipere, ponaf in secundina sua tot grana catapucie quot annos uult permanere sterilis. Et si inperpetuum, penat grana plena manu. »

37. These include the following substitutions: menstrua (LSM) for flores (TEM), uulua

132 MONICA H. GREEN

striking is the thorough substitution of menstrua for flares; the latter is now dismissed as a common, vernacular term used by women 38. The « common» term is also given for some otherwise unspecified organs near the heart and lungs called the comelieis, a term that was consistently to confuse scribes throughout the later history of the texts 39. Theoretical explanations, such as the theory of sex difference espoused in the prologue, were also added. Occasionally, the sense changed considerably. For example, whereas the TEM had explained that « This purgation [menstrua­tion] first occurs at the time when pollution happens to males », thus stressing the temporal coincidence of sexual maturity in boys and girls 40, the LSM stressed the qualitative and functional similarity of the two purga­tions : « In this manner the purgation happens to women just as at night by the force of nature pollution occurs in men. For always nature is burdened by certain humors, either in the man or the female; it strives to take off its yoke and it lays aside its burden »41. Even the magic was revised : a simple religious charm for aiding difficult labor was replaced with a more sophisticated palindromic formula drawn from an ancient and widely-diffused magical tradition 42.

for natura, item for rursus, purgatio for purgamentum, errwrroidas for jicus, arthemisia for mater herbarum, uir for mas, mulier for femina, manus for pugnus (when used as a measure), secundina for lectus, vulnera for plaga.

38. LSM 1 ('I 3) : « menstrua, uidelicet que uulgo apud eas flores appellantur. »

39. LSM 1 ('If 47) : « Ex huiusmodi semine.superhabundante et corrupto quedam frigida fumositas dissoluitur et ascendit ad quasdam partes que uulgo dicuntur cornelieis, que quia uicine sunt pulmoni et cordi et ceteris instrumentis uocis, inde contigit fieri impedi. mentum loquele. » Compare this with the original reading in the TEM: « de hoc autem semine ita habundanti et corrumpi ascendit fumus ad pennas pulmonis in una parte iunctas cordi et in alia uicinas matrici tangit etiam cetera instrumenta ad uocem pertinencia unde loque­lam amittit. " Forms that the word later took on include in the proto-ensemble, coriles, canales, comelles, comiles, and cotilidones; in the transitional ensemble, conilles, comiles, conlidones, comealles, and comelliers; in the intermediate ensemble, coralles, thorales, canat, canales, and comelles; in the revised ensemble, collaterales, colatales, corrales, and carenes. The term stabilized as collaterales in the standardized ensemble.

40. TEM ('If 3) : « Hoc autem purgamentum eis primum contingit temporibus quibus maribus accidit pollucio. » The same emphasis on temporal coincidence is found in Viaticum 6:~ .

41. LSM 1 ('If 3) : « Huiusmodi purgatio contingit mulieribus, sicut uiris de nocte ui nature accidit pollutio. Semper enim natura ab a1iquibus grauatur humoribus, siue in uiro, siue in femina; iugum suum nititur deponere et exuit laborem. »

42. TEM ('If 98) : « hoc carmen in pergameno de uitello scribatur et ligetur ad uen­trem : • + Sancta maria peperit et mater ilia non doluit. Christum genuit qui nos de suo san­guine redemit. Amen.' " LSM 1 : « scribantur hee dictiones : ·sator. arepo. tenet. opera. rotas' in easeo uel in alio cilio, et dentur ad comendendum. " As the text matured in the ensemble the formula became increasingly garbled. On the Sator Arepo, see E. DARMSfAED.

TER, Die Sator-Arepo-Formel und ihre Erkliirung: in Isis, t. 18, 1932, pp. 322-329; and

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA 133

Only two copies of the Latin LSM 1 are extant; both are relatively late (early fourteenth- and mid-fllteenth-century, respectively) and both were produced in England. In one instance (ms 77) the text appears with DOM 3; in the other (ms 67) with both DCM 2 and DOM 243. The earliest French translation (Fren2), however, gives witness to the text's transalpine circulation at least from the first half of the thirteenth century.

c. LSM 2 (2 copies)

- title: [none]

- incipit: Cum auctor uniuersitatis deus in.prima mundi constitutione (43 origine) ...

- explicit: ... Item in uentre yrundinis primogeniti inuenitur lapis cuius lotura omni ualet. Accipe medianum corticem caprifici ... et temperata cum uino propinetur super omnia ualet in hoc casu. Valent etiam alia plurima. Et hec de sinthomatibus mulierum dicta sufficiant.

- mss : 43, 44 At the third stage of redaction of the TEMILSM, probably a different

editor went back to make several minor revisions to the text, such as changing the name of Constantine in the prologue's list of authorities to « Cleopatra» - a reference to the infamous queen of Egypt to whom a widely circulating Latin gynecological text was attributed, in the early Middle Ages 44. This editor also rearranged small sections of the text and returned, at the close of the treatise, to a topic glossed over in earlier drafts, concer­ned as they were with path~logical conditions only : « It remains to explain how the woman ought to be assisted before and during birth» (Restat dicere qualiter subueniendum mulieri ante partum et in partu). The following two new sections (err 115-122 d) then offer brief descriptions of procedures and effective remedies for normal births. It is in this version that the epithet de sinthomatibus mulierum dicta first appears (here; in the colophon). The text is anonymous in both extant copies 45.

As with LSM 1, the circulation of LSM 2 was very limited. It is extant now in only two copies; one (ms 44) coming perhaps from southern France from the second quarter of the thirteenth century, the other (ms 43) from the later fourteenth century, probably also from France and apparently with some cross-contamination from some version of the ensemble. In both

R. BADER,SatorArepo : Magik in der Volksmedizin, in Medizinhistorisches Journal, t. 22, 1987, pp. 115-134,

43. On this latter ins, see Section 8.6 below. 44. On the 0naecia Cleopatrae, see n, 17 above. 45. The title Liber "Trotile minoris at head of ms 44 was added by a later hand.

134 MONICA H. GREEN

instances it is found with DCM 2, though in ms 43 there is oruy on~ very brief excerpt. LSM 2 seems to have been used for none of the known vernacular versions. It was, however, used by the compiler of the proto­ensemble (see Section B.l below) to fill in certain gaps in LSM 3, which served as the base text for the first version of the Trotula ensemble.·

d. LSM 3 (6 copies)

- title: none (2, 59, 121); Incipit liber de sinthomatibus mulie­rum (23, 93); Nota aliqua de Trotulis mulierum et utiliora excerpta ab eisdem (117)

- incipit: Cum auctor uniuersitatis deus in prima mundi constitutione ...

- explicit (en- 122 + 122 c) : ... Item in uentre yrundinis primogeniti inuenitur lapis cuius lotura omni ualet. Valent etiam alia plurima. Et hec de sinthomatibus mulierum dicta suffIciant. (ms 121 adds: Explicit Trotula minor) 46

- mss : 2, 23, 59, 93, 117, 121

LSM 3 is an abbreviated version of LSM 2 with slight rearrangements of text. The only substantive embellishment of theory is the addition of the phrase cuius nutnmento postmodum ubera propinaret at the end of the first paragraph, which describes how the seed is received into the womb. More interestingly, this version has been expurgated: the chapters on contracep­tives and the development of the fetus (en- 83-88) were suppressed.

LSM 3 bears no attribution ,in four of its six extant copies (mss 2, 23, 59 47 , 93), three of which are, signifIcantly, the earliest copies of the LSM extant. The rubric « Trotula » appears in the two fifteenth-century manuscripts (mss 117, 121), in one case used as a title, in the other as an author's name.

The text is found with DOM 3 in three manuscripts (mss 23, 59,93); in a fourth early manuscript (ms 2) the text is found alone, though because this copy of the LSM, which appears at the end of the codex, was never completed we cannot know whether the DOM was meant to be included as well. LSM 3 is found with both DCM 2 and DOM 2 in ms 121, a fIfteenth­century attempt to reconstruct the ensemble (see Section B.6 below).

LSM 3 quickly circulated throughout western Europe. Mss 2, 23, 93 come from the early thirteenth century or perhaps even the late twelfth; the « latest» version of the LSM is thus the earliest witnessed in the extant manuscripts. These come, respectively, from Spain, France, and possibly Italy. The three other manuscripts were copied in Germany or eastern Europe

46. Ms 121 is virtually unique in referring to the LSM as Trotula mirwr. See n. 106 below. 47. The heading« Incipit trotula" in the margin of f. 57 r O was added by a later hand.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTVLA 135

(mss 59, 117, and 121), and date from the fIrst half of the fourteenth to the middle of the fIfteenth century. LSM 3 served as the basis for what may have been the earliest translation out of Latin, a Hebrew version (which may date from 1197-99) now extant in a single fragmentary manuscript (Hebl).

2. The De cuns muli~TUm (DCM)

a. DCM 1 (2 copies)

- title : none

- incipit : Ut de cura mulierum nobis compendiosa fIat traditio, uidendum est que calide, que frigide fuerint mulieres, ad quod tale facimus experimentum '"

- err 151 (anecdote) : Vnde contingit quod cum quedam puella propter huiusmodi infirmitatem deberet incidi, uocata fuit Trota quasi magistra et admirata fuit quam plurimum ...

- explicit: ... mollillcat et maturat. Probata hec omnia hic notata teste Trota. Explicit.

- mss : 40 (excerpts only), 72

Like the LSM, the DCM probably derived from some earlier Ur-version although in this case the process of its formation is less clear. (See Section B.l.b below.) The text as it has come down to us is thoroughly different in character from the LSM. All the same topics of menstrual disorders, infertility, etc. are covered, but these are only part of the broad range of gynecological disease entities identifted. From the care of widows and nuns who suffer from sexual continence to ano-vaginal fIstulas resulting from childbirth, from « wind» trapped in the womb to lesions of the breasts, the DCM suggests a wealth of practical knowledge accumulated through hard experience. Moreover, while the LSM defIned « the care of women» strictly around reproductive disorders, the DCM takes a more encompassing perspective, incorporating recipes for cosmetics and treatments for derma­tological and pediatric conditions, even including urogenital disorders, some of which afflict women and men equally (e. g., kidney stones and anal prolapse), some of which are unique to men (e. g., swelling of the testicles). Whereas the LSM had more or less followed the topical order of the Viaticum chapters on women's diseases 48, the DCM is quite chaotic, jumping from remedies for sunburn to urinary incontinence, from hair lice

48. The logic of the ordering (menstruation and menstrual abnormalities, diseases of the uterus [beginning with uterine suffocation], and then pregnancy and complications of childbirth) reflects a hierarchy of disease based on ancient physiological notions.

. " .

136 MONICA H. GREEN

to snake bites. It even repeats one remedy for sunburn and excoriations of the face (err 167 and 232 g). This disarray is, in fact, quite remarkable given that the imposition of order was one of the hallmarks of literate Salernitan medicine of the twelfth century. Besides mentioning a specific mourning practice of Salernitan women, the DCM is unique among the three texts in citing by name several Salernitan physicians : Magister Mathaeus Ferrarius, Magister 10hannes Ferrarius, Copho, and Trota. The latter is mentioned in a case history (err 151), which recounts how she was called in « as if she were a master» (quasi magistra) to examine a young woman suffering from abdominal pain. Trota took the young woman home, diagno­sed her with uentositas matricis, and then proceeded to cure her.

The references both to Salernitan women and to the several named Saler­nitan masters would seem to confirm a Salernitan origin for the text, while the reference to herba etna, in apparent reference to the volcano on Sicily, would further suggest a southern Italian provenance 49• But the DCM has a unique peculiarity: it includes three English words 50. In the chapters on whooping cough and· worms the DCM provides the English names of the conditions (chinke and digge, respectively); in a third recipe, the English synonym for what is probably stinking iris (gladene) is given 51. We might be inclined to dismiss these as the unique glosses of a single scribe, but in fact the gloss digge and a remnant of the gloss chinke are found in almost every copy of the DCM, whether it is independent or absorbed into the en-

49. Although etna may in fact be an error for emma (see n. 51 below), its presence here nevertheless suggests that the scribe was making an association based on his knowledge of southern Italian geography.

50. The sole full copy of DCM I (ms 72) breaks off at 'i 2321 (i. e., six paragraphs shy of the end of the two full mss of DCM 2, mss 11 and 44), thus omitting 'i 232 q with its English gloss digge. However, these last six chapters are similar to the rest of the DCM in style, materia medica, etc. (one even comes from the same ultimate source, the Practica secundum Trotam). I am inclined to believe that even if they are not part of the original DCM, they were drawn from a related source and - together with the English gloss digge - were added almost immediately after the composition of DCM l.

SI. DCM, 'i 176 : « Ad uetulas rugosas. Accipe spatulam, id est glildene, et extrahe succum »; 'i 204 : « Passioni puerorum que quasi tussis est, et dicitur anglice chinke, subuenimus sic »; 'i 232 q : « Ad eiciendum uermem qui anglice dicitur digge. ,. See The Middle English Dictionary, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1952-, s. v. chinke, dikking, and gladen; on the last, see" also T. HUNT, Plant names of medieval England, Cambridge, 1989, p. 243, s. v. spatulafetida. All three terms are also documented in Old English, though in the latter two cases not with precisely these same medical meanings. (My thanks to Pauline A. Thompson of the Dictionary of Old English for her advice on this matter.) In a fourth recipe ('IT 227), multe is given as an equivalent for herba etna. The latter may be an error for herba emma, for which the synonym policaria minor is given in 'IT 231 in the other copy of DCM I, ms 40. If so, this might suggest that multe is an alternate spelling of the Old French rrw1(l}et, « fleabane ». Thus, the.substitution in DCM 2 of herba etna lemma ?J, id est multe with policaria minor in fact reflects a correct understanding of the herbal referent.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROrULA 137

semble 52. While the historical circumstances which might have led to this English influence remain to be explored, the Norman domination of both England and southern Italy from the late eleventh century and the well-known visits to southern Italy made by English scholars will undoubtedly prove to be decisive factors.

The sole complete copy ~f DCM 1 attributes the text to Trota, who perhaps should be seen more as the text's source than its actual author (see Section B.l.b below). That copy (ms 72) is found in an early thirteenth-century volume of combined Italian and probably English provenance; it was in any case in England by the later thirteenth century. The DCM is found here with a copy of DOM 2 53 and with a quite remarkable array of texts by authors associated with Salerno plus several series of random recipes of obvious Salernitan provenance. In ms 40, which is of &imilar date though perhaps of French origin, we find excerpts from both DCM 1 and DOM 1 imbedded within a compendium, arranged in a capite ad calcem order, of material of similar Salernitan provenance.

b. DCM 2 (6 copies)

- title : none (11 54, 4455); incipit liber Trotule de secretis mulie­rum (41); De secretis mulierum. Incipit liber Trotule de secretis mu­lierum 56 (52); Trotula minor (67); Incipit practica Trottule Solernitane mulieris et primo cognoscendum que mulier ex' frigiditate uel caliditate laboret (121)

- incipit: Ut [add. : ait Ypocras 11] de curis mulierum compendiosa (nobis) traditio '"

- anecdote: Vnde eontingit [contingebat 44] quod Trota [tota 11, Trotha 67, Trotta 121] uocata fuit quasi [tamquam 41 bis] magistra (11, 41 bis 57 ,

44); whole reference omitted, cure instead attributed to an unnamed medi­eus (41); anecdote changed into straightforward recipe, reference to Trota omitted (52)

52. The gloss digge remains relatively unchanged. On the fate of the gloss chinke, see Section 8.4 below. The phrase id est gladene soon dropped out as a synonym for spatula in the proto-ensemble. The unusual herba etna, id est multe was replaced in DCM 2 by poli­cana minor.

53. The DCM and DOM 2 are, however, separated by nearly thirty folios and there is no indication that the scribe considered them related.

54. _ A later hand adds : lncipit liber Trote de cum mulierum. 55. A slightly later hand adds : Liber Trotile minoris. 56. In the right margin, a later hand has added; Trotulis minor. 57~ In ms 41, 9f 151 appears twice with the two different readings, as cited (41 and

41 bis).

138 MONlCA H. GREEN

explicit (varies depending on which paragraph appears last) : Mss II and 44 agree in ending with <Jf 232 ( ... uermes quasi fllos ca­dentes), ms 11 going on with four more gynecological and cosmetic recipes from an unidentified source. Mss 67 and 121 agree in ending with <Jf 232 ( ... et pone acetum in olla inferius et liberabitur). Ms 41 has excerpts through <Jf 164. Ms 52 has rearranged excerpts ranging from <Jf 132 through <Jf 228.

- closing rubric: Exspliciunt Experimenta Atrote (ll); Explicit (41); Explicit Practica Trottule mulieris Solemitane de curis mulierum (121); none (44, 52, 67)

- mss : ll, 41, 44, 52, 67, 121

What I have called DCM 2 is distinguished from DCM 1 more by subtle variants than allY major deletions or additions. A full collation of the manuscripts will be necessary to determine whether these alterations show any distinctive patterns. Even now, however, it seems clear that many changes were prompted by the redactor's desire to improve the text's style and clarity. The six extant copies of DCM 2 - including the two earliest - vary significantly one from the other, showing that the text remained unstable even after the introduction of the main alterations of DCM l. It was, in any case, this version of the text that was to serve as the source for the Trotula ensemble 58.

DCM 2 lacks an attribution in the earliest extant copy (ms 44), which probably comes from southern France from the second quarter of the thirteenth century, though a slightly later hand ~as to add Liber Trotile mirwris at its head 59. In the second oldest copy (ms ll), coming from England from perhaps the middle of the century, the text bears an ascription similar in gist to that of the sole complete copy of DCM 1 : that is, Exspliciunt Experimenta Atrote. The four remaining manuscripts, which date from the fIfteenth century all bear the name « Trotula » though they disagree on whether it is an author's name or a title.

Like the several versions of the LSM, DCM 2 circulated primarily in France (ms 44) and England (mss ll, 41, 52, 67), appearing in eastern Europe only in the fIfteenth century (ms 121). As for its circulation with other Trotula texts, it is found alone in mss 11 and 52; with the TEM in ms 41; with LSM 2 in ms 44; and with either LSM 1 or 3 and DOM 2 in mss 67 and 121 (for which, see Section B.6 below).

58. Based on the collations I have made thus far, ms 44 seems to be closest to the archetype used for the prot~nsemble. .

59. The heading « Trotile ,. was added to mS.44 by a later hand.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA·

3. De omatu mulierum (DOM)

a. DOM 1 (6 copies)

139

- title: Depilatorium (75); Incipit tractatus breuis et utilis de decora­tione et ornatu mulierum ReichfITdi medici experti (103); none (21, 39 60 ,

40, 98)

- incipit (preface) : Ut ait Ypocras in libro suo quem de prognostico­rum scientia composuit ...

- incipit (text) : Ut mulier suauissima et planissima sine pilis et rugis ...

- explicit: ... et adiacencia omnia. Tunc facie sua aqua rosacea infusa ad uirum red eat, cuius faciem aqua superfundat, et cum puluere predicto eum fricet sub acellis et circa pecten. pannus etiam cum quo ipsa mulier uirilia mundat debet huiusmodi puluere aspergi ut redoleat.

- closing rubric : none

- mss : 21, 39, 40, 75, 98, 103

The third text of what would become the Trotula, the DOM is, like the LSM, found in several quite distinct versions 61. The first redaction offers exactly what its author claimed it would : a succinct treatise that summari­zed treatments for women's overall body care, moving in a capite ad calcem order from care of the hair to that of the face, lips, teet1;I and mouth, closing with a remedy said to be used by Muslim women when a woman's vagina is so overstretched or foul-smelling that sexual relations with men become impossible. The text opens with an elegant preface in which the author (who signals his gender with a masculine verbal form) cites Persius's Satires and well as Constantinus Africanus's translation of the Hippocratic Prognos­tics 62 • The physician seeking « glory or a delightful multitude of friends »,

he says, must furnish himself with the precepts of the learned. While this rhetorical formula is hardly novel, the author seems to be original in applying it to cosmetics.

60. The heading De omatufaciei et partium eius in ms 39 was added later by the fifteenth­century owner Roger Marchall.

61. A. SCHULTZ, « Toiletten-Anweisungen des 14. Jahrhunderts ~, Anzeiger for Kunde der deutschen Vorzeit : Organ des Gennanischen Museums, n.s. 24, 1877, coll. 186-190, summarizes the content of the DOM from Clm444 (what I have identified as DOM 3). To my knowledge, there is no other scholarly discussion of the DOM. For surveys of other medieval discussions of cosmetics, see D. MENJOT, ed., Les wins de beaute: Moyen Age, debut des temps modernes. Actes du Ill' Colloque International Grasse (26-28 avril 1985), Nice, 1987. .

62. The preface edited by Benton (art. cit., p. 53) co~flates DOM 1 and DOM 3. In DOM 1 there is only one masculine verbal form: « .•• ut in singulis tarn ad ornatum faciei quam ceterorum membroium mulieruril doctus reperiar ... B

140 MONICA H. GREEN

The text itself is very probably a compilation of earlier material rather than a summation drawn from the author's own clinical practice: with but one exception, the authorial « I » is used exclusively for narrational markers. The exception is err 304 a where the author claims to have personally witnessed a Muslim woman on Sicily cure many people of breath· problems. Wishing to offer remedies to both rich women and those of more modest status, the author included alternative remedies, noting some that were used by noble women which presumably were distinguished by their more expensive ingredients. Clearly the author intended a wide audience, for he observed that women beyond the Alps would not have access to the spas that Italian women did; hence he included instruc.tions for an alterna­tive steam bath 63.

Only one of the six copies of DOM 1 bears an attribution. This is the mid-fifteenth century copy from southern Germany or Austria (ms 103), which attributes the work to « Reichardus medicus expertus ». While this may in fact be an authentic attribution (a possibility made likely by the relative integrity of the text as found in this manuscript), the lack of any other similar witness nevertheless raises the possibility that this scribe may have confused the DOM with the quite different cosmetic text of the late twelfth-century medical writer Richardus Anglicus 64•

The DOM 1 never circulates with any of the other Trotula texts with the sole exception of ms 40, a compendium from several sources which also includes excerpts from DCM 1. The earliest manuscripts date from the first . half of the thirteenth century and come from England (ms 21), possibly France (ms 40), and Italy (ms 98). Thereafter, the text continues to circulate in England (mss 39 and 75), and appears for the first time in Germany in the mid-fifteenth century (ms 103). I have not as yet found any evidence of a vernacular translation.

b. DOM 2 (15 copies)

- title: Incipit lib er de ornatu mulierum (23, 77, 122); Incipit tracta­tus de ornatu mulierum bonus et utilis (27); De ornatu mulierum (45); De

63. DaM 1, "If 242 : « In primis eat ad balnea, et stuphet se ut sudet. Si autem bal­nea defuerint, cum stuphis sicut transmontane mulieres que huiusmodi carent balneis flant stupha sic. » DaM 3 would change transrrwntane to ultrarrwntane.

64. On Richardus Anglicus and his De omatu (which is never found with the inde­pendent copies of DaM 1-3), see E. WICKERSHEIMER, Dictionnaire biographique des mldecins en France au Moyen Age, t. 11, Paris, 1936; repr. Geneva, 1979, pp. 694-698; D. ]ACQUART, Supplement to E. Wickersheimer, Dictionnaire biographique des mldecins en France au MoyenAge, Geneva, 1979, pp. 256-257 ;C. H. TALBOT and E. A. HAMMOND, The Medical practitioners in medieval England: a biographical register, London, 1965, pp. 270-272.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROrULA 141

ornamentis mulierum sequitur et primo de pills remouendis (67); Stupha mulierum (72); De facie ornanda (117); Incipit ornatus mulierum (121); none (31, 59, 83, 93, 96, 111)

- incipit (preface, om. 45, 72, 121) : Ut ait Ypocras in libro quem de prognosticorum ... (abbreviated, in various forms)

- incipit (text) : Ut mulier leuissima et planissima et suauissima ...

- explicit: ... et sic bene ornata (facie toto corpore) ad uirum accedat. Et hec de ornatu mulierum dicta sufficiant 65 •

- closing rubric: none (27, 31, 72, 77,93, Ill, 122); Explicit liber de ornatu mulierum (45, 83); Explicit (59); Expliciunt meliora excerpta de Trotulis mulierum (117); Explicit ornatus mulierum (121)

- mss 66 : 23, 27, 31, 45, 59, 67, 72, 77, 83, 93, 96, 111, 117, 121, 122

The second redaction (DOM 2) abbreviates the text throughout. Although it has almost all the same recipes as DOM 1, the length of the text itself is reduced by a full fIfty percent. The preface is cut down to the opening sentence which quotes the Progrwstics, there being now no remaining indication of what « the precepts of the learned » or the desire for « glory imd a great multitude of friends » have to do with cosmetics. It is not surprising, then, that in several manuscripts we fInd the preface deleted or rewritten in quite interesting ways 67.

In general the abbreviations consisted of deleting discursive explana­tionsof preparation procedures. en- 249 in DOM 1, for example, had offered very specifIc instructions for how a woman should fasten cloves, musk and nutmeg in her hair and also (but discreetly) in her robe in order that she be wonderfully redolent. DOM 2 abbreviated this to the terse assertion « Let the woman have well-ground musk, for it comforts » 68.

65. Mss 59, lll, and 121 omit the colophon and add additional recipes before the explicit.

66. There is also ~ deleted fragment of DOM 2 in ms 64. 67. DOM 2 preface; « Ut ait Ypocras in libro quem de prognosticorum sciencia compo­

suit; Omnis qui medicine artis studio seu gloriam seu delectabilem amicorum copiam conse­qui desiderat rationem prudentum regulis ad eo munire studeat ne in aliquibus ad artem medendi pertinentibus inscius uideatur. » Mss 77 and 83 then add« Cum ergo super earum computuras mulieres multociens nos conueniant neque in hoc experti inueniamus de earum compturis quasdam in hoc opusculo enucleare disposuimus a pilorum remotione inco­hantes. » Ms 122 adds « Hinc est quod mulierum familiaritatem habere desiderans, huius libelli contemptio non sit. » Mss 45, 72, 121 omit the preface altogether.

68. DOM 1,9f 249 ; « Et ut melius redoleat, deferat etiam mulier gariofilum, museum uel nucem museatam ligatam in capillis. Caute tamen 'ne ab aliquo uideatur peplum quoque quo caput debet ligari reponat cum gariofilis. nucibus et nucibus museatis et huiusmodi redo­lentibus. » DOM 2·; « Muscum mulier habeat contritum quia confortat. »

142 MONICA H. GREEN

In some instances, this characteristic abbreviating caused a real loss or change of sense. For example, in 'if 244 DOM 1 had read « If, however, this depilatory is too thick, when the woman wishes to be anointed let her dilute it with her own urine. For the addition of more water makes it worse » (Si autem hec pilatoria nimis fuerit spissa, quando mulier uult inungi liquefa­ciat ea mulier cum urina sua. Nam alia aqua imposita ea peioraret). DOM 2, in contrast, completely contradicts the original sense: « If these depilato­ries are thicker than the woman wants, let her thin them out with fresh water » (Si hec depilitoria sint magna spissa quam mulier uelit, rarefaciat cum aqua recenti).

DOM 2 is anonymous in all of its fIfteen copies. It is, however, referred to as one of two Trotula mulierum in ms 117. (See Section B.l.b below.) DOM 2, perhaps because of its abbreviated form, had the widest circulation of the three versions of the cosmetic text, particularly in German-speaking regions. Extant copies range in date from the turn of the thirteenth century (ms 23) to the middle of the fIfteenth century (mss 67 and 121). In terms of its circulation with the other Trotula texts, it is found alone in one third of the extant copies (mss 27, 31, 45, 96, Ill, and 122). It was, however, also paired very early in its transmission with LSM 3 (mss 23, 59, 93, and 117); it was undoubtedly because of that pairing that it served as the basis for the cosmetic section of the full Trotula ensemble. It is also found with LSM 1 in ms 77, and with LSM 1 or 3 and DCM 2 in mss 67 and 121 (see Section B.6 below)69.

c. DOM 3 (8 copies)

- title: Incipit tractatus utilissimus de ornatu mulieris corporis et faciei cutis et capillorum et membrorum ceterorum (35); De ornatu faciei incipit tractatus (46, 108); Incipit summus tractatus de ornatu mulierum (90, 55, 76); none (47, 58)

- incipit (preface, om. 46) : Ut ait Ypocras in libro quem de scientia prognosticorum ...

- incipit (text) : Ut autem mulier suauissima et planissima et sine pilis et rugis per singula membra a capite inferius ...

- explicit ('if 305g) : ... talem emplastrum durat per duos annos (mss 35, 46, 47, 108 end here).

69. Although both DOM 2 and DCM 1 occur in ms 72, they are separated by nearly thirty folios and there is no indication that the scribe considered them related. In ms 83, on the other hand, recognition of the overlap between the standardized ensemble (which also appears here) and DOM 2 may be the reason why only excerpts from the latter are found here. .

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA 143

- colophon (err 305h) : In hoc enim modico tractatu quedam ad ornatum mulierum pertinencia, quibus se subueniant decenter satis compendiose pertractata sunt. Sufficiat autem ad presens opusculum breuitatis ratione iam dicta, ad hoc ut ornate se muniant mulieres et decen­ter conseruent.

- closing rubric : Explicit tmctatus necessarius de supplectione pul­critudinis mulierum (55, 76, 90); Explicit liber de ornatu mulierum secun­dum totum corpus (58); none (35, 46, 47, 108)

- mss : 35, 46, 47, 55, 58, 76, 90, 108

The third redaction of the DOM goes back to th~ original, long text. It, too, abbreviates it, but unlike DOM 2 it does so more by deleting whole recipes (err 250, 280c, 280d, 280f, 283, 284, 284a) than by abridging the text. Its most significant change comes at the end of the treatise, where it substitutes the original final remedy for genital hygiene (err 305f) with a depilatory for the face. It lamely apologizes for the redundancy and break from the clear head-to-toe order already laid out in the text with the claim that care of the face had not been sufficiently discussed before. In the new colophon, DOM 3 asserts that with this text women can now maintain them­selves « decently» 70. It would seem, then, that it was prudery that indu­ced this redactor to make the substitution 71.

Like the standardized ensemble (Section B.5 below), this version of the DOM is characterized by regularized chapter divisions (in this case, nine) with accompanying rubrics 72. This regularized format, together with the fact that no extant manuscripts pre-date the late thirteenth century, suggests a mid-thirteenth century date of redaction, if not later.

Like DOM 2, DOM 3 is in every manuscript anonymous. It is never found with any of the other Trotula treatises, except for ms 76 where it is separa­ted from the transitional ensemble by nearly 200 folios. DOM 3 makes it first appearance in France at the turn of the fourteenth century (mss 55 and 90). It then appears in England (ms 76) in the first half of the fourteenth century and Germany (ms 58) at the end of the century, after which point it is only found in English manuscripts, the last of them copied in the seven­teenth century.

70. DOM 3 ('if 305g) : « Lieet stiperius de hoc traetauimus de ornatu faeiei, tamen de isto niehil seu parum ibi dieitur et multarum diuersarumque rerum quem dam per 10eo­rum distaneias inueniri possunt, quedam non minime, unde istius sylotri talis sit usus. »

71. 'if 305f would also be deleted from the revised ensemble. 72. In addition to the title (quoted above), these are (I) De mundificatione prima (or

Prima doctrina.de stuphis); (2) De omatu capillorum; (3) De nigris capiUis; (4) De omatu faciei; (5) Item capitulum ad pilostollendos; (6) De omatu labiorum; (7) De omatu dencium et dealbatione; (8) Adfetorem oris remouendum; (9) Aliud capitulum adfaciem dealbandam.

144 MONICA H. GREEN

B. THE TROTULA ENSEMBLE

1. The proto-ensemble (21 copies) - title: none (34, 65, 69, 71, 74, 81, lIS); Incipit practica Trotule

de passionibus mulierum (14); Incipit Trotula de ornatu mulierum (16); Incipit Trotula loquens de secretis mulierum (22); Trotula (37); Hic incipit Trotula maior de secretis mulierum (48); Incipit genecia de passionibus mulierum (62); Incipit trotula mulierum etc. (70); Incipiunt cure magistre Trottule (80); Incipit tractatus magistre Trotule salernitane de sinthomati­bus mulierum (88) ; Incipit Trotula. De infirmatibus mulierum. Et curis earum­dem (lI4)

- LSM incipit : Cum auctor uniuersitatis deus in prima mundi origine [constitutione 48, 62, 114J ...

- LSM explicit : ... ut cepe pastinace et similla.

- closing rubric (in copies with LSM only) : none (14, 71, lI4); Explicit Trotula senior Deo gratias (65, 81); Explicit Trotulla (88)

- DCM opening rubric: De cura mulierum (16); Incipiunt capitula Trotule ... Contra retentionem menstruorum (42); Recapitulatio predictorum breuis (62); Quomodo cognoscitur utrum mulier contrarias proue ex frigi­ditate ue! caliditate (80); none (22, 34, 37, 38, 70, 74, lIS)

- DCM incipit : Ut de curis mulierum compendiosa traditio ...

err 151 (anecdote) : Vnde contingit quod [add. domina 62J Trota [custa 16, om. 22, tota 38, Trotula 37, 85, Trocta 80J fuit uocata [notata lI5J [add. : quasi 16, tarn quam 38, 42, 62J magistra cum quedam puella prop­ter uentositatem [propter uentositatem) etiam uentositate sua 115J debuit incidi (16, 22, 38, 42, 62, 80, 85, 115); Unde quia Trota uocata fuit magistra cum quadam pellicula pro uentositate sua debuit incidi (34, 70, 74); err om. (48)

- DCM explicit (a, err 235) : ... et minget uelit nolit (57). Si uero non, non (42, lIS); Si uero corrupta non minget (38)

- (b, err 234-because of displacement of err 235) : ... in maio factum quod melius est et inunge manus (22, 37, 85)

- (c, err 223 Ad inflatione testiculorum) : ... et istud panno super inductum pone desuper (34, 70, 74, 80)

- rubric: none (22, 37, 38, 42, 48, 57); Explicit Trotta (34, 74); Explicit hec Trota multum mulieribus apta (70); Explicit t"c. e~. Incipit de ornatu mulierum (80); Vt mulier sit plana et leuissima a capite (85); De pills in muliere abstrahendis (lIS)

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROruLA 145

DOM omitted entirely (other than in incomplete copies) : 42 73, 48, 62; Harley Group (34, 70, 74)

preface : [none)

DOM incipit (text) : Ut mulier planissima et suauissima ...

DOM explicit: irregular, no two copies except mss 22, 37, 85 (i. e., the Erfurt GroupJ and ll5 end with same chapter (in this case, err 218) 74 .

- closing rubric: Explicit Trotula loquens de secretis mulierum (22); Explicit (37, ll5); none (38, 42, 48, 57, 62, 85)

- MSS: 14, 16,38,42,48,57,62,65 75,69,71,80,81,88, ll4, ll5; Erfurt Group: 22, 37, 85; Harley Group: 34, 70, 74

While the three Salernitan texts on women's medicine continued to circulate independently throughout Europe until the end of the Middle Ages, they had their widest impact not as discreet texts but in an ensemble in which they were linked together. Exactly where and when this linking took place is unclear. Nothing internal to the texts offers any clues as to place; the earliest extant manuscripts (m ss 38 and 42) come from France and possibly England. The only chronological terminus likewise comes from these tWo earliest manuscripts, i.e., the end of the twelfth or the very beginning of the thirteenth century, though since these copies also show considerable development or' even corruption a composition date in the latter decades of the twelfth century seems most likely.

As has already been mentioned, the earliest association of the Salerni­tan texts on women's medicine seems to have been that of LSM 3 and DOM 2, which are often found side-by-side 76. The full ensemble was formed by fusing these two texts with the DCM 2. The earliest form, which I here refer to as the « proto-ensemble ", while not rewritten overall, is nevertheless characterized by major additions and rearrangements 77. First, the compi-

73. In ms 42, 9T 265 has been added (apparently by a different hand) between the DCM and the LSM.

74. Mss 22,37,85 and 115 displaced 9T 219 and 218, in that order, to the end of the text to follow DOM 9T 271.

75. Ms 65 is an apograph of ms 81. 76. Copies of both texts are found in mss 23, 59, 93, and 117. This early association

of LSM 3 and DOM 2 might be tllken to suggest that both abbreviations were the work of the same editor. DOM 2 also appears with LSM 1 in ms 77. .

77. It is possible that the revision of the LSM which I am about to describe was origi­nally done independently of the creation of the proto-ensemble, and so should properly be designated «LSM 4 .. » This seems likely, fIrst, because no similar major interpolations were made in the DCM or DOl'tfsections; second, because the LSM section of the proto-ensemble has a tendency to circulate as an independent text; and third, because the earliest ms of . . . .

10

146 MONICA H. GREEN

ler compared LSM 3 with a copy of LSM 2. The compiler reinserted several passages that had dropped out of LSM 3, such as the sentence in IJf 4 specifying the various ages of menopause 7S. She or he also reinserted the paragraphs on contraception and development of the fetus that had been omitted from LSM 3, but put them in a different position thus causing the forward displacement of the recipes for prenatal care (i. e., IJf 88 a-c now becoming IJf 79-81). This redactor also emended certain readings, such as changing the reading constitutione in the LSMs opening passage to origine 79.

The compiler then augmented the LSM with six new chapters placed at the end (1Jf 123-131) so. Some of these repeat topics that had already been addressed in previous chapters, though here they are covered in much more detail. First was a brief summary of the stages of development of the embryo drawn from the late antique treatise De semine attributed to the fourth-century North Mrican author Vindicianus (1Jf 123) SI. This was fol­lowed by chapters on the choice of the nurse and the care of the infant (1Jf 124-127), all of which were excerpted from the fourth book of the Liber ad Almansorem, a long regimen of health by the Persian physician Abu Bakr MuJ:tammad ibn Zakariyii' ar-Razi (ca. 865-925, known in Latin as Rhazes) which had just recently been translated from the Arabic into Latin in Spain S2. A chapter on pustules in infants {whose source

the revised DCM-DOM section of the ensemble (ms 38), which represents (as I argue below) the compiler's original attempts to fuse those two works, lacks the LSM. Mss 14, 62, 81 (and its apograph ms 65), 71, 88, and 114 all have several readings in common with LSM 3 which thus situate them very near what must have been the archetype of the amplified LSM. However, since several of these mss show cross-contamination, a full collation of all of them will be necessary to determine this issue.

78. LSM 1-2 : « Durat autem usque ad .1. annos si macra sit, quandoque usque ad .Ix. uel.xl. [.lxv. LSM 2) ut in mediocriter pinguibusuel usque ad .xxxv. si sit mulier multum pinguis. »

79. The reading constitutione remains in mss 48, 62, 88, and 114. This and other readings very close to the independent LSM suggest that these mss reflect the very earliest stage of the proto-ensemble, if not an independent « LSM 4» (see n. 77 above). constitutione also reappears in ms 95, a copy of the transitional ensemble which shows other signs of cross­contamination, and in three mss of the intermediate ensemble. It is formally reincorporated into the revised ensemble.

80. In ms 44, these bear the rubrics De rrwdo generationis embrionis (9T 123), De regimine infantis (9T 124-125), De eligenda nutrice (9T 126-127), De pustulis puerorum (9T 128), De impedimento conceptionis (9T 129-130), and De sterilitate ex parte uiri (9T 131).

81. My thanks to Klaus-Dietrich Fischer of the University of Mainz for identifying this section as Vindician, De semine 16. This brief passage is also found in mss of the so-called -Gynaecia attributed to Vindician; this circulated much more widely than the De semine and may have been the immediate source for the proto-ensemble's compiler.

82. The Liberad Almansorem had been translated initially by an anonymous (?) trans-

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA 147

I have unable to locate) was also added. The final chapters on sterility ('IT 129-131), in contrast, were drawn from earlier Salernitan material, attributed in one instance to the famed male healer Copho, in another to the woman Trota 83 • From this point on, the LSM would remain quite stable, to be altered only by minor new readings rather than any substan­tive additions or deletipns of text.

Manipulation of the ·DCM at the proto-ensemble stage was less exten­sive than that of the LSM. The text of DCM 2 was only slightly augmented by the addition of new material, often introduced with a characteristic Item aliud : two additional vaginal constrictives ('IT 192 and 195 a); a remedy for swelling of the face and eyes ('IT 198); a cure for deafness ('IT 221); one for scabies of the hands ('IT 234); and, at the very end of the text, a test for determining if a woman was a virgin ('IT 235) 84. Manipulation of the text itself seems to have been very slight, such as the addition of the gloss id est, nasturcium aquaticum following a reference to senationes in 'IT 159 (both terms referring to watercress). The most significant change made by the pro to-ensemble compiler was the careful repositioning of several selected paragraphs. Of the eighteen recipes that had originally closed the text, 'IT 232 a-d, i-I, and p-r (on various uterine conditions, neonatal care, and miscellaneous topics) were moved to follow 'IT 212 (now beco­ming 'IT 213-219). The cosmetic recipes within the closing sequence ('IT 232 e-h ~md moo), on the other hand, were taken out of the DCM alto­gether. It seems that the compiler's intention was to relocate them within the DOM, a task which, however, he apparently did not complete.

I have, in fact, given this version the epithet « proto-ensemble »

precisely because of the incomplete state of the final cosmetic section. Whereas later versions of the ensemble will have incorporated the full text of DOM 2, the proto-ensemble does not. Aside from ms 38 (the earliest extant), no copies have more than the opening chapters of the DOM on hair care (all of them to varying degrees abbreviated), to which have been added all

lator, whose original version was then revised by Gerard of Cremona in Toledo before 1187; the absorption of its chapters on pediatrics into the LSM witnesses its rapid influence. On the Liber ad Almansorem, see D. JACQUART, Note SIlT la traduction latine du Kitiib al-Ma~uri de Rhazes, in Revue d'histoire des textes, t. 24, 1994, pp. 359-374.

83. In a late twelfth-century compendium of Salemitan writings called De egritudinum curatione, these passages are attributed to Copho; see S. DE RENZI, ed., Collectio Saler· nitana ossia documenti inediti, e trattati di medicina appartenenti aUa scuola medica salemitana, t. n, Naples, 1852-1859; repr. Bologna, 1967, pp. 342-343. They are also found within the Madrid ms of the Practica secundum Trotam. (Madrid, Biblioteca de la Universidad Co1Jlplutense, MS .1l9 (olim 116-Z-31]) at f. 142 vO·143 vo.

84. This last test very quickly lost its rubric (Si mulier sit corrupta an non), which was replaced by the. (in this context) nonsensical Item aliter.

148 MONICA H. GREEN

the DeM's chapters on the same topic (i. e., DCM en- 207 a-c, 207f-j, and 2071-0 becoming ensemble en- 259, 256, 258, 261-263, 257, 264-265,267,266, and 268, respectively). The compiler also seems to have planned to incorporate the chapters on care of the face. As I noted above, en- 232 e-h (on thickened skin, facial worms, sunburn, and serpigo [a skin disorder characterized by red skin]) were deleted from the DCM section of the proto-ensemble. Although three of these four paragraphs (en- 232 e-f and 232 h) are not found within the DaM section of any extant copy of the proto-ensemble, they do re-appear within the transitional ensemble (as en- 286-288) and I think it likely that the pro to-ensemble editor was responsible for this relocation. This is suggested by the development of en- 232 g, the only one of the facial care recipes preserved in an extant

. copy of the proto-ensemble. In ms 38, we find a conflation of DCM en- 167 and 232g, the two redundant recipes from the DCM for an un­guent for sunburn and facial excoriations. The proto-ensemble compiler moved en- 232 g into the DaM (now en- 290) and then added the more detailed instructions from en- 167. Whether or not he or she intended to go back to the DCM and delete en- 167 (which still retained the rich socio­logical information on how and by whom the unguent was used) is unclear. Be that as it may, this example suggests that the proto-ensemble compiler intended to incorporate all the DCMs cosmetic chapters into the DaM, but only succeeded in completing the transfer of the chapters on hair care and one of the many on facial care 8S• The obviously incomplete state of the proto-ensemble may also help explain why many of the manuscripts have the De omatu of Richardus Anglicus (in varying degrees of completeness) appended at the end, suggesting that the abbreviated cosmetic section was recognized as indeed being too brief 86. The job of finishing the incorpo­ration of the independent DaM into the ensemble was thus left to the compiler of the transitional ensemble (section B.2 below).

The earliest manuscripts of the proto-ensemble, which date from the late twelfth or beginning of the thirteenth century (mss 38 and 42), suggest Norman dissemination of the text in France and perhaps England as well. Thereafter, the text's circulation was largely limited to France and England. The text spread into Germany in the late thirteenth or early fourteenth

85. In the transitional ensemble, we find not only 'R 232 g, but also the surrounding recipes on haircare, 'R 232e-f and 232h (becoming 'R 286-288).

86. The compiler/scribe of ms 80 took up the task left unfinished by the proto-ensemble compiler and rearranged passages from Richardus' text together with excerpts from the DCM to create a complete cosmetic section moving from the hair to the ears, face, lips, teeth, breasts, skin and finally the genitalia. Interestingly, in addition to other editorial intrusions, this compiler has also rewritten the text in places to make a sjngle authorial « I " (magistra Trottula) more prominent.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA 149

century. There are, however, no exemplars from Spain, and only one copy (ms 80) can be situated in Italy (and this with some uncertainty).

The proto-ensemble, somewhat more than other versions of the en­semble, had a tendency to be abbreviated: mss 14, 65, 71, 81, 88, and 114 have only the LSM87, while in mss 42,48, and 57 excerpts have been mined from at least two of the texts. One of these abbreviated forms (repre­sented now by ms 48) took on the title Trotula maior de secretis mulierum and seems to have circulated both in the Low Countries and in England, where it spawned a verbatim English translation (Eng3).

Several groups of manuscripts of the proto-ensemble reflect various branchings-offfrom the main genealogical tree. Mss 22,37, and 85, which I shall call the Erfurt Group, share many peculiar readings 88• Some of these are probably just corruptions, as in 'IT 141 where we read that widows and nuns suffer from sexual abstinence because they cannot take a fertile vow ifecunda uota for the original secunda uota), or in 'IT 149 where we are told that the inadequacies of midwives should be kept a secre­tarium among women (instead of secretum). Some of these new readings, interestingly, also characterize the revised and standardized ensembles, such as in regione Francie in 'if 26 (for the original regine Francie) and in 'IT 151 « Trotula » for the original « Trota »89. The earliest manuscript of this group appears in a collection made partly in Cremona and partly in Erfurt in the mid-fourteenth century; the other two manuscripts are of fifteenth-century English and French provenance, respectively.

Another sub-family, which I call the Harley Group, is also witnessed by three manuscripts. Although none of them dates from before the late fourteenth century (thus suggesting a relatively late redaction), this version probably branched off from the main group fairly early. It seems to be a distinctly English tradition; even the copy made in France (ms 34) has several small texts in Middle English, suggesting that it may have been made for an English recipient resident in France during the Hundred Years War.

A third sub-family is the meretrices group, which I treat as a separate version because of its particularly striking peculiarities.

87. These can be called « excerpts ", of course, only if it is determined that my­hypothesized « LSM 4 " (see n. 77 above) does not constitute a separate stage of development. -

88. The Erfurt Group shares many features with ms l1S as well. 89. Ms 22 omits the name altogether, apparently because this scribe found it discon­

certing to have an author (as he clearly supposed « Trotula " was) referring to herself in the third person.

150 MONICA H. GREEN

a. The meretrices group

- title 90 : Incipit liber de synthomatibus, id est, passionibus mulierum qui dicitur Trotula mulierum [mulierum om. 95J quem [quam 5J due mere­trices scilicet mater et filia sua ediderunt. Nam cum diuersas [diuersis 82J circuebant teITas multa experiebantur ut hic patet. [ms 95 replaces the second sentence with : que circuibant diuersas terras experimentando. Primo inci­pit Trotula mater.J

- LSM incipit : Cum auctor uniuersitatis deus in prima origine mundi ...

- LSM explicit: ... ut sunt cepe, pastinace domestice et similia, unde nota [non 5J quod quecumque sunt augmentantia [augmentatici 5J lac et sperma ut feniculus et similia.

- rubric: Explicit Trotula. Incipit sua filia de curis mulierum et primo qua causa laboret (5, 82); Incipit Trotula minor (95)

- DCM incipit : Ut de curis mulierum compendiosa traditio ...

- 'If 151 (anecdote) : whole 'If omitted (ms 5); Unde contingit quod Trotula magistra fuit uocata cum que dam puella debuit incidi propter uentositatem quasi de ruptura roboraret. et mirata fuit quam plurimum. Trotula fecit [add. ergo 95J hanc uocari ad se, et uenire ad domum suam ut in secreto melius cognoscetur callsam egritudinis. Qua cognita quod non ex inflatione uel ruptura fuerit sed ex uentositate matricem comprimente, fecit Trotula sibi balneum fieri in aqua ... (82, 95)

DCM explicit ('If 235) : ... et inungat cum inde manus.

rubric: Ad suauitatem cutis mulierum (5, 82); De palliatione (95)

DOM incipit : Ut mulier planissima et suauissima fiat et sine pilis ...

DOM explicit: all three copies have only three paragraphs from the DOM ('If 242, 243, and 247), followed by a remedy to clarify the voice and two to determine if a wounded man will die, ending: ... et si tunc uomit, non euadet. Si non, euadet.

- closing rubric : Explicit ambe Trotule mater et sua filia perfecte et bene (5, 82); Expliciunt trotule et maior que fuit matris et minor que fuit filie (95)

- MSS: 5, 82, 95; cf. ms 60 This sub-family of the proto-ensemble tradition probabiy dates from the

late thirteenth centurY. The earliest extant copy (ms 82) comes from the turn of the fourteenth century, the second oldest (ms 95) from the latter half of that century, and the third (ms 5) dating from the fifteenth century. This version's circulation seems to have been limited to Germanic-speaking areas,

90. This title was added in the bottom margin of the opening page of ms 60; the text itself is the revised ensemble and shows no other signs of influence from the meretrices version.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA 151

the earliest copy coming from Brabant. The one copy produced in northern Italy (ms 5) shows evidence of having been made for a German student 91 •

The meretrices version was used as the basis for the second Middle Dutch translation (Dut2), the earliest copy of which dates from 135l.

The meretrices group has two distinctive features. First, it has a unique attribution to two prostitutes, m~ther and daughter, « who traveled through many lands in order to become . experienced ». The manuscripts' rubrics are confused over whether « Trotula » is the name of the authoresses (mater et sua filia) or of the two books. In the text itself, in the anecdote about Trota ('If 151), the Salernitan healer's name has been changed to « Trotula ». Not only that, but the editor has repeated « Trotula's » name twice more in the passage, apparently to avoid confusion between practitio­ner and patient left open by the original's use of feminine pronouns 92.

Despite this internal use of« Trotula» as a woman's name, however, I believe that the meretrices group preserves what is the original usage of the word « Trotula », that is, as the title of the ensemble itself (in this case, Trotula mulierum).

Secondly, the meretrices group is distinguished by a variety of interpola­tions, both major and minor. There are two substantial additions: (1) an extended discussion, situated between 'If 44 and 45 and said to come from the Anatomy of Alexander, on the anatomy and nature of the uterus. (2) The second addition is a prolonged discursus on. conception inserted within 'If 74. There are also many other minor interpolations and unique readings, such as the addition after 'If 86 of a new contraceptive recipe taken from « Macer » followed by the warning that « such things ought not be told to all women » 93; or at end of 'If 150 an additional recommenda­tion on preventing injury to a woman due to the excessive size of her male partner's penis 94; or the string of treatments for eyes added bet­ween 'If 208 and 209. As I shall argue at length elsewhere, several of the features that characterize the meretrices Group - particularly the associa-

91. Hermann Schedel, w.ho owned ms 60 which has the meretrices heading added on the opening page, studied in haly; indeed, he has bound his copy of the Trotula with his notes from Cristoforo Barzizza's lectures at Padua. Such halo-German contacts could well explain the southern migration of the meretrices text in the fIfteenth century.

92. I suspect the scribe of ms 5 omitted "IT 151 precisely because he recognized that this third-person account conflicted with his understanding that « Trotula " was the title of the work. .

93. «Item dicit Macer si succus mente imponatur matrici mulieris non concipiet. Sed talia non dicantur omnibus mulieribus. »

94. «Sed rogo eas (sic] qui nimis longas habent virgas et mulieres panias valde ut impo­nant virge sue quod dam iilstrumentum ad modum illius instriImenti quod equi portare solent collis quod de panho uel pelle molli sit effectum, ne ita mulieres exinde ledantur. »

152 MONICA H. GREEN

tion with prostitutes and the insertion of additional material on the anatomy and physiology of reproduction - reflect a later medieval preoccupation with generation 95. It is not coincidental that the earliest copy of the meretrices version situates it right next to the notoriously misogynistic Secreta mulie­rum, falsely attributed to Albertus Magnus.

b. Attribution of the ensemble to Trota and « Trotula »

In 1923, Pietro Capparoni put forward the suggestion that Trocta was the name of an historic Salernitan woman (whom he presumed to be an obstetrix), whose rules were compiled by a male physician; the resulting treatise, called the Trotula, was named after her, « just as Rogerina was the name of the surgical work of Roger, Guglielmina that of Guglielmo da Saliceto, and Rolandina that of Roland » 96. Capparoni was, of course, working on the traditional assumption that the Trotula was a single text by a single author. Moreover, Capparoni's suggestion about the historic Trocta's connection with the « text» was sheer hypothesis, not the result of philologi­cal research. Nonetheless, his suggestion was prescient, for the evidence of the Trotula manuscripts together with other indications show that his theory was in part correct.

The manuscripts of the proto-ensemble, even the earliest ones, are clearly already at some distance from the three original, independent Salernitan texts on women's medicine. Yet it was at this stage, I will argue, that the collective attribution of all three texts to Trota and later « Trotula » origina­ted. Whatever attributions the LSM and the DOM originally had, they must have immediately been lost for there is no trace of them in the extant manuscripts. The DOM is anonymous in all copies of all three versions, save the one copy of DOM 1 which attributes it (probably erroneously) to Reichardus medicus 97• Although both copies of LSM 1 mention « Tro­tula », only one does so as author; the other is clearly using the word as a title. Both manuscripts, moreover, are quite late and both scribes, I believe, have recognized the LSM as the opening text of the Trotula ensemble and so labelled their text accordingly98. The same recognition also probably induced a later annotator to add « Trotula » in the margin of the earlier of the two manuscripts of LSM 2; neither copy had had it originally. Of the six copies of LSM 3, only the two fifteenth-century copies (mss 117 and 121) mention « Trotula »; like the two copies of LSM 1, these are divided as to

95. GREEN, Women and Literate Medicine. 96. P. CAPPARONI, 'Magistri Salemitani nondum cogniti' : a contribution to the history

of the medical school of Salerno, London, 1923, pp. 16-17 and 39. 97. See n. 64 above. 98. Ms 67, which uses « Trotula » as a title, is a deliberate attempt to reconstruct the

ensemble; see Section B.6 below. .

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA 153

whether the word is an author's name or a title 99• Only the DCM has a name unambiguously associated with it in its earliest form. And that name is Trota.

As Capparoni noted in 1923, « Trocta» (or less commonly « Trotta ») is a common woman's name in southern Italian documents in the late eleventh and twelfth centuries 100. Approximately ninety women with this

. name can be identified in Salernitan sources from this period. The form « Trotula » (which literally should mean « little Trocta ») has thus far been found as a personal name only twice, in one case clearly referring to a child 101. One of the many Troctas in Salerno in the late eleventh or perhaps

99. In the case of ms 121, I allow the possibility that .. Trotula minor" could be inten­ded as an author referent. As evidence for the original anonymity of the LSM, it is also rele­vant to point out here that none of the vernacular translations of the LSM (Engl (which is a translation of Fren2], Frenl, Fren2, Fren3, Fren4, and Hebl (which is admittedly frag­mentary]) bears an author's name either.

100. In the present article I have chosen to employ the form .. Trota » to refer to the Salernitan healer. Even though the doubled consonant -et- or -tt- is found in virtually all Saler­nitan documents, « Trocta » is found only once in all the extant copies of the DCM and the ensembles (that is, in ms 80, a copy of the proto-ensemble). « Trotta » is found in the closing rubric of two copies of the Harley Group (i. e., at the end of the DCM) and internally in 91 151 in the « reconstructed» ensemble in ms 121. « Trota », in contrast, is found not only in mss of the DCM and the proto-ensemble, but $0 in the two extant copies of Trota's authentic Practica (Madrid, Biblioteca de la Univmidad Complutense, MS 119 (olim 116-Z-31], f. 140 rO-144 rO, ca. 1180-1215, N. France; and Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Rawlinson C 506, f. 146 vO-147 vO, s. xv2, England). Notably, aside from ms 80 (which has « Trocta »), all these manuscripts are of transalpine origin. It may well be, therefore, that the form « Trota » reflects the differing pronunciation of the Normans.

101. There are seven « Troctas » listed in the eleventh- and twelfth-century entries in the necrology of the confraternity of Salerno and sixty-nine in the Liber confratrum itself; see Necrologio del Liber Confratrum di S. Matteo di Salerno, ed. C. A. GARUFI, Fonti per la stona d'ltalia, Rome, 1922, passim. Dr. Patricia Skinner has also kindly alerted me to the presence of an additional fifteen « Troctas » between 1090 and 1138 in the arcae at Cava dei Tirreni. Cf. the seventeen Troctas listed in the necrology of the convent of Santa Patrizia in Naples (A. FACCHIANO, Monasten femminili e nobiltd a Napoli tra Medioevo ed eta modema : /l necrologio di S. Patrizia (secc. XII.XVI), Fonti per la Storia del Mezzogiorno Medievale, 11, Altavilla Silentina, 1992); the three found in the Regii Neapolitani archivi monumenta (M. VILLANI, L 'onomastica femminite nel ducata di Napoli : l'esempio di Mana, in Melanges de l'Ecolefranl$aise de Rnme: Moyen Age, t. 106, 1994, pp. 641-651); and the healer Trotta di Troya who was licensed to practice surgery in the Kingdom of Naples in 1307 (R. CALVANICO, Fonti per la stona della medicina e della chirurgia per il regno di Napoli nel periodo angioino (a. 1273-1410), Naples, 1962, pp. 124-25, item 966). Dr. Skinner has also alerted me to one little girl named « Tottula " (sic) in the town of Giovinazzo in the year 997 (Codice diplomatico Barese, t. IV, doc. 6), and an adult .. Trotula" in Bari in 1088 (ibid., t. V, doc. 9).

I have found no documentation to support Spitzner's assertion that« Der Name 'Trota', 'Trotta\ 'Trotula', 'Truta,' ist normannischen Ursprungs » (p. 37). The name was not intro­duced into N.orman England (see C. CLARK, Women's Names in Post-Conquest England, in

154 MONlCA H. GREEN

early twelfth century was a general healer (whose practice was by no means limited to midwifery) and an accomplished medical writer. A Practica secun­dum Trotam is extant in two manuscripts, and portions of her work can also be found in a large compendium of Salernitan writings entitled De egritudi­num curatione 102. As I have already mentioned, Trota is also cited within the DCM in err ISI in the case history recounting how she healed a young woman suffering from uterine flatulence. Trota is clearly not the author of the DCM; cn:.lSl consistently refers to her in the third person. Nevertheless, as I shall argue more fully elsewhere, selections from Trota's Practica and perhaps Trota's own oral dictation make up the core of the DCMI03. Thus the colophon of ms 72, which is the sole full copy of DCM I, is suitably oblique in referring to Trota as « witness» to the cures there recounted (Probata hee omnia hie notata teste Trota) 104.

Speculum, t. 53, 1978, pp. 223-251). Nor have I been able to find any French evidence for the name (see M. BOURIN and P. CHAREILLE, eds., Genese medievale de l'anthroponymie modeme, t. I, partie 2 : Persistances du nom unique : Designation et anthroponymie des femmes. Methodes statistiques pour l'anthroponymie, Tours, 1992). All the same, aside from « Tottula " in 997 (which may be another name entirely), « Trocta " is not witnessed prior to the late eleventh century. It probably evolved from « Truda ", a common name among the Lombard women of southern Italy throughout this period. (Compound forms found in the Liber conJratrum include Ageltruda, Altruda, Angeltruda, Cumeltruda, Giltruda, Gumeltruda, Madeltruda, and Rattruda.) On the earlier Germanic history of the name, see E. FORSTEMANN, Altdeutsches Namenbuch, vo!. 1 : Personennamen, Bonn, 1900, colI. 421·430; and H. KAUFMANN, Altdeutsche Personennamen. Erzanzungsband, Munich and Hildeshelm, 1968, pp. 98-99.

102. On the Practica, see n. 100 above. On the excerpts from Trota in the Salernitan compendium, see C. HIERSEMANN, Die Abschnitte aus der Practica des Trottus in der Salemitanischen Sammelschri/t De Aegritudinum Curatione. Breslau Codex Salem. 1160-1170 (inaugural dissertation, Leipzig, 1921). Hiersemann's contention that the abbreviation « Trot' " should be expanded as the masculine « Trottus » is without foundation. Not simply do major portions of the « Trot' " sections from the Breslau Codex correspond exactly with Trota's Practica, but there is no evidence anywhere in twelfth-century Salernitan documents for a masculine equivalent of Trocta. (The singular form « Troctulus » found in the name « Amatus, qui dictus est Troctulus » is clearly a matronymic; see GARUFI, Necrologio, pp. llO and 134.)

103. An edition of the Practica and further information on Trota's medical practices will be found in GREEN, Women and Literate Medicine. Confirmation of the existence of Trota and her authorship of the Practica secundum Trotam was first published' by John BENTON, art. cit.; on the basis of only a preliminary examination of the texts, however, he simulta­neously claimed (p. 43) that the Practica had no relation to any of the Trotula texts. Trota's fame extended far beyond Salerno : beside the well· known reference to « Dame Trote » by Rutebeuf (Le dit de l'herberie, in (}uvres completes de Rutebeuf, ed. M. ZINK, t. 11, Paris, 1990, p. 247), a thirteenth-eentury Anglo-Norman cosmetic text refers to her many times. See P. RUELLE, ed., L'Omement des Dames (Omatus mulierum) : texte anglo-normand du XIW siecie. Le plus ancien recueil en Jranrais de recettes medicales pour les soins du visage, publie avec une introduction, une traduction, des notes et un glossaire, Bruxelles, 1967.

104. See also ms 11, a copy of DCM 2, which' ends Exspliciunt Experimenta Atrote.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROrULA 155

It is from the DCM, then, that Trota's name became attached to the ensemble. Since Trota's name was the only one associated with even one of the texts, she was credited with the whole ensemble 105. Precisely what the term « Trotula » was meant to refer to is not certain, but two possibilities are suggested by particular manuscript traditions. The Harley Group of the proto-ensemble, although a late Il1anuscript tradition, may represent an early stage in the creation of the attribution. The Harley Group is distinguished by its retention of the original form of « Trotta »at the end of the DCM. (The DOM is omitted in all three copies.) In fact, in ms 70, « Trota » is being used as a title : Explicit hec Trota multum mulieribus apta. In two copies, there is no title or author indicated at the beginning of the LSM. In the third (again ms 70), the heading Trotula mulierum opens the LSM. «Trota » may, therefore, have been viewed as the author/title of the DCM, while the LSM may have been dubbed <~ The Little Trota of Women ». In other words, although the LSM in its expanded form is only slightly shorter than the DCM, it may have taken on the label Trotula or Trotula mulierum in order to distinguish it from the Trota proper, i. e., the DCM.

The other possibility - and the one that seems more likely to me -is that the whole ensemble was dubbed the Trotula (<< The Little Trota ») or more specifically, the Trotula mulierum (<< The Little Trota of Women ») in order to distinguish it from the Practica secundum. Trotam which, the evidence suggests, was in its original form a very large work that covered the whole range of human diseases, not simply women's medicine. Here it is notable that aside from the peculiar meretrices group (section B.l.a above), no manuscripts of the proto-ensemble signal a significant break between the end of the LSM and the beginning of the DCM. From this perspective, the evidence of ms 87, a mid-thirteenth century copy of the transitional ensemble (section B.2 below), is particularly intriguing. Here, the LSM opens with the rubric Incipit summa que dicitur Trotula, thus showing « Tro­tula » in its original form as a title. The DCM opens with the simple rubric De traditione curarum, a phrase which merely states the topic of the opening paragraph ( en- 132). The accompanying two-line initial is no larger than those of other rubricated subheadings within the ensemble, showing that the DCM was not distinguished as being a separate text. The DOM, on the other hand, is here called Alius Tractatus qui dicitur minor Trotula and it has a three-line initial, as had the opening of the LSM. The combined LSM and DCM, therefore, constitute the « Little Trota » (Trotula) while the

105. I thus disagree 'with Bimton, who argued not only that all three Trotula texts were most probably of male authorship, but also that the attribution to' a female author was a deli· berate fi,ction meant to hide that fact and so gain greater credibility for the texts.

156 MONICA H. GREEN

DOM (which was completed in the transitional ensemble) has become the « Lesser Little Trota » (Trotula minor) 106.

The title Trotula mulierum was preserved in the meretrices group of the proto-ensemble tradition and reappears, apparently at random, in a handful of later manuscripts (mss 54, 68, and 117) 107. Very soon after the original composition of the ensemble, however, « Trotula » had become understood not as a title but as an author's name. The majority of the proto­ensemble manuscripts, even some of the earliest (mss 42 and 80), refer to « Trotula » as author. Indeed, the meretrices group itself, which preserves the title Trotula mulierum, also claims two authoresses for the texts : ambe Trotule, mater et sua filia loa. « Trotula » thus became viewed as the normative form of the personal name, so that the internal reference to Trota in 'If 151 was also changed to « Trotula » 109. The many manuscripts that begin simply Incipit Trotula or end Explicit Trotula are ambiguous as to whether they are using the term as an author or a title; they may consciously be construing what they believed to be the author's name as the title, which is of course a common medieval practice~ Ms 81 and its apograph, ms 65, suggest just such a usage when they refer to the LSM (here drawn from the proto-ensemble) as « Trotula the elder » (Trotula senior). Interestingly, two copies of the standardized ensemble (see Section B.5 below) which open with the normal rubric claiming « Trotula» as author, also close Explicit Trotula cum Trota. Whether this usage indicates that « Trotula » and Trota were thought to be two different individuals (much like the mere­trices group viewed mother and daughter as the two authoresses), or whether it is a harkening back to the original titles is unclear. Ms 29, also a copy of the standardized ensemble, is unique in calling it a Tractatus bonus qui intitulatur uetula de doloribus; perhaps this scribe thought « The Old Woman On the Sufferings [of Women] » made more sense as a title than the obscure Trotula.

106. Ms 26, a fifteenth-century German copy of the standardized ensemble, is the only other copy of the ensemble to refer to the DOM alone as Trotula miTWr. Mss 44, 88, and 121 have rubrics calling the LSM Trotula miTWr; in the fIrst two cases, the designation was added by later hands (in ms 88 in an appended table of contents), while in the third ms the LSM has been situated after the DCM which may ·explain the unusual designation.

107. These are, respectively, copies of the revised ensemble, the standardized en­semble, and the paired LSM 3 and DOM 2. A later hand also adds the heading Trotula mulierum to ms 109, a copy of the intermediate ensemble. The term is likewise used in the early 15th-century list of contents of ms 114 to refer to a copy of the LSM from the pro to-ensemble.

108. Ms 95 confuses the designations mater et s~ filia with maior et miTWr. 109. Similarly, in the Madrid ms of the Practic;a secundum Trotam, a slightly later hand

« corrected» the original scribe's title to Practica secundum Trotulam.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROrULA 157

Uncertainty over whether « Trotula » was a title or author's name lingered. In many copies of the intermediate, revised and standardized ensembles, the term functioned as a title in the designation of the LSM as Trotula mawr and the DCM as Trotula mirwrllO. The scribe of ms 51 could refer to the Trotula maior et mirwr Ipocratis, assigning authorship to Hippo­crates. Others referred to the texts as Trotula maior or mirwr but also viewed « Trotula » as the author's name (mss 83, 88, 92, 99, 100, and 120; cf. ms 95 of the meretrices group). The ambiguity remained, in fact, right up through the editio princeps. Although the editor, Georg Kraut, clearly considered « Trotula » the author, he also considered the term a title of the book as seen from his marginal rubric beside the reference to « Trotula »

in 'If 151 (his cap. 20) : « Thus it is easy to understand why this little book is called Trotula » Ill. While medieval readers could still note the qualita­tive difference between the Trotula mawr and the Trotula mirwr - even if few of them posited separate authors - modern readers of the printed edition, being presented with Kraut's reworking of the standardized en­semble have been unable to discern the presence of the three original works. Hence, virtually all modern discussions of authorship, whether supporting or denying « Trotula's » existence, have assumed single authorship of the full 'Trotula ensemble. The irony of Kraut's attempt to endow « Trotula »

with a single, orderly, fully rationalized text was that, in the process, he was to obscure for the next 400 years the distinctive contributions of the historic woman Trota.

2. Transitional ensemble (8 copies)

- title: Incipiunt cure Trotule (6); Incipit prologus in librum Trotule de infirmitatibus [morbis 79] mulierum et earum curis (73, 79); none except for header Tro. (76, acephalous); Incipit summa que dicitur Trotula (87); Hic incipit Trotula (94)

- LSM incipit : Cum auctor uniuersitatis deus in prima mundi origine [constitutione 94] .

LSM explicit : ... sepe et similia pastinace domestice.

- rubric: De curis mulierum (6, 94); De impedimento ex ea (19);

110. Within the ensemble, the DOM was often not distinguished from the DCM; hence, the epithet Trotula minor in some mss apparently applied to both texts together. Compare this usage with another group of commonly circulating medical texts which likewise derived their title f~om their author's name, that is, the so-called Rogerina major, Rogerina media, and Rogerina minor.

Ill. Kraut in Schottus, 'np. cit., p. 27 : « Hic facile potest comprehendi, unde iste libel­Ius Trotula intituletur. »

158 MONICA H. GREEN

Incipit liber Trotule sanatricis Salernitane de curis mulierum (64) 112; none (76); De traditio ne curarum (87)

- DCM incipit : Ut de curis mulierum compendiosa traditio ...

- err 151 (anecdote) : Unde contingit quod [add. domina 87] Trotula [Trota 64, 73, 76] uocata [notata 6] fuit tamquam [quasi 87; deest 19] magisfra [add. huius operis 94] [tamquam magistra om. 76] ...

- DCM explicit, Group A (err 235) : ... minget uelit nolit. Si uero non, non.

- DCM explicit, Group B (CjJ"241) : ... postea duo oua (87); ... postea duo oua et manus inde fricentur (19, 94)

- DOM, rubric: Ut mulieres fiant sine pilis (6); Psilotrum ad planan­dam cutem (64); AIius Tractatusqui dicitur minor Trotula (87); none (19, 94)

- DOM incipit (abbreviated preface), Group A : Sicut ait Ypocras in pronosticis, omnis qui medicine artis studio seu gloriam et cetera ne medi­cus in singulis ad artem pertinentibus uideatur inermis (6); Sicut ait ypo­cras in pronosticis, omnis qui medicine artis studio seu gloriam seu delecta­bilem amicorum copiam habere desiderat rationem sue regule prudentum muniat ne singulis ad artem pertinentibus inermis uideatur (64)

- DOM incipit (abbreviated preface), Group B : Ut ait Ypocras in libro quem de prognosticorum scientia composuit, omnis qui medicine artis stu­dio seu gloriam seu delectabilem amicorum copiam consequi desiderat, ratio­nem suam prudentem adeo regulis munire studeat, ne in singulis ad artem medendi spectantibus inermis uideatur (87); Sicut Ypocras testatur in libro pronosticorum, omnis qui medicine artis studio seu gloriam seu delectabi­lem amicorum copiam consequi desiderat ratione sua adeo regulis pruden­turn se muniat ne inhermis in singulis ad artem spectantibus uideatur (94); deest (19)

- DOM incipit (text) : Ut leuissima et mulier planissima et suauissima et sine pilis a capite inferius fiat [appareat 64] (Group A); ... a capite infe­rius inueniatur (Group B)

- DOM explicit, Group A ( err 309f) : ... et hoc durabit per septima­nam. Probatum est 113

- DOM explicit, Group B : (varies)

- closing rubric: Explicit (6, 19, 64); Explicit Trotula (94); none (73, 79, 87)

- MSS, Group A : 6, 64

112. Note that the LSM is lacking in ms 64. 113. Ms 6 omits the last four sentences.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROrULA 159

MSS, Group B: 19,73,76,79 (an apograph ofms 73), 87, 94 114

It is with the transitional ensemble that the Trotula ensemble takes on its full character. This redactor's chief work was in the DOM section. The compiler went back to the full text of DOM 2 and incorporated it in toto, including the little that was left of the original preface. Like the creator of the proto-ensemble, the compiler of the transitional ensemble seems also to have compared his or her copy of DOM 2 with a copy of DOM 1, for we find here passages restored (often with some alteration) from the earlier text. For example, in 'If 247, which described a lye mixture with which to wash the hair, the compiler rejected the fragmentary text of the proto-ensemble in favor of DOM 1. The proto-ensemble had had the unique reading olla impleatur habens in fundo duo foramina parua uel tria, et per illa coletur lexiuia et recipiat in alia olla que non sit per/orata. The transitional ensemble, making no mention of a second, non-perforated pot, returns to a reading closer to that of DOM 1 (impleatur olla habens in fundo duo foramina parua uel tria. Aqua supradicta bullita infundeatur in olla ut coletur per foramina) lIS. In 'If 249, however, the transitional ensemble retains the proto-ensemble's ascription to noble women of the use of redolent substances in the hair and clothes. In 'If 243, the transitional ensemble incorporates the reading of the proto-ensemble for the instruction to test the depilatory being described with a feather lest it overcook and burn the skin; it then goes on to say that .if the depilatory did in fact cause a skin burn, rose oil should be used to treat it 116. The compiler also retrieved from DOM 1 'If 284 (a facial whitener), which had been omitted from DOM 2.

This compiler augmented the DOM text with additional recipes - and useful elaborations. Whereas the original author of the DOM had simply recommended the use of amidum, offering no explanation of what it was, . the transitional ensemble's compiler added precise instructions on how to make this starch paste from wheat or barley and milk ('If 274). The compiler may well have 0 been simply inserting material that had already become attached to the text; 'If 2S0a on removing spots from linen, for example, is found already in the earliest copy of the proto-ensemble (ms 38). But the compiler also combed other texts for appropriate material. Extracting two passages from one of the short tracts on materia medica by

0 114. This ms is a collation of the transitional ensemble with several other forms of the texts. 115. DOM 2 had had a slightly more simplified version of this passage. 116. Transitional ensemble, 'iT 243: « Caue ne nimis coquatur et nimis unquam super

cutem moretill-, quia maximum ardorem facit, et si ex psilotro contingat cutem deperdi. Accipe oleum rosaceum cum succo semperuiue distemperato donec recedat calor, post inunge ungento albo out sedetur ardor. »

160 MONICA H. GREEN

the Salernitan author Bernard of Provence, for example, the compiler created a little sequence of three recipes (Cff 290,289 and 293c) all discussing the practices of the mulieres Salemitane. The transitional en­semble text of the DOM is, then, distinguished by the considerable care with which is was rewritten : usually it was simplified, but occasionally it was augmented with small details that suggest the special expertise of the compiler in this field.

The transitional ensemble manuscripts fall into two groups. Group A is characterized by the addition in the DOM section of recipes for thicke­ning the hair (Cff 266), removing stains from linen cloths (Cff 280a) 117, and whitening the face (Cff 285); a sequence of chapters on care of the lips ( Cff 296 a, 296 b, 297, 298, 299 and 299 a); a series of dentifrices plus a recipe for whitening the hands (Cff 305 a-e); and, after the instructions for genital hygiene that had closed DOM 1 and 2 (Cff 3051), three further vaginal constrictives and four remedies for the face, the last being an unguentum uxoris Petri Viviani (Cff 307-309, 309 a, 309 c, 309 e, and 3091).

Group B moves the unguentum uxoris Petri Viviani and the dentifrices and hand whitener to the end of the DCM (now Cff 233, 237, 236, 238-241), where they stay in all subsequent ensembles. It also adds in the DCM a recipe for breath odor caused by stomach disorders (Cff 178), and ano­ther vaginal constrictive (Cff 195 b). In the DOM it adds recipes for coloring the hair (Cff 255) and making it golden (Cff 260), and instructions for removing blemishes from the skin after birth (Cff 277).

The two extant manuscripts of Group A come from northern France from the middle of the thirteenth century. Most manuscripts of Group B come from England and France, likewise beginning in the mid-thirteenth century. Ms 94, a late thirteenth- or early fourteenth-century copy from Germany, reflects a collation of the transitional ensemble with an early version of the proto-ensemble as well as the revised ensemble. Hence, for example, it retains the preface to the DOM while at the same time presenting the more abridged collection of cosmetic recipes as found in the revised ensemble.

Of particular interest are two manuscripts of English provenance : ms 73 (s. xiv in.) and its apograph, ms 79 (s. XVI). These reflect the very first attempt to remedy the disorder and redundancy of the ensemble, which must have proved frustrating to the practitioner attempting to use the work. Embellishing the Trotulan material liberally with material from other sources, this redaction divides the text into thirty-nine chapters. The provision of a table of contents, even though it is misplaced in both copies,

117. 9f 280 a is also found in rns 38, a copy of the prot~nsernble.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA 161

undoubtedly contributed to the practical utility of this manual. Its order more or less follows that of the LSM : after the LSM s opening discussion of basic female physiology and pathology (I[ 1-9), the text covers menstrual condi­tions, uterine suffocation, other uterine conditions, infertility, regimen of pregnancy, difficult birth, extraction of the afterbirth, neonatal care, choice of a wet-nurse, and breast problems. Those cosmetic recipes which were not deleted are grouped into the penultimate chapter, while methods to « restore» virginity close the text. Similar rearrangements would be attemp­ted in the fifteenth century (see Section B.5 below), and of course by Georg Kraut in his 1544 editio princeps.

3. The intermediate ensemble (15 copies) - title: none (8, 9, 63, 86, 118); Incipit liber magistre Trotu[le] cuius

florem legit ex dictis prouidorum Galieni, Auicenn[e], et aliorum peritorum ueterum in utilit[atem] mulier[um] et pro deco[ra]tione ea[rum], scilicet de fa[cie] et de uu[l]ua ear[um] (24); Incipit Trota de hornatu mulierum (36); Liber Trotile (49); Incipit trotula maior et minor de sinthomatibus uirorum et mulierum (51); Incipit liber de curis egritudinum mulierum (53); Tro­tula de ornatu mulierum (99); Incipit Trotula (109); Trotula (1l0)

- LSM incipit : Cum auctor uniuersitatis [Quoniam auctorum diuersi­tatis 86] deus in prima mundi origine [constitutione 53, 99, 109] ...

- LSM explicit : ... ut sunt cepe, pastirrace domestice et similia. - rubric: none (8, 9, 86, 99, 1l0, 118); De curis mulierum (24);

De commocione qualitatum (36); Trotile minor (49); Incipit minor Trotula de sinthomatibus (51); Cum fuerit uicio mulieris, cura (63); Hie incipit Trotula minor de ornatu (104, begins with I[ 184); Sequitur de curis mulierum (109)

- DCM incipit : Ut a nobis de curis mulierum ... - I[ 151 (anecdote) : Unde contingit quod Trotula [Truttula 24;

cito 36] uocatil fuit tamquam [quasi 24, 36, 109; illegible 99] magistra [add, huius 24] operis [tamquam magistra operis om. (8); tamquam in­grata 86] ...

- DCM explicit : ... et exinde manus frica. - rubric: none (8, 36,49,86,99, 118); De planitie (12); De depila-

torium [sic] (24); De depilatione pectoris (51); De ornatu (104); Vt mulier sit plana (109)

DOM preface: deest DOM incipit : Ut mulier suauissima et planissima et sine pilis ... DOM explicit (1[312) : ... et mane lauet cum aqua tepida.

closing rubric: none (8, 9); Explicit Trotula (12, 104); Explicit lib er Troctule de negotiis mulierum (24); Explicit liber Trotile (49); Explicit Tro-

II

162 MONICA H. GREEN

tula maior et minor Ipocratis de omnibus sinthomatibus mulierum et uiro­rum, secretis et pudendis que ipse et ipsi uerecundantur medicis' reuelare (51); Explicit Trotula maior et minor de secretis mulierum (99); Explicit (109)

-- MSS:8,9, 12,24,36,49,51,53,63,86,99, 104,109,110, 118

The intermediate ensemble is the fullest form of the Trotula compen­dium. Either it derives from the transitional ensemble at a stage somewhat intermediate between Group A and Group B, or it has conflated the two traditions. It includes most of the new material characteristic of Group A (<if 257, 280a, 280, 293c, 296a, 296b, 297, 298, 299 and 299a ll8,

309a and 309c), and it generally follows Group A in retaining older mate­rial that Group B had dropped (<if 217 a-b and 217 d in the DC M, and <if 280a-c and 280e-h in the DOM) though in the case of the DOM recipes it moves them to the end of the text (now <if 309g-i, 310, 310a-b, and 312). Furthermore, it omits nothing that Group A had had save the DOM preface (long since superfluous), a recipe for whitening the face that employed. fava beans (Cjf 280d), another for exfoliating the face (Cjf 280i), and a brief recipe for brightening the face (Cjf 30ge). Like Group B, however, it moves the unguentum uxoris Petri Viviani and the series of recipes for dentifrices and a face whitener to the end of the DOM (Cjf 309f and 305a-e thus becoming <if 236-241) 119. It also agrees with Group B against Group A in its inclusion of <if 255, 260, and 277.

The number of completely new recipes is fairly small. In the DCM, the intermediate ensemble adds Cjf 220 on treating flesh corroded by worms with oat bran. This, however, is essentially a restatement of <if 219 and apparently reflects the intermediate ensemble editor's incorporation of a variant reading. New in the DOM are <if 291-93 on treating fIstula. These may have some origin in the transitional ensemble as the fInal sentence

ll8. The intermediate ensemble collapses 'if 299 and 299a, which had in the transi­tional ensemble addressed thickening of the lips and of the body, respectively: 'if 299 « Labiorum grossicies subtiliatur cum perunctione mellis uel succi glaucie uel peruncta tyriaca uel succo mente uel succo spatule uel cathaplasmata uermiculari uel peruncta sepe succo cucumeris radicis uel ipsa radice contracta cathaplasmata »; 'if 299 a « Corporis grossicies subtilitatur cum unctione mellis albe in quo bullerit radix draguntee et yreos uel scrophula­ria uel etiam amidum in mulsa dissoluunt, et puluis marmoris, puluis pumicis assi, et ossis sepie, misceantur et ungantur. Ungatur et locus mixto puluere agarici et masticis. » Because of an omission caused by homoearchon or homoeoteleuton (the scribe's eye skipping from cum perunctione mellis in 'if 299 to cum unctione mellis in 'if 299 a), the two recipes were collapsed into one.

ll9. The unguent is still attributed to the wife of Petrus Viviamis in mss 12, 51, 63, 99, and 109. In mss 8, 24, and 86, it is attributed to the wife of Petrus Julianus. Petrus Hispanus (later Pope John XXI) was also known as Petrus juliani (see WICKERSHEIMER, Dic­tionnaire, 2 : 638-40; and JACQUART, Supplement, pp. 232-236) but it would surprising to think that he was credited with having a wife.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA 163

of 'If 292 appears in one copy of that earlier version. Oddly, right after these chapters on fistula it adds 'If 293 a and 293 b, on signs to distinguish between pregnancy and dropsy, and signs of a fetus that has died in the womb. These are found in the margin of ms 87, a copy of the transitional ensemble, Group B, near the DCM chapter on women who labor in child­birth with a dead fetus ('If 145)., It was probably from an exemplar that similarly had these passages added. marginally that they became incorpora­ted, however incongruously, into the cosmetic section of the intermediate ensemble. Finally, it adds 'If 309b, yet another face whitener, and 309d, a wax preparation for softening the skin.

Beyond these rearrangements and additions,· the intermediate en­semble gives little evidence of editorial intrusion. Those new readings that are found here come mostly from corruptions : the reference to Cleopatra in 'If 2, for example, turned into such bizarre forms as leo patre patroti­nia 120. The manuscripts are generally in common agreement in their attri­bution to « Trotula ». Notably, mss 24 and 49 are the only two copies of the Latin Trotula to have an illumination at the opening of the text, which at least in the latter case is clearly meant as an author portrait 121.

Aside from one late German manuscript (ms 51, copied in 1471), the circulation of the intermediate ensemble was limited to Italy, France, and England. Its Italian circulation is notable, for no other version of the ensemble save the standardized is witnessed by as many Italian copies (mss 24, 63, 86, and 109). This version was also popular in England, whence six copies still survive (mss 9, 12,36,53, 104, and 118). The intermediate ensemble served as the basis for the longest of the English translations, Eng2 (there called the Liber Trotuli).

4. The revised ensemble (14 copies)

- title: Incipit Trotula (7, 112); none (13, 15, 18, 32, 119); Incipit liber de passionibus mulierum secundum Trotulam ex libris [rest illegible] (28); Incipit liber Trotule (54); Incipit liber de passionibus mulierum secun­dum Trotulam (56); De passionibus mulierum secundum Trotulam (60) 122;

Incipit liber de egritudinibus pudibudorum mulierum et eorum remediis (106)

120. Variants in 'if 2 in mss of intermediate ensemble: deo [expunc.) lea patre patro­tinia compilarem (8); oleo prepatronia (24); cleopatre (53, 63, 99); cum deo patre paterno (109); constantini (49); cleopatre (cleppatre 86) petronia (51, 86); cleopatre noui pociora (9, U8); et cleopatre pectora (36); reference omitted (12, UO).

121. The only known vernacular illuminated ms is Fren2Id, which had opened with a depiction of God creating Adam. Unfortunately, this ms was destroyed in the fire at the Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria of Turin in 1904.

122. In ms 60, a later hand has also added the title from the meretrices version in the bottom margin.

164 MONICA H. GREEN

LSM incipit : Cum auctor uniuersitatis deus in prima origine [consti­tutione 18, 109, 112J mundi ...

- LSM explicit : ... ut sunt cepe, pastinace domestice et similia. - rubric: none (7, 60, 119); De cognitione mulieris frigide et calide

(112); De diuersa complexione mulierum (15); Cura (18); Probatio [rest illegibleJ (32); Explicit primus lib er Trotule. et incipit secundus (54); Vt cognoscas que causa laborant mulieres (105); De cognitione qualitatum mulie­rum (13, 28, 56)

- DCM incipit : Ut a nobis de curatione (curis : 105, 110, 112) mulierum ...

- DCM explicit ('if 241) : '" et postea duo oua et cum eo manus fricabis.

- rubric: none, no significant break (7, 18, 28, 32, 60, 84, 119); De modo preparandi mulierem ut pulcra fiat (15); Ad remouendum pilos (56); Ut mulier sine pilis maneat (54); Ad remouendum pilos de pecline (112)

DOM incipit : Ut mulier suauissima et planissima et 'sine pilis ...

- DOM explicit : ... et mane lauet cum aqua tepida.

- closing rubric: Explicit Trotula (7,18,32,56,60,112,119); Explicit liber factus a muliere Salernitana que Trotula vocatur (ms 15); Explicit Trotula de passionibus mulierum (ms 28); Explicit Trotula. Explicit Trotula mulie­rum (54); Expellit Trotula (105)

- mss:7, 13, 15, 18,28,32,54,56,60,84, 105, 106, 112, 119

At some point in the early or middle decades of the thirteenth century, another editor decided to establish a purer form of the texts. He or she used copies of both the transitional ensemble (Group B) and the intermediate ensemble as a base, incorporating material from both versions. 'if 291-93, which had first appeared in the intermediate ensemble 123, were carried over, while 'if 178 and 233 which had characterized Group B of the tran­sitional ensemble were incorporated. Only one recipe is completely new: 'if 222 on deafness.

The editor of the revised ensemble also suppressed several recipes. 'if 173a on impetigo, 'if 217 a on infantile worms, 'if 217b on swelling of the throat, and 'if 217 d on snake bite were all deleted from the DCM, perhaps because they seemed extraneous to gynecological conditions. In the cosme­tics section, the editor omitted or chose not to carry over from the inter­mediate ensemble a total of thirteen recipes, including the incongruous 'if 293 a and 293 b on signs of pregnancy and a dead fetus, as well as 'if 305f on hygiene of the genitalia and a series of facial care suggestions near the end of the text.

123. Though see the note to 9T 291 in Table Ill.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA . 165

Equally distinctive of this version of the ensemble are its many revised readings drawn from the earlier, independent versions of the three Trotula texts. In the LSM, this editor noticed that a group of recipes (Cjf 107-9) had been omitted from the section on aids for difficult birth 124, the text thus moving directly from the description of a lye mixture used to induce vomiting (Cjf 105) to the recommendation that emenagogues be used if the lochial flow will not start (Cjf Ill). The editor of the revised ensemble copied this abbreviated section as she or he found it, and then completed the section by adding the remaining recipes (Cjf 107-9). The editor appa­rently did not notice, however, that she or he had duplicated the instruction for the emenagogues, hence the redundancy of 'If 106 and 111125.

For the DC M, this editor went back to a manuscript of the earliest form, DCM 1, though as with the rest of the ensemble text his or her interest was generally in restoring the occasional lost or abbreviated passage, not in retrieving original readings for their own sake. In the opening sentence (Cjf 132), the editor clarified that the subsequent test was for differentiating « hot» women from « cold» in order that they might be properly aided in conception (notandum quod quedam mulieres sunt calide, quedam sunt frigide). DCM 2 and all earlier versions of the ensemble had said more vaguely « it ought to be seen which cause dominates» (uidendum est que causa super­fuerit). In Cjf 141 on. the problems of sexual continence in widows and nuns, the editor reinserted a final passage which explained the anatomical reason why a pessary should not be used for this condition (quoniam os matri­cis uulue iungitur, ut ori labia, nisi fiat conceptio, quoniam tunc retrahitur matrix) 126. In Cjf 160, he or she reintroduced the clarification that sterile women suffering from a sanious flux ought to be aided by provoking the menses (the phrase in prouocando menstrua having dropped out in the proto­ensemble). But either because the exemplar of the DCM was defective or because of the editor's oversight, the crucial non, which had dropped out in transitional ensemble, was not replaced. Hence the original assertion that these older women ought not be treated because, having already passed meno-

124. 'iT 107-9 had dropped out in the proto-ensemble; they are found only in the meretrices group and ms 84 which, as I have already indicated, show signs of conflation with other versions of the texts.

125. A scribal error, on the other hand, is probably behind the redundancy of a pas­sage on care of the gums in the DOM. Apparently because of homoeoteleuton, the scribe skipped from 'iT 299 (cum mastice siccatz) to the last two sentences of 'iT 304 (beginrung De hiis autem siccatis). He consequently moved the latter half of 'iT 304 and all of the subse­quent 'iT 304 a forward, situating them immediately after a recipe (itself already corrupted in the intermediate ensemble) on fat lips, 'iT 300 in the revised and standardized ensem­bles, therefore, is nothing -but a repetition of the end of 'iT 304.

126. This passage is found in the meretrices group of the proto-ensemble tradition. It appears in no other version. .

166 MONICA H. GREEN

pause, their sterility was incurable (quibus in menstma prouocando non est subueniendum cum sint steriles) was never restored.

In two instances, the editor's emendations created novel readings. In DCM 1-2 and the proto-ensemble, 'If 155 had read « We cook raw fdatum in water with ashes and this we apply to the pain » (decoquimus jilatum cmdum in aqua cum cinere et istud dolori apponimus). This reading persists in the intermediate ensemble. In some manuscripts of Group B of the tran­sitional ensemble, however, the reading of the second sentence of the pre­vious paragraph was changed to « We cook black nightshade in water with [its] seed and we apply it to the pain» (decoquimus solatmm in aqua cum semi ne et dolori apponimus). The revised ensemble editor, instead of resol­ving the conflict, simply links the two readings together, thus creating 'If 156; the intervening phrase vel aliter apparently was meant as a disclai­mer to indicate that the different versions disagreed.

More interestingly, in 'If 204 on whooping cough, the revised ensemble editor attempted to retrieve what was left of the original synonymous phrase, et dicitur anglice chinke. Scribes of DCM 2 alr~ady show that the English term needed to be glossed : ms 11 adds the erroneous French gloss id est, sire (cf. Latin siriones, a kind of worms). The English term drops out and the French term alone gets carried forward into the proto-ensemble, though here, too, the vernacular term makes little sense to scribes who render it with such forms as tyrie (ms lIS) or thum (which is then expunctuated, with chynke added above the line in ms 34); the Erfurt group adds a qualifying quasi (que est quasi tussis, ms 22; que est quasi tussis et dicitur are, mss 37 and 85). The term turns into citer or cicer in Group A of the transitional ensemble (mss 6 and 64), while in Group B the qualifier quasi reemerges and the variants of sire drop out (que quasi tussis dicitur, ms 87; que est quasi tussis et dicitur, ms 19; que est quasi tussis .i. dicitur followed by a blank space, ms 76). As might be expected, ms 94, which is influenced by the revised ensemble, provides a new reading: « a disease of children which is like a cough and it is called 'very piercing' » (passio pueromm que est quasi tussis et dicitur acerrima). It was indeed this readingthat became normative in the revised ensemble. Soon, however, the now-awkward phrase et dicitur was seen as extraneous and so was deleted, never to be found in any copies of the standardized ensemble.

While almost always in agreement in their contents, in their wording manuscripts of the revised ensemble present a good deal of variation one from another. Nevertheless, it is at this stage that we fIrst see readings that will become permanently fIxed in the standardized ensemble, e. g., the title De passionibus muliemm ,secundum Trotulam; deo prestante repla­cing Cleopatre and its many wild variants in 'If 2; or the unguent originally

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA 167

attributed to Muslim women in Cfr 245 being re attributed to Salernitan women.

The revised ensemble had a circulation similar to both the intermediate and the standardized ensembles. The earliest copy, ms 32, which perhaps comes from the region of Alsace in the second quarter of the thirteenth century, is actually a prototype of the new version : it has conflated the transitional and intermediate ensembles, but has not yet added the distinc­tive readings just described 127. The second oldest copy, now presenting the full form of the text, is an English manuscript from the mid-thirteenth century (ms 13), after which follow a group of four copies from the turn of the fourteenth century which may all come from southern France, perhaps even Montpellier (mss 54,56,84, and 112). Thereafter, with the exception of one fourteenth-century French copy (ms 7), the revised ensemble is found only in fllteenth-century manuscripts, and these mostly from Germany.

5. The standardized ensemble (28 copies)

- title: De passionibus mulierum secundum [add. dominam 91] Trotulam (3, 25, 66, 83, 84, 91, 92, 100, 102, 107, 120); Hic secuntur que [sic] capitula Trotule de passionibus mulierum (10); none (26, 29, 30, 33, 50, 78, 88, 97, 101, 116); Edicio magistri Adalberti. Incipit Trotula de secretis mulierum (61); Incipit tractatus intitulatus Trotula mulierum (68); Excerpta rotule [sic] secuntur causa (105); Incipit Trotula de secreta [sic] mulierum (113, rubric added by later hand)

- LSM incipit : Cum auctor uniuersitatis deus in prima constitutione (origine 68, 78, 84) mundi ...

- LSM explicit : ... ut sunt cepe, pastinace domestice et similia.

- rubric: Cura (3, 26, 30, 84, 101, 102); none (25, 29, 33, 50, 78, 97, 107, 116); De cura alia eiusdem (10); De sterilitate ex parte mulieris (61); Incipit Trotula minor (66,88,92, 100); Cura [marg. : Hic incipit Trotula minor] (83); Cura alia (91); Vt cognoscas que causa laborant mulieres (105); De muliere calide aque [sic] frigide (112, added by later hand)

- DCM incipit :. Ut a nobis de curatione [curis 105] ...

127. For example,ms 32 deletes DCM'If 173a, 'If 217 a, 'If 217b, and 'If 217 d, and it inserts 'If 233 from the transitional ensemble (Group B). In the DOM, however, it still retains the incongruous material on signs of pregnancy, etc. Although I have classified it with.Grolip B of the transitional ensemble, ms 94 can also be considered a prototype of the revised ensemble not only because it has the same characteristic deletions and additions as ms 32; but also because (unlike ms 32) it deletes the same DOM material as the full­fledged revised ensemble. Notably, it too comes from a German area early in the thirteenth century.

168 MONICA H. GREEN

anecdote: Un de contingit [conuenit 33,116; accidit 105] quod Tro­tula uocata fuit quasi magistra operis ...

- DCM explicit : ... et cum eo, manus fricabis. - rubric: De palliandis mulieribus (3, 101, 20, 83, 92, 100, 101,

107); De palliacione (10); none (25, 97, 29, 33, 78, 84, 97, 102, 116); Incipit Trotula minor (26); De pallicionibus mulierum (30); De palliatione bona (91); Vt mulier suauissima (105, 113)

DOM incipit : Ut mulier suauissima et planissima et sine pilis ... - DOM explicit : ... et mane lauet cum aqua tepida. - closing rubric : Explicit Trotula [Trotulla 88] (3, 26, 30, 83,

84, 88, 91, 100, 107, 113); Explicit Trotula cum Trota [Troca 25] (25, 120); Explicit tractatus bonus qui intitulatur uetula de doloribus (29); Est finitus huius Trocule (61) 128; Explicit Trotula mulierum (68) 129;

Explicit liber factus a muliere Salernitana que Trotula uocatur (78); none (101); Explicit Arnaldus de noua uilla (102); Expellit Trotula (105); Explicit Trotula de egritudinibus mulierum et earum curis scriptum peril­lustris (116)

- MSS : 3, 10, 17, 20, 25, 26, 29, 30, 33, 50, 61, 66, 68, 78, 83, 84, 88, 91, 92, 97, 100, 101, 102, 105, 107, 113, 116, 120

The editor of the standardized ensemble, the last major revision of the Trotula, made no substantive additions or deletions; the text is, in contents, entirely identical to the revised ensemble 130. For only one passage did this editor go back, as had the revised ensemble editor, to the original texts. In 'IT 87, which recounted the causes of miscarriage and offerred sug­gestions for its prevention, the revised ensemble (following earlier versions) said that « a woman does not need purging or phlebotomy before the fourth month, but in the fifth or seventh month she can be purged» 131. The ori­ginal LSM, however, rather than denying that women might need purging or bleeding in the first four months, said that even if they did need it it should not be done. The standardized ensemble editor returns to this fuller, more medically precise reading 132.

128. Because of its rearrangement, ms 61 ends with 9f 127. 129. Because of its rearrangement, ms 68 ends with 9f 125. 130. Three copies of the revised ensemble, mss IS, 18, and 84 (LSM only), regularly

have readings that conform to the standardized ensemble. I have not yet determined whether this is due to cross-contamination or to the fact that they represent an intermediate stage between the revised and the standardized ensemble.

131. Revised ensemble ('W 87) : « Vnde Ypocras dicit quod mulier non indiget purgatione uel minutione ante .iiii.or menses, sed in quinto uel'septimo potest purgari uel minui. ~

132. Standardized ensemble (9f 87) : « Vnde Ypocras dicit quod si mulier indiget

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA '169

This editor's work was otherwise limited to minor stylistic changes and amplifications. She or he replaced, for example, the assertion in 'If 3 that Nature created « a recuperation» for women's defective heat (the cause of menstruation) by the more poetic phrase « to temper the poverty of their

, heat» (ad caloris ipsamm pauperiem temperandam) 133. This editor had a particular taste for synonymy: the veins of the womb are both ample et aperte, not simply aperte ('If 29); pain occurs in the « more prominent » or the more anterior part of the womb ('If 65, in eminentiori uel anteriori parte matricis). In some cases of paired terms the editor is incorporating variant readings from different manuscripts : an amenorrheic woman has both her color and her heat ('If 9, color et calor) restored after her. cure by Galen; the compound medicine diatesseron is made from either mint or myrtleberry ('If 11, menta uel mirta). This same tendency to incorporat~ variants rather than resolve discrepancies gave rise to the creation of 'If 39, a prescription to apply the juice of willow-weed to the belly in order to stem excessive menstrual flux. As with the revised ensemble, it seems to be philological tinkering rather than clinical scrutiny that gives rise to these changes.

This editor was not uniformly conscientious in tidying up the text and he or she introduced new errors and allowed old ones to stand. In 'If 34, the standardized ensemble unnecessarily repeats a reference to plantain root in a recipe for a ptisan 134. In the revised ensemble, the passage had read « Let her drink a ptisan made from barley, first from sugar» (Bibat ptisa­nam de ordeo jactam, primitus de zuccara), de zuccara itself being a corrup­tion of the transitional ensemble's reading decorticato, « having ftrst been husked ». The standardized ensemble editor chose to eliminate the nonsen­sical phrase de zuccara, substituting it with the secondary instruction for adding plantain root. She or he forgot, however, to delete the original phrase from its position at the end of the paragraph. The redundancy of 'If 300 and

purgatione uel minutione, non debet purgari uel minui ante .iiii. mensem. Sed in quinto uel sexto potest purgari uel minui. "

133. The reading adcaloris ipsarum pauperiem temperandam is found in eight of the twenty-three mss of the standardized ensemble that include this passage (mss 3, 30, 33, 50, 61, 88, 97, 102); ms 33 in fact has the fuller reading defectum uel pauperiem temperandam. The relative rarity of the reading and the various attempts to make sense of its corruption show that the loss occurred early in the transmission. The standardized ensemble editor had substituted the new phrase for the earlier reading recuperationem, which had entered the ensemble tradition via LSM 2; recuperatioriem was, in turn, an emendment of the original reading re~ompensationem found in LSM 1 and 3.

134. Standardized ensemble,.9f 34 : « Bibat ptisanam de ordeo factam, primitus in qua coquatur radix plantaginis~ et bulliat cum ptisana et melius erit. Et postea bulliat in aqua maris donee crepuerit et corrugetm- et apponaturacetum et coletur per pannum et detur ad bibendum. Bibat uinum rubeum cum aqua marina Iimphatum. Et si radix plantaginis bulliat cum ptisana, melius erit. " ..

170 MONICA H. GREEN

304 in the DOM similarly went unnoticed and uncorrected, . as did other· peculiar or even nonsensical words and phrases.

The standardized ensemble is distinguished by its regularized chapter divisions and rubrics, a feature which, as with DOM 3, suggests a mid­thirteenth century date of redaction at the earliest. These rubrics divide the whole text into ninety-one chapters, though in truth they are not sufficient to signal the constant topical changes in the DeM. There is no rubric, for example, to divide 'If 135 on provoking the menses from 'If 136-138 on the opposite topic of restraining an excessive menstrual flux. Nor are these, in turn, separated from the subsequent discussion of aiding difficult birth ('If 139). Be that as it may, the rubrics, like the rest of the text, remained remarkably stable 135.

The standardized ensemble proved to be the most popular of all of the forms of the Trotula texts, being now extant in twenty-eight copies, almost twice as many as any other aside from the proto-ensemble. Manuscripts come from all parts of Europe save Spain. The earliest (mss 3, 20, 100, 113, and 120) already show the text circulating in Italy, France, England and Germany in the latter half of the thirteenth century. The standardized ensemble's popularity peaked in Italy, France and England around the turn of the fourteenth century. Thereafter, the majority of copies were made in central and eastern Europe. The standardized ensemble also served as the basis for at least four vernacular translations : Dut3, Fren6 (and possibly Fren5 as well), Germ2, and Germ3.

In the fifteenth century, two scribes independently rearranged the text: in Klattau, Bohemia, in 1478-1479, 10hannes Rudolt copied out a rearrangement of the gynecological, obstetrical, and pediatric chapters. Whether Rudolt himself was responsible for the rearrangement is unclear; he attributed it to « Adalbertus, » undoubtedly intending to associate the Trotula (here called De secretis muliemm) with the identically entitled treatise (also found in this manuscript) traditionally attributed to Albertus Magnus. At approximately the same time, an English scribe made a similar rearrangement, though in this case he added related material from Walter Agilon, Lanfranc, and other authors (ms 68) 136. These re arrangements appear, then, to be the unique work of individual scribes. They are enti-

135. There are, of course, several mss where space was left for the rubrics though they were never added; they sometimes do (mss 33, 84) and sometimes do not (ms 78, 97) have the rubric text written in the margin. The regularity of the standard rubrics is highlighted by the irregularity of those added by a later hand to ms 113; these often correspond poorly to the content of the text. .

136. A similar though less elegant rearrangement had been made from the transitional ensemble, probably in the latter half of the thirteenth century (see Section B.2 above).

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA 171

rely unrelated to Georg Kraut's creative manipulation of 1544, when he refashioned the standardized ensemble anew into his editio princeps.

6. «Re-constructions» of the ensemble (2 copies)

- mss : 67, 121

It is perhaps fitling to close this survey of the Latin versions of the Tro­tula with two manuscripts that raise some of the most interesting questions about the development of the Trotula ensemble. Mss 67 and 121 juxtapose the independent LSM (LSM 3 in the case of 121, LSM 1 in the case of 67), DCM 2 (ending with Cff 232, i. e., just before the long sequence of recipes that were relocated by the proto-ensemble editor, Cff 232 a-r) , and DOM 2 (without its preface) 137. Neither manuscript is an apograph of the other, but they are clearly related: the text of the DCM and the DOM (the latter being fragmentary in ms 67) are very similar in both. Both copies are identical, for example, in moving DCMCff 189 to follow Cff 191, and in omit­ting Cff 193-197. The two manuscripts diverge, however, in one section of the DCM : ms 121 retains the first string of hair-care chapters (Cff 207 a-d, f-j, and 1-0 138, which would in the ensemble be transposed into the DOM), while ms 67 omits them.

It is conceivable that the two manuscripts derive from a common source in eastern Germany. Ms 121 was written in eastern Europe, while Herman­nus Zurke, who wrote ms 67 for Gilbert Kymer in Salisbury in the 1450s, hailed from Greifswald on the Baltic 139. A distinctive feature of the medi­cal manuscripts that Zurke wrote for Kymer is that they contain many texts that are known only from his copies. In other words, he seems to have had access to a store of otherwise rare texts 140. The obvious familial relationship between Zurke's manuscript and ms 121 might then be due to Zurke's actually having brought a copy of this reconstructed ensemble with him from Germany. Then, either because his copy lacked the LSM or because he found in England a copy that was preferable to his (LSM 3, which the scribe of ms 121 used, had of course lackedCff 83-87), Zurke

137. Ms 121 puts them in the order of DCM 2, LSM 3, and DOM 2. The DOM is frag­mentary in ms 67 due to the loss of several leaves. See the entries in Section A above for the rubrics and other specific readings of these mss.

138. "If 207m is omitted. 139. My thanks toLinda Voigts (personal communication) for pointing out the signifi­

-cance of Zurke's east German origin. 140. Cf. L. E. VOIGTS, A Fifteenth-Century medical scribe, paper presented at the Twelfth

Saint Louis- Conference on Manuscript Studies, abstract in Manuscripta, t. 30, 1986, pp. 18-19. Voigtli thinks it more likely that Zurke supplied these texts himself than that K ymer obtained them through his Italian connections.

172 MONICA H. GREEN

employed a local copy of LSM 1 to complete his unusual version of the Trotula ensemble.

I have called these two manuscripts {( re-constructions » of the en­semble, though the possibility needs to be considered that ms 121, at least, represents a late copy of an earlier exemplar of the three texts as they were originally brought together before the proto-ensemble redactor began his or her creative editorial work : collating LSM 3 (the base text) with LSM 2; adding the chapters to the end of the LSM on pediatrics and conception; relocating the DC Ms closing 'if 232 a-d, i-I, and p-r earlier in the text (here, of course, these paragraphs are omitted altogether); and removing the DC Ms recipes on hair and facial care into the DOM. If, on the other hand, mss 67 and 121 reflect a novel assembly of the original component parts of the Trotula ensemble, they would give evidence that already in the fIfteenth century some scholars had developed a historical understanding of the development of the Trotula and had attempted to {( re-construct» it out of its original component parts. Georg Kraut's uncriti­cal acceptance a century later of the standardized ensemble for hi~ editio princeps and his intrusive {( emendations » of that already much-modifIed text would thus suggest that, far from being the notable humanist that his publisher Johannes Schottus estimated him to be, Kraut was already somewhat behind the times.

C. THE MEDIEVAL VERNACULAR TRANSLATIONS AND LATIN RE-WRITINGS

The phenomenon of vernacularization of medical texts has not yet been studied extensively from a comparative perspective. Hence, it is diffIcult to say whether the twenty-three different vernacular renditions of the Trotula - to which can be added two Latin re-writings - follow or diverge from patterns of medical literature in general 141. Extant are one Catalan version, three Dutch, fIve English, seven French, three German, one Hebrew, one Irish, and two Italian, plus one recasting into Latin prose and one into Latin verse. These are all described in detail in my Handlist of Trotula manus­cripts. Here I will limit myself to discussing their general characteristics in relation to the Latin texts.

The Hebrew translation (Heb1) may have the claim to being the oldest: it is possible that it was redacted in southern France between 1197

141. The Middle English tradition, which I have studied in some detail, does conform to patterns that historians of medieval English medicine have discerned as regards techni­ques of translation, audience, etc. See M. H. GREEN, Obstetrical and gynecological texts in Middle English, in Studies in the Age of Chaucer, t. 14, 1992, pp. 53-88.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROrULA 173

and 1199. The other early translations seem to have been made in France and possibly England in the thirteenth century {Frenl, Fren2, Fren3, and LVI}. The fourteenth century saw translations into Catalan (Catl), English (Engl probably dates from the end of the century), Dutch (Dutl and Dut2), French again (i.e., if Fren4 is not a product ofthe thirteenth century), Irish, and Italian (!tall). All the remaining translations are found only in fIfteenth­century manuscripts (or in the case of Eng3, sixteenth-century), but whether they all date from that period has not yet been determined. The names of only two translators are documented: a certain « mestre Johan Reimbamaco » who made a Catalan translation for one of the queens of Ara­gon, and Johannes Hartlieb (d. 1468) who made a translation for Siegmund, Duke of Bavaria-Munich, Count-palatine of the Rhine, and later adapted it for Emperor Frederick Ill.

As would be expected, different versions of the Trotula served as the bases for these renditions. One of the earliest translations, Frenl, is either a conflation of excerpts from the TEM and LSM I, or it reflects a text inter­mediate between the two, of which we now have no Latin exemplar. The TEM alone served as the basis for the Latin re-writing in LPl. LSM 1 was used for the second French translation, which in turn apparently served as the basis for·a subsequent French verse redaction (Fren3) and a Middle English translation {Engl}. LSM 1 also underlies the very spare text of Fren4. LSM 3 served as the basis for the Hebrew translation. Dut2 employed the meretrices version, while Dutl, Eng4, and Germl may derive from the proto-ensemble or one of the other middle versions of the ensemble. An abbreviated version of the proto-ensemble served as the basis for Eng3 (cf. Latin ms 48), and the intermediate ensemble was used for Eng2. The standardized ensemble was used for one of the Dutch translations (Dut3) 142, for one, perhaps two of the later French translations {Fren5 and Fren6}, for Johannes Hartlieb's German rendition (Germ2) and for a German translation of the cosmetic section (Germ3). The remaining vernacular translations are so free that it is not yet possible to specify from which Latin version they derived. Surprisingly, translators were largely uninterested in the DOM; only Catl, Eng2, Fren6, Germ2, !tall, and LVI include it (though it is possible that Hebl included it as well). Only Germ3 is devoted solely to cosmetics.

Five of the translations are in verse (Dut2, Frenl, Fren3, Fren4, and LVI). Eight are ostensibly addressed to f~male audiences (Catl, Dut3, Engl, Eng5a [but not Eng5b], Frenl, Fren2I, Fren3 and Germ3). In the case of

142. Dut3a seems to have been made exclusively from the standardized ensemble ~ Dut3b, however, incorporates several readings from an· early version of the LSM.

174 MONICA H. GREEN

Fren2I and Fren3, however, this seems to be nothing more than a rhetori-. cal gesture 143.

Monica H. GREEN. Duke University.

APPENDICES

I. SHELFMARKS OF MANUSCRIPTS OF THE TROTULA TEXTS 144

I. The Latin Manuscripts

1. Admont, StiJtsbibliothek, 496, f. 32 t'-36 y> (?) (s. xiv). 2. Barcelona, Archivo de la Corona de Aragon, Ripoll 181, f. 203 t'-206 t' (s. xiii in., Spain or Catalonia).

3. Basel, Offentliche Universitatsbibliothek, D.II.l7, f. 24 t' a-52 t' b (s. xiii 2,

Italy).

4. - - D.III.l, f. U5 t' a-b, U5 y> b-U6 t' a (ca. 1420, Italy?).

5. Berlin, Deutsche Staatsbibliothek, Hamilton 433, f. 51 t'a-71 t' a (s. xv2 , N. Italy).

6. Brussels, Bibliotheque Royale, 14324-43, f. 228 y> a-242 y> a (ca. 1230-50, N. France).

7. - - 14344-58, f. 108 VO b-120 rO b (s. xiv 1, N. France). 8. - - 15478-89, f. 174 rO-195 rO (s. xiv in., N. Europe).

9. Cambrai, Bibliotheque municipale, 916, f. 214 rO a-222 VO b (s. xiii ex., N. France or England).

10. Cambridge, Cambridge University Library, Dd.XI.45 (cat. 671), f. 62 Vo-80 VO (s. xv med., England). 11. - Clare College, 12 (G 1.3.2), f. 221 vO-227 VO (s. xiii med., England).

12. - Gonville and Caius College, 84/166, pp. 227 a-241 a (ca. 1215-35, England?).

13. - - U7/186, pp. 239a-250b (s. xiii med., England). 14. - St. lohn's College D.4 (James 79), f. 30 VO b-32 rO b (s. xiii ex./xiv in., England).

15. - - F.18 (James 155), f. 75 rO-89 VO (s. xv2, England). 16. - Trinity College, 903 (R.XIV.30), f. 187 rO-204 VO (new foliation, 74 rO-91 VO) (s. xiii ex., France).

143. This question of audience will be' explored at length in Women and literate medicine. 144. Full descriptions of all these manuscripts can be found in my « Handlist ,. (see

n. I above). .

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROrULA 175

17. Carpentras, Bibliotheque municipale, 320, f. 1 rO-3 Vo (s. xv, France ?).

18. Darmstadt, Hessisches Landes- und Hochschulbibliothek, 463, f. 195 rO-213 VO (post an. 1493, Germany). 19. Dublin, Trinity College, 367, f. 55 rO a-61 rO b (s. xiii2, France). 20. - - 3528/37, f. 1 rO-2 VO (s. xiii med., England). 21. Edinburgh, Edinblvgh University Library, 167 (D.b.V.21), f. 11 vO-15 VO (s. xiiil , England). 22. Erfurt, Wissenschaftliche Bibliothek, Amplon. Q 15, f. 62 rO-72 VO (ca. 1352-54, Cremona or Erfurt by German scribe). 23. - - Q 204, f. 78 VO a-79 VO b; 95 VO a-97 VO a (s. xii ex.!xiii in., France). 24. Firenze, Biblioteca Laurenziana, Plut. -73, cod. 37, f. 2 rO- 41 rO (s. xiii 2 ,

Italy). -

25. Glasgow, Glasgow University Library, Hunter 341 (U.8.9.), pp. 1-70 (ca. 1270-1320, N. France). 26. Hamburg, Staats- und Universitiitsbibliothek, Cod. med. 798, pp. 23-79 (s. XVI, Germany). 27. - - Cod. med. 835 (Quarto), f. 30 vO-32 VO (s. xiv med., Germany). 28. Kassel, Stadt- und Landesbibliothek, 2° Ms. med. 7, f. 224 rO a-238 rO b (ca. 1435, Germany). 29. Kremsmiinster, StiJtsbibliothek, 72, f. 159 rO-184 rO (s. xv med., Austria).

30. Laon, Bibliotheque municipale, 417, f. 27 rO a-38 vOa (s. xiv in., Italy). 31. Leiden, Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit, -foss. Lat. Q. 99, f. 209 rO b-211 rO a, 211 VO a-212 VO a (s. xiii l , France). 32. Leipzig, Universitiitsbibliothek, 1215, f. 46 rO a-57 VO a (ca. 1225-1250, Germany-E. France-Alsace). -33. London, British Library, Additional 18210, f. 166 rO-175 VO (s. xiii ex.! xiv in., N. Europe). 34. - Harley 3407, f. 1 rO-19 rO (s. xiv ex.!xv in., France). 35. - - 3542, f. 97 vG-lOO VO (s. XVI, England). 36. - Royal 12 B.XII, f. 88 rO a-95 VO b (ca. 1300, England). 37. - 12 E.VII,f. 192 rOc207 rO (= pp. 322- 352) (s. XVI, England). 38. - - .12 E.XV, f. 6 rO_lO VO (s. xii ex., E. France). 39. - Sloane 420, f. 77 rO-78 rO (s. xiv in., England). 40. 434, f. 11 rO-41 VO (s. xiii in., France or England ?). 41. 783 B, f. 165 rO-167 rO; 169 rO-174 rO (s. xv, England). 42. 1124, f. 172 r O a-178 rO b (s. xiii in., NW France or S. England). 43. 1610, f. 186 rO a-187 rO c (s. xiv, northern Europe). 44. 1615, f. 83 rO a-87 rO a, 88 rO a-90 VO b (ca. 1220-40, S. France). 45. 3550, f. 29 rO-32 V O (ca. 1300, England). 46. 3848, f. 6 rO-8 VO (s. xvii, England). 47. University College, Lat. 12, f. 16 vO-19 VO (s. xv in., England).

176 MONICA H. GREEN

48. - Wellcome Institute for the History of Medicine, 517, f. 129 vO-134 rO (s. xv ex., probably Flanders). 49. 544, pp. 65a-72b, 63a-64b, 75a-84a (s. xiv in., France). 50. 548, f. 140 rO-145 VO (s. xv med., Germany or Flanders). 51. 549, f. 101 rO b-125 rO b (an. 1471, Germany). 52. 550, f. 221 rO-228 rO (s. xv2 , England). 53. Westminster Abbey, 3411, f. 1 rO a-vO b (s. xiii ex., probably England). 54. Madrid, Biblioteca Nacional, 1921, f. 161 rO a-170 rO b (s. xiii ex.!xiv I, sou­thern Europe). 55. Manchester, Chetham's Library, 11380, f. 181 vO-183 VO (s. xiii ex.!xiv in., France). 56. Montpellier, Faculte de Medecine, 317, f. 1 rO a-7 rO b (ca. 1300, S. France). 57. Miinchen, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 381, f. 1 VO a-5 rO a (s. xiii med., Germany). 58. 444, f. 208 rO b-210 rO b (s. xiv ex., S. Germany). 59. 60. 61.

570, f. 57 rO-66 rO (s. xiv l , Germany). 660, f. 1 rO-40 rO (s. XVi, Germany?). 3875, f. 194 rO a-204 rO b (an. 1478-1479, Klattau).

62. 8742, f. 53 vO-60 rO (s. xiii ex.!xiv in., Germany). 63. Naples, Biblioteca Nazionale, VIII D. 59, f. 21 rO-36 VO (s. xiii ex., Italy). 64. New York, New York Academy of Medicine, SAFE, f. 77 rO a-82 rO a; 86 VO a-b (s. xiii med., France). 65. Oxford, Bodleian Library, Ashmole 399, f. 21 r?-26 rO; 63 rO a-b (s. xiv l ,

England). 66. - - 1427, f. 29 rO a-38 VO b (s. xiv l , England). 67. - Bodley 361 (Se 2462), pp. 458-480 (an. 1453-59, Salisbury). 68. - 682 (Se 2696), f. 172 rO-196 rO (s. xv2, England). 69. - 786 (Se 2626), f. 175 rO a (s. xiii med., England). 70. Digby 29 (Se 1630), f. 278 rO-291 VO (s. xv in., England). 71. 75 (Se 1676), f. 52 rO-63 rO (an. 1458, England). 72. - 79 (Se 1680), f. 106 rO-114 rO; 142 rO- 144 VO (s. xiii I, England?). 73. - - e Musaeo 219 (Se 3541), f. 87 A vO, 88 rO-105 rO (s. xiv in., England). 74. - - Wood empt. 15 (Se 8603), f. 18 rO-31 rO (s. XVi, England). 75. - Corpus Christi College, 221, f. 64 rooa-vob (s. xiv l , England). 76. - Exeter College, 35, f. 38 rOb-40 VO a; 228 vOb-230 rOa (s. xiv l , England). 77. Magdalen College, lat. 173, f. 246 vO-256 VO (s. xiv in., England). 78. Merton College, 230, f. 11 rOa-20 vOa (s. xiv. in., England). 79. - 324, f. 94 vO, 98 rO-113 rO (s. XVi, England).

80. New College, 171, f. 74 vO-81 rO (s. xiii!", Italy or S. France).

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE morULA 177

81. - Pembroke College, 21, f. 176 rO-189 r O (s. xiii ex., England). 82. Pans, privately owned ms, f. 28 rOa-45 yOb (ca. 1300, Brabant). 83. - Bibliotheque nationale, lat. 6964, f. 96 vOa-99 yOb, 135 rOa-137 vOa; 141 rOa-141 vOa (an. 1305, Montpellier). 84. - 6988, f. 98 rOb-106 rOb (s. xiii ex.lxiv in., S. France). 85. - 6988A, f. 10 rO-14 Vo (~. xv in., E. France). 86. 7036, f. 137 rO-153 VO (ca. 1250-75, S. Italy).

87. 7056, f. 77 rOb-86 vOa; 97 rOb-lOO rOa (s .. xiii med., England or N. France?). 88. - - - 7066, f. 33 vO-42 rO; 53 rO-73 r O (s. xv med., E. France or Germany?). 89. 8654, f. 32 yOb (s. xiv, France). 90. 16089, f. 113 rOa-1I5 rOb (s. xiii ex., France?). 91. 16191, f. 207 vOa-218 rOb (s. xiv in., France). 92. 16222, f. 79 vOa-87 yOb (s. xiv in., N. France). 93. nouv. acq. lat. 603, f. 55 r Ob-59 rOb (s. xiiP, Italy?).

94. Pommer.sfelden, Bibliothek der Gra/en von SchOnbom, 178, f. 124 rOa-132 rOb (s. xiii ex.lxiv in., Italy). 95. - - 197, f. 11 rOa-lS rob (s. xiv2, Germany). 96. Praha, Knihovnd Metropolitnf Kapituli, Cod. M-2, f. 214 vo- 216 VO (s. xv in., E. Europe). 97. - - Cod. M-18, f. 99 rO-122 VO (s. xiv2, E. Europe).

9S. - - Cod. M-20, f. 49 r Ob-51 rO (s. xiii med., Italy). 99. Reims, Bibliotheque municipale, 1002, f. 251 rOa-257 vOb (s. xiii med., N. France). 100. - - 1004, f. 152 rOa-159 vOa (s. xiii2, France).

101. Rouen, Bibliotheque municipale, 981, f. 127 rOb-138 rOb (s. xiv l , France). 102. Salzburg, Erzabtei St. Peter, b V 22, f. 149 rO-162 VO (ca. 1456, Leipzig). 103. - Museum Carolino-Augusteum, 2171, f. 180 rO-187 VO (s. xv med., S. Germany/Austria). 104. San Marino, Calij., Huntington Library, 64, f. 28 vOa-34 rOb (s. xv ex., England). .

105. Schlagl, StiJtsbibliothek, 102, f. 109 rO-133 VO (s. xv2, Austria).

106. Sevilla, Biblioteca Capitular y Lolombina, 7-4-25, f. 128 rOa-b (s. XVI, Italy). 107. - - 83-6-38, f. 43 vOb-49 "ob (ca. 1300, N. Italy). 108. Sheffield, Central Library, lackson Collection, 1302, f. 43 vO-44 VD, 46 Co­

VO (s. xv ex., England).

109. Vatican, Biblioteca Apostolica, Pal. lat. 1084, f. 115 rOb-125 vOa (s. xiii ex.lxiv in., Italy?). 110. - - - 1164; f. 96 vOb-99 vOa (s. xiii ex.lxiv in., France).

12

178

Ill. 112.

MONICA H. GREEN

1165, f. 39 rOb-40 vOb (s. xiii in., Germany). 1253, f. 166 rOa-178 rOb (s. xiii2, S. France).

113. 1304, f. 38 rO-45 v°.' 47 rO-48 vG, 46 ra_vG, 51 ra_vG, 49 rO-50 VO (5. xiii 2, Italy). 114. - 1382, f. 46 vO-48 VO (5. xiv2, SW Germany). 115. - - Vat. lat. 4485, f. 67 rO-78 VO (5. xiii med., France). 116. Wien, Osterreichische Nationalbibliothek, 5388, f. 43 rOa-63 rOb (s. XVi, E. Europe). 117. Wiesbaden, Landesbibliothek, 56, f. 56 r Ob-59 rOb (s. xv med., Germany). 118. Winchester, Winchester College, Warden and Fellows Library, 26, f. 42 vOa-51 vOb (5. xiii ex.lxiv in., England). 119. Wolfenbiittel, Herzog-August-Bibliothek, 784 Helmst., f. 97 rO-120 VO (s. xv ~ed., Germany). 120. Wroclaw (Breslau), Biblioteka Uniwersytecka, 2022, f. 153 rOa-164 rOa (s. xiii2, Gennany). 121. - - III.F.I0, f. 113 rOb-125 rOb (s. xv, eastern Europe). 122. Wiirzburg, Universitiitsbibliothek, M. p. med. q. 2, f. 55 rOa-57 rOb (s. xiii2, Germany).

11. Medieval Translations

A. Catalan

1. a. Madrid, Biblioteca Nacional, 3356, f. 1 rOa-32 v~b (s. xiv2).

B. Dutch

1. a. Utrecht, Universiteits-Bibliotheek, 1328, f. 72 rO-127 VO (s. xiv in., Utrecht). b. Wien, Osterreichische Nationalbibliothek, 2818, f. 266 vOa-268 vOa (ca.

1490, Brabant). 2. a. Brussels, Bibliotheque Royale, 15624-41, f. 77 vOa-85 vOb (an. 1351, perhaps Brab~?t).

b. Wien, Osterreichische Nationalbibliothek, 2818, f. 284 rOa-299 vOb (ca. 1490, Brabant). 3. a. Brugge, Stadsbibliotheek, 593, f. 1 rO-18 rO (s. xiv ex.lxv in.,. western Flanders).

b. Copenhagen, Det Kongelige Bibliotek, GKS 1657, f. 1 rO-36 rO (s. xv [post 1430]).

c. Hamburg, Staats- und Universitiitsbibliothek, Cod. med. 798 (s. xv med.), pp. 85-256.

C. English

1. a. Cambridge, University Library, Ii.VI.33, f. 33 r~-68 rO (s. xv).

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA . 179

b. London, British Library, Additional 12195, f. 157 rO- 185 rO (s. XV2).

c. - - Sloane 421 A, f. 2 rO-25 VO (ante 1530).

d. Oxford, Bodleian Library, Bodler 483 (Se 2062), f. 82 rO-103 VO (s. xv med.) .

. e. - - Douce 37 (se 21611), f. 1 rO-37 VO (s. xv in.).

2. a. London, British Library, Additional;34111, f. 197 rO-217 VO (s. XVI).

3. a. Cambridge, Jesus College, 43 (Q.D.l), f. 70 rO-75 VO (s. xv).

b. London, British Library, Sloane 121, f. 100 rO-105 rO (s. xv).

c. Oxford, Bodleian Library, Lat. misc. c. 66, f. 83 rO-86 VO (s. xv ex.). 4. a. London, British Library, Sloane 121, f. 106 rO-l07 VO(s. xv).

b. Longleat House (Warminster, Wiltshire), Longleat 333, f. 33ro-43 VO (s. xvi 2).

5. a. Cambridge, University Library, Ii.VI.33, f. 1 rO-32 VO (s. xvi).

b. Glasgow, Glasgow University Library, Hunter 403 (V.3.1), pp. 347-363 (an. 1544).

D. French

1. a. Cambridge, Trinity College, 0.1.20 (044), f. 21 rOb-23 rOb (s. xiii 2, England).

2. Redaction I : a. London, British Library,· Sloane 3525, f. 246 vO-253 rO (s. ?Civ in.).

b. - Wellcome Institute for the History of Medicine, 546, f. 46 vOb-49 vOb (s. xiv med.).

c. Paris, Bibliotheque nationale, nouv. acq. lat. 693, f. 181 vO-183 rO (s. xiii ex.lxiv in.).

[d. Turin, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria, L.IV.25, f. 56 rO-65 rO (s. xiv, Italy).]

Redaction 11 : a. Kassel, Murhardsche Bibliothek der Stadt und Landesbibliothek, 4 ° MS

med. 1., f. 16 vO-20 VO (ca. 1430-75).

b. Lifle, Bibliotheque municipale, 863, f. 122 vO-125 vu, 127 rO (s. xv med., probably Tournai).

Redaction III : a. London, British Library, Lansdowne 380, f. 269 rO-271 VO (s. xv/xvi).

3. a. Cambridge, Trinity College, 0.1.20 (1044), f. 216 rO-235 VO (s. Xiii2, England. . 4. a. Cambridge, Trinity College, 0.2.5 (1109), f. 123 rOb-124 vOa (s. xiv med., England) ..

5. a. Paris, Bibliotheque Ste-Genevieve, 1037, f. 20 Vo (s. xv, N. France).

6. a. Paris, Bibliotheque natio~ale,fr. 1327, f. 61 rO-1l7 rO (s. xv med.).

7. a. Paris, Bibliotheque nationale,fr. 212 (s. xv ex.).

180 MONICA H. GREEN

[h. Turin, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria, L.IV.17, f. 414 rO-429 Vo (s. xv med.).]

K Gennan

1. a. Los Angeles, University of California at Los Angeles Library, Benjamin 11, f. 34 rO-44 Vo (ca. 1444, central Germany).

2. a. Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Library, ms 3 (38066), f. 72 rO-110 VO (s. xvi ex., S. Germany).

h. Berlin, Staatsbibliothek Preussischer Kulturbesitz, genn. foL 928, f. 82 rO-141 rO (s. xv2, Bavaria).

c. Dresden, Siichsische Landesbibliothek, C 314, f. 1 rO-73 rO (s. xvi2). d. -:- - C 451, f. 71 rO_vo, 90 rO-93 VO (s. xvi2).

e. Heidelberg, Universitiitsbibliothek, Cpg 116, f. I rO-IV VO (an. 1525). f. - - - Cpg 480, f. 4 rO-89 VO (s. xvi2, S. Germany).

g. - - - Cpg 488, f. 4 rO-62 rO (s. xvi2, S. Germany).

h. London, Wellcome Institute for the History of Medicine, N 133, f. XXI rO-52 rO (s. xvi). .

i. Marburg, Universitiitsbibliothek, 93, f. 2 rO-48 rO (s. xvi med., S. Germany).

j. Milan, Biblioteca Braidense, AE.IX.34., J. 1 rO-45 rO (an. 1480). k. Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 261, f. 50 rO-95 rO (s. xv2,

Bavaria).

L Niirnberg, Gennanisches Nationalmuseum, 2186 (s. xvi in.).

m. Vienna, Osterreichische Nationalbibliothek, cod. Vindob. 11168 (Med. 99), f. V rO-60 rO (s. xvi 2, S. Germany).

n. Wolfenbiittel, Herzog August-Bibliothek, GuelJ. 69.8 Aug. fol., f. 66 rO-114 VO (s. xvi in., S. Germany).

3. a. Niirnberg, Stadtbibliothek, Cent. VI, 1, f. 94 rO-1l6 VO (an. 1598).

F. Hebrew

1. a. London, Jews' College, Montf!/iore 440, f. 60 rO-62 VO (s. xv, Spain ?).

G. Irish

1. a. Dublin, Royal Irish Academy, 23 F 19, f. 88 rOa-93 rOa (s. xv).

h. - Trinity College, 1436 (E.4.1), pp. 101-106 and 359h-360h (s. xv)~

H. Italian

1. a. Firenze, Biblioteca Medicea-Laurenziana, Plut. 73.51, f. 52 rO-56 56 vO-59 VO (s. xiv).

h. - - Redi 172(1) (olim 73), f. 74 rO-83 VD; 84 rO-88 VO .(s. xiv).

c. - Biblioteca Riccardiana, 2165 (olim N.lV.20), f. 70 rO-76 rO; 76 rO-79 rO (an. 1433).

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROrULA 181

d. Lucca, Biblioteca Govemativa, 1286, f. 97 vO-l04 Vo (s. XVii).

2. a. London, Wellcome InstituteJor the History oJ Medicine, 532, f. 64 rO-70 Vo (ca. 1465).

I. Lat~n prose

1. a. London, Wellcome Institute Jor the History of Medicine, Western MS 5650, f. 62 vO-67 Vo (s. xv, England). \ .

J. Latin verse

1. a. Paris, Bibliotheque nationale, lat. 8161A, f. 6 rOa-15 vOa (s. xiii med., England).

H. CONCORDANCES OF TRoruLA TEXTS

The three tables that follow are concordances of the constituent paragraphs of all the basic versions of the Trotula texts. The intent of these concordances is to show the historical development of the texts, that is, at what point material was added or deleted. Annotations here are limited to remarks on transpositions of chapter order and other major. structural changes.

Table I lists all the material in the Liber de sinthomatibus mulierum (LSM = 'If 1-131), including its Urtext, the Tractatus de egritudinibus mulierum (TEM); Table H all the material in the De curis mulierum (DCM = 'If 132-241); Table III all the material in the De ornatu mulierum (DOM = 'If 241 a-312). Except in the case of the earliest versions of the independent texts (where extant witnesses are few), I have excluded most material that is found uniquely in single manuscripts.

In all three concordances, because the standardized ensemble text will be the fIrst to be published it is used as the reference both for the numeration of the indivi­dual paragraphs and for their incipits a. The numbers in parentheses that follow the incipits reflect the ordering in the 1544 edition by Georg Kraut, which was based on the standardized ensemble text b. Other material originating in earlier versions but not found in the standardized ensemble is inserted in its appropriate position

a. Monica H. GREEN, 'The diseases of women according to Trotula' : a medieval compendium of women's medicine (forthcoming).

b. Trotulae curandarum Aegritudinum Muliebrium, ante, in & post partum liber unicus, nusquam antea editus, ed. Georg KRAUT, published in a collection entitled Experimentarius medicinae (Strasbourg, Joannes Schottus, 1544). Kniut rearranged the standardized ensemble into sixty-one chapters: Virtually all the cosmetic material (if he did not suppress it altogether) he grouped together into a single final chapter, De omatufaciei et partium eius (his cap. 61). Kraut also accidentally repeated four paragraphs: "11 188 (in his capp. 20 and 53), "11228 (his capp.20 and 32), "11230 (his capp.20 and 57), and "11272 (repea­ted within his long cosmetic cap. 61). The chapter numeration in the 1544 edition is disordered due to printer errors; the chapter numbers I cite are the corrected numbers.

182 MONICA H. GREEN

in square brackets. In order that there be one all-inclusive system of numeration, I have enumerated these intervening sections alphabetically; thus, for example, the three paragraphs intervening between 144 and 145 are designated 144a, 144b, and 144 c. This sublevel of numbering also is used to indicate the original position of material that was later moved c.

Table I includes only the TEM, LSM 1-3, and the proto-ensemble since all later versions of the ensemble (with minor exceptions) neither added nor deleted mate­rial to the first text. Table 11 collates in full DCM 1-2 and the proto-, transitional, and intermediate ensembles. Table III compares all three versions of the DOM with the transitional and intermediate ensembles; it omits, however, the proto-ensemble as no extant copies have the full text of the cosmetic section and are inconsistent in the chapters that they do have. In all three parts, the revised ensemble will have all the same component parts as the standardized ensemble, hence it is not listed separately.

Table I : The Liber de sinthomatibus mulierum

In the column « Source ", all Viaticum chapters refer to Book VI; the text used for comparison is that in Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Laud. mise. 567 (s. 12 1 ,

England), f. 39 rO-41 vo, which agrees in most respects with the Lyons 1515 printed edition. « Egert » refers to paragraphs in the Liber de muliebria, ed. Ferdi­nand Paul EGERT, Gyniikologische Fragmente aus demfiiihen Mittelalter nach einer Peters burger Handschrift aus dem VlIl.·/X. Jahrhundert, Abhandlungen zur Geschichte der Medizin und der Naturwissenschaften, Heft 11, Berlin, 1936, pp. 34-45.

Standardized Ensemble Source TEM LSM} LSM2 LSM3 Proto-(Kraut ed.) (LSM Utrext) ensemble

1 Cum auctor uniuersitatis deus X x x X (prol.) 2 Quoniam ergo mulieres uiris X X X X

sunt debiliores natura (prol.) 3 Quoniam igitur in mulieribus Viaticum 9 X X X X X

non tantus habundat calor (prol.) 4 Contingit autem mulieribus hec Viaticum 9 X X X X X

purgatio circa.xiii. annum (prol.) 5 Quandoque ex eadem causa do- Viaticum 9 X X X X X

lor sentitur (prol.) 6 Aliquando accidit dyama (prol.) Viaticum 9 X X X X X

7 Aliquando mulieribus deficiunt Viaticum 9 X X X X X

menstrua (prol.) 8 Si ergo deficiant menstrua (l) Viaticum 9 X X X X X 9 Galyenus refert de quadam mu- Viaticum 9 X X X X X liere cui defecerunt menstrua (1)

c. The one exception to this is that I have merely noted in a footnote when the order of immediately adjacent paragraphs has been inverted.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROrULA

10 Et sepe et sepius constipatur uenter earum (1) 11 Dyathessaron fit de quatuor speciebus (1) d

12 Conferunt ei omnia diuretica, ut feniculus (1) 13 Galyenus sic docet (1) [5 uses I

of arthemisia) 14 Valet etiam arthimesia cum hiis herbisadmixta(l) 15 Item morsus galline (-) 16 Item puluis optimus ad prouo­candum menstrua (1) 17 Si autem matrix indurauerit (1) 18 Vel fiat aliud pessarium in modum uirge uirilis (1) 19 Mulieres SI pauca habent menstrua (2) 20 Si uero diu defecerint men­strua (2) 21 Item accipe mentam (2) 22 Aliter, recipe radicem yreos (2) 23 Aliud, decoquatur in uino sauina (2) 24 Item, accipe tanacetum (2) 25 Quidam medicus fecit hoc (2) 26 VaIet etiam ad predicta fumi­gatio (2) 27 VaIet ad idem scarificatio (2) 28 Comedat si sit sine febre (2) 29 Habundant quandoque men­trua (3) 30 Si sanguis qui egreditur uergit in citrinitatem (3) 31 Cura. Si ergo sanguis est in causa (3) 32 Si colera sit in caUsa (3)

Viaticum 9

Viaticum g e

Viaticum 9

??

??

?? ??

Egert 35

??

Egert 16

Egert 26

Egert 25 Egert 44

adapted· from Viaticum 9

?? latter half adapted from Viaticum 9

Viaticum 9

?? ??

Viaticum 10

Viaticum 10

Viaticum 1.0

Viaticum 10

x

x

x

Xf

x

x

x

x

Xh

x X

X

X

X

X

X

X

x

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Xh

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

d. Kraut suppresses the instructions for making diatessaron.

x

x

x

x

X

x

x

x

x

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X X

X

X

X

X

183

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

e. Only the latter half of this paragraph comes from the Viaticum. The instructions for making. diatessaron are a novel addition- of the LSM author.

£. There is no reference to . GaIen in the TEM. g. This brief recipe had a particularly checkered career, being present in only two copies

of the proto-ensemble (neither of them early), only one of the transitional, and three of the intermediate. It is, however, found in most copies (If the revised ensemble and (typical of that version's stability) all copies of the standardized ensemble.

h. Order of'iT 20 and 21 reversed.

184 MONICA H. GREEN

33 Si contingat ex habundantia Viaticum 10 X X X X X flegmatis (3) 34 Comedat coctas gallinas (3) Viaticum 10 X X X X X

35 Et ponantur uentose (3) . Viaticum 10 X X X X X 36 Iniciatur succus plantaginis (3) ?? X X X X X

Xk 37 Valet etiam succus semperuiue ?? Xi _i X X (3) [a) Bonum est etiam accipere la- ?? X

nam et intingere in illo succo et ligare super uentrem) 38 Succus etiam paritarie cum ?? X X X X uino ualet bibitus (-) 39 Item succus persiccarie ualet super uentrem linitus I (3) [a) Item bonum est potare aquam ?? X X X xm in qua fabe cocte sint) 40 Item accipe duo frustralardi(3) ?? X X X X X

41 Fiant etiam duo emplastra de ?? X X X X X absinthio n (3) 42 Et si apponantur folia mirre ?? X X X X X (3) 43 Aliter, accipe testas nucis (3) ?? X X X X

44 Vel fac puluerem de testibus ?? X X X X XO

ouorum (3)

i. The TEM employs the term barba iouis for « houseleek » instead· of semperuiua. j. Although not found in either extant copy of LSM 1, the presence of this paragraph

in LSM 2 suggests that it dropped out of the text only after LSM 2 branched off. k. Apparently because of a transcription error, the original suggestion that « juice of

houseleek is good when drunk in wine» (Valet succus semperuiue in uino patatus) was changed in LSM 3 to « the juice of the same [se. plantain) is also good when tied to the belly» (Valet etiam succus eiusdem supra uentrem ligatus). See also note I below.

I. 'IT 37,38, and 39 underwent considerable deformation as the ensemble developed. Characteristically, the editor of the proto-ensemble (LSM 4?) retrieved the lost reading of 'IT 37 from LSM 2 (Valet succus semperuiue in uina patatus), but also retained the rather nonsensical reading of LSM 3 (Valet etiam succus [eiusdemJ supra uentrem ligatus). It was probably also the proto-ensemble editor who first substituted paricaria (<< pellitory-of-the­wall .) in 'IT 39 with persiccaria (. willow-weed »). The many permutations of the recipes need not be summarized here; they reached truly remarkable lengths in two copies of the intermediate ensemble (mss 9 and 118) which offered six different combinations (including a retrieval of the lost 'IT 38a). The standardized ensemble editor retrieved the original 'IT 38 but retained 'IT 39 from the revised ensemble as well, changing, however, the problematic ligatus to a more plausible linitus.

m. Found in only four copies of the proto-ensemble (mss 62,81 and its apograph 65, and 114). It disappears entirely at the transitional ensemble stage.

n. The TEM had recommended mentastrum. This was changed to sisimbrium in the LSM. The pro to-ensemble added absinthium, and sisimbrium dr!>pped out at the revised ensemble stage.

o. After 'IT 44, the meretrices version of the proto-ensemble adds an extended discus­sion of uterine anatomy said to come from the Anathomia Alexandri.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE morULA 185

45 Quandoque suffocatur matrix Viaticum 11 X X X X X (4) 46 Galyenus refert de quadam Viaticum 11 X X X X X muliere que ita patiebatur (4) 47 Contingit autem hoc eis que Viaticum 11 x x x x x uiris non utuntur (4) 48 Summum autem remedium ViatIcum 11 X X X X X est ut manus et pedes mulieris (4) 49 Justianus medicus contra hunc ?? X X X X X morbum (4) 50 Oribasius iussit radicem ger- ?? X X X X X mandree (4) p

51 Si contingat post partum ma- ?? xq X X X X tricem de loco suo nimis inferius descendere (5) 52 Quandoque mouetur matrix de Viaticum 14 X X X X X loco suo (5) 53 Cura. Si descendit et non exit ?? X X X X X foras (5) 54 Si uero matrix exierit (5) Egert 41 X X X X X

55 Sacceletur uenter et umbilicus Egert 43 X X X X X (5) 56 Postea matrix egressa (5) Viaticum 14 X X X X X

57 Deinde fiat eis stupha. .. Diasco- Viaticum 14 X X X X X rides (5) r 58 Dieta sit frigida et stipticil (5) ?? X X X X X

59 Experimentum probatum ad ?? X X X X X

matricem egressam (5) 60 Aliquando mouetur matrix de Egert 46 X X X X X

loco suo, non tamen sursum (6) 61 Cura. Accipe apium et fenu- Egert 46 X X X X X

grecum (6) 62 Aliter, accipe agaricum (6) Egert 47 X X X X X

63 Ad hoc quod uuluanonmouea- Egert 49 X X X X X

tur (6) 64 Contingit quandoque matricem ?? X X X X X

distemperari (7) 65 Quandoque innascuntur in ma- Viaticum 12 X X X X X

trice inflationes (8) 66 Si ergo sit de calida causa (8) Viaticum 12 X X X X X

67 Item dicit Galyenus S quod Viaticum 12 X X X X X

multum prodest (8) 68 Paulus docet fieri pessarium Viaticum 12 X X X X X

(8)

p. Krautomits the first sentence of this paragraph. q. In TEM, this read « Si post partum mulieris nimium ascendat matrix» and was the

final paragraph of the chapter on suffocation. r. Kraut changes « Diascorides » to « Galenus ».

s. In TEM and LSM 1-3, the name given is " Diascorides. ,. It was deleted in the revised ensemble, only to be replaced by « Galienus ,." in the standardized ensemble.

186 MONICA H. GREEN

69 Si frigidum sit apostema (8) Viaticum 12 x x X x X

70 Ulceratur quandoque matrix Viaticum 13 X X X X X

(9) 71 Nee minus valet accatia (9) Viaticum 13 X X X X X

72 Pruritus uulue si sit (IQ) Viaticum 13 X X X X X

73 Galyenus t dicit quod puluis Viaticum 13 X X X X ·x fenugreci (IQ) 74 Quedam mulieres sunt inu- ?? X X X X XV

tiles U (Il) 75 Cura. Si mulier maneat sterilis Egert 94 X X X X X

uicio uiri uel sui, hoc modo perci-pietur (11) [a) Si ergo uelit mulier impregnari, Egert 4a X X X X w

desiccet testiculos uerris) 76 Si uult masculum concipere uir Egert 8 X X X X X

eius accipiat matricem et uuluam leporis (11) 77 Aliter, accipiat mulier epar et (= 9f 78b x x x x X

testiculos parui porci (11) below) 78 Aliter, accipiat mulier lanam Egert 91 x. X X X

succi dam (-) [a) Item. Accipe corticem quercus) Egert 5 X X X -Y

[b) Item. Accipiantur epar et testi- ?? X X X X

culi primi porcelli) [c) Item fiat puluis delepusculis) ?? X

79 Nota quod quando mulier in- (see 9f 88a aa aa aa aa X

cipit inpregnari (IS) below) 80 Si uero pedes eius tumuerint (see 9f 88b aa aa aa aa X

(IS) below). 81 Si eius uenter uentositate (IS) (see 9f 88c aa aa aa aa X

below)

t. In TEM and all versions of independent LSM, Diascorides' name appears here. It was changed to « Galienus » in the revised ensemble.

u. In LSM 1-3 and early versions of the ensemble, this paragraph began with the phrase Sicut testatur Ypocras. In later versions of the ensemble, the phrase was transposed to the end of the previous paragraph.

v. The meretrices version of the proto-ensemble inserts into 9f 74 a prolonged discur­sus on conception.

w. In proto-ensemble mss 62, 81, 88, and Il4, this recipe for the use of boar testicles remains in its original position. In all other copies (and in alllilter versions of the ensemble), it has been moved to the position of 9f 82 below.

x. In the TEM and all independent versions of the LSM, this recipe appeared in position of 9f 78b.

y. This is found in only three mss of the proto-ensemble (mss 48, 62, and 88). It also reappears in one lone copy of the intermediate ensemble (ms 99). Otherwise it completely

. disappears from the text. z. Transposed to new position as 9f 77 .. aa. 9f 79-81 had originally appeared in the position of 9f 88 a-c in the TEM and LSM

1-3.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA 187

82 Si mulier uult impregnari, ac- (see 'If 75a ab ab ab ab X cipe testiculos uerris (11) above) 83 Galyenus ac dicit mulieres que Pantegni, X X X X habent uuluas (ll) Practica 1 : 18 84 Mulier si non uult concipere, Egert 96d X ad X X X came sua nuda ferat secum matri-cem capre (ll) !

85 Inuenitur autem quidam lapis. Egert 96c X X X X (ll) 86 Aliter, recipe mustelam (ll) Egert 28 X X X X (a) Item sumat truncum caulis) Egert 96b X

~7 Si autem lesa fuerit in partu Egert 96 X X X X (ll) 88 Refert Galyenus, ita ligatus fe- Viaticum 15 X X X X tus (13) (a) Cauendum est etiam cum mu- Viaticum 15 X X X X ae

lier primum incipit impregnari) (b) Si pedes eius tumuerint) Viaticum 15 X X X X af

(c)) Si uenter eius uentositate Viaticum 15 X X X X -ag

distenditur) 89 Maturato tempore partus (13) Viaticum 16 X X X X 90 Sunt autem quedam ita an- Viaticum 16 X X X X gustiose (17) 91 Cura. Mulieri difficile partu- Viaticum 16 X X X X rienti (17) 92 Et qui assistunt non respi- Muscio? ah X X X X ciunt earn in uultu (17) 93 Si puer non egrediatur eo or- Muscio? ai X X X X dine quo debet (17) 94 Si puer sit mortuus, accipe ?? X X X X rut am a) (17) 95 Vel teratur satureia (17) ?? X X X 96 Idem facit uerbena (17) ?? X X X 97 Vel accipiatur aqua salsa (17) ?? X X X (a) Item ruta et mater herba ?? X ak ak ak

rum)

ab. Appears in position of 'If 75a in 'rEM and all independent versions of LSM. ac. The name uf Constantinus appears here in the TEM and LSM 1-2. ad. The order of 'If 84 and 85 is inverted in the TEM. ae. Moved to position of 'If 79 above. af. Moved to position of 'If 80 above. ago Moved to position of 'If 81 above.

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

ah. Muscio, Gynaecia, edited Valentin ROSE, Sorani Gynaeciorum vetus translatio latina, Leipzig, Teubner, 1882,23.11-12 : « (obstetrix) faciem suam retrorsus avertat, ne pariens verecundia se concludat. »

ai.Cf. ed. ROSE 85-88. There is, however, no precise parallel here, nor any specifica­tion of the types of oils to be used.

aj. This recipe.collapses what were originally three separate sets of instructions in the LSM. ak. Moved' to position of 'If 101.

ak

188 MONICA H. GREEN

98 Vel scribantur hec nomina (-) ?? al X X X X 99 Vel accipiatur butyrum (17) ?? X X X X 100 Quod si adhuc tardet partus ?? X X X X (woman's milk) (17) am

I 0 I Item accipe rutam, arthime- ?? an X X X X siam, oppoponacum (17) 102 Item cingatur mulier de spo- ?? X X X X X lio serpentis (17) ao

103 Vel alligetur radix cucur- ?? X X X X X bite (17) 104 Si secundina intus remanse- Viaticum 17 X X X X X rit, properandum est ut eiciatur (17) 105 Aliter, fiat lexiuia de cinere Viaticum 17 ap X X X X X facto de fraxino (17) 106 Et si sanguis non exierit aq

(17) 107 Vel detur ipse pulius de se- Viaticum 17 X ar X X semine malue (17) 108 Et subfumigetur subtus ocu- Viaticum 17 X X X X lis (17) 109 Valet etiam decoquere semen ?? X X X X lini (17) IlO Item facit bdellium at (17) X X au

III Si autem sanguis non exeat Viaticum 17 X X X X X (17)

al. The TEM had a different charm here. am. Kraut combines this paragraph and the next, omitting the latter part of 9T 100

with its magical abbreviations. an. Appeared in position of 9T 97 a. ao. Following 9T 102 Kraut adds: " Idem operatur lapis Aetites, ligatus ad femur. »

ap. 9T 105 and 9T 107 are one single recipe in the Viaticum. aq. This sentence repeats 'i Ill. See n. as below. ar. This is the only paragraph found in the TEM and LSM 2 and 3 but not in LSM I.

It probably, therefore, reflects an omission early in the LSM 1 tradition. as. Aside from the meretrices group, 'i 107-IlO appear in only two copies of the

proto-ensemble (mss 88 and Il4). Although they made their way into one branch of the transitional ensemble tradition, they do not appear in the intermediate· ensemble. Hence, in those copies where these paragraphs were omitted, the text jumped from 9T 105 to 9T Ill. When the revised ensemble editor reintroduced 9T I07-IlO, he or she inadver­tently repeated the instruction for using emmengogues, hence the identity of 9T 106 and Ill.

at. In LSM 1 and 2 this is not really a separate recipe but an additional recommenda­tion that linseed (previously mentioned in 9T 109) can also be given in wine (Idemfacit bul­litum cum uino). LSM 3 collapses the two recommendations together: in aqua uel uino detur potandum. The passage effectively disappeared in the proto-, transitional, and intermediate ensembles. The misreading Idemfacit bdellium appeared when 9T JIO was reinserted into the revised ensemble. .

as

as

as

as

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA 189

112 Si uero post partum illius ?? x x x x x mulieris incontinenti matrix do-leat (20) 113 Ad cognoscendum utrum ?? X X X X X mulier (14) 114 Vnde Ypocras dixit: mulier AphorisTflS X X X X X que masculum gerit (14) [a) Item ad eductionem fetus] ?? X av

[b) Ad matricem constringendam] ?? X

115 Contra difficultatem partus ex ?? X X X orificii constrictione (17) 116 Tempore partus imminente, ?? X aw X X paret se mulier ut mos est (16) II 7 Item galbano cum asa feti- ?? X X X da (16) 118 Item notandum est (magnet) ?? X X X (16) 119 Rasuram eboris (16) ?? X X X 120 Corallus in collo (16) ?? X X X 121 Item illud album (16) ?? X X X 122 Aliter in uentre yrundinis ax ?? X X X (16) [a) Accipe medianum corticem ca- ?? X prifici] [b) Item borax que est gumma] ?? X [c) Valent etiam ad alia plurima X X (colophon)] 123 Primo mense sit purgacio Vindician X sanguinis (12) 124 Infantis aures primende (18) Rhazes, Ad X

Almansorem 4 125 Si membrum alicuius pueri Rhazes, Ad X (18) Almansorem 4 126 Nutricem oportet esse iuue- Rhazes, Ad X nem (19) Almansorem 4 127 Dieta. Non comedat salsa Rhazes, Ad X (19) Almansorem 4 128 Pustule nascuntur pueris (51) ?? X 129 Conceptio impeditur tarn ui- Cophoffrota X cio uiri (11) 130 Si uero pre nimia humiditate Cophoffrota X matricis (11) 131 Si uicio uiri inpediatur (11) Cophoffrota X

au. The recommendation to use wine is here collapsed into the previous recipe (see previous note). .

av. This recipe is found in only one copy of LSM 3 (ms 23). aw. This is two distinct recipes in the LSM_ ax. This recipe conflates two separate paragraphs in LSM 2 and 3.

190 MONICA H. GREEN

Table II : The De curis mulierum (<iJ 132-241)

This concordance collates the two versions of the independent DCM with the various versions of the Trotula ensemble. The proto-ensemble redactor reposi­tioned many recipes; all the chapters on hair care and several on care of the face were resituated within the DOM. In the proto-ensemble column, paragraph numbers in parentheses indicate this repositioning; an asterisk (*) indicates material moved to the DOM section. The transitional ensemble has two sub­families : Group A and Group B. These agree in their constituent material except where noted.

Standardized ensemble DCM 1 DCM2 Proto- Transit. Intermed. (Kraut ed.) ensemble ensemble ensemble

132 Ut a nobis de curatione (21) X X X X X

133 Si de calida causa (21) X X X X X

134 Si uero ex frigiditate (21) X X X X X

135 Sunt quedam mulieres que cum X X X X X

ueniunt ad tempus menstruorum (2) 136 Eis autem sunt alie contrarie que ha- X X X X X

bent menstrua inmoderate (3) 137 Restringit etiam hoc aliud quod sic X X X X X

fit. Accipe cornu cerui (3) 138 Confortantur etiam isto. Recipe spice x a X X X

nardi (3) 139 Sed difficulter parturientibus (17) X X X X X

140 Post partum dolori matricis' (20) X X X X X

141 Sunt autem quedam mulieres quibus X X X X X

non committitur (36) 142 Alia est cura qua reddimus matricem X X X X X

aptam (36) 143 Si uero sit gross a et quasi ydro- X X X X X

pica (36) 144 Curamus etiam aliter uiros gros- X X X X X

sos (36) [a) Fiat et hoc cataplasma quod calorem X

matricis reprimit]1i [b) Si uero ex siccitate contingerit X

[c) Si fuerit ex humiditate] X

145 Eis que multum laborant parien- X X X X X

do (17) 146 Sunt que dam quibus remanet intus X X X X X

secundina (20)

a. Not found in ms 44. b. This and the following two' chapters may well be interpolations unique to the single

extant manuscript of the full text of DCM 1. Both stylistically and in terms of their theoretical sophistication they are unlike any other material in the DCM.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA 191

147 Sunt et alie que post partum immo- X X X X X

deratum fluxum (20) 148 Vel aliter, accipe argillam (20) X X X X X

149 Sunt quedam quibus male acci- X X X X X

dit (20) 150 Sunt et alie quibus matricem contin- X X X X X

git exire (30) 151 Suntquedam'que uentumperuuluam X X X X X

(Trotarrrotula) (20) 152 Exitus ani est morbus (39) X X X X X

153 Sunt et alii quibus non exierit anus X X X X X

(39) 154 Sunt quid am qui in uirga (50) X X X X X

155 Accidit quibusdam doloryliorum (40) X X X X X

156 Vel aliter decoquimus sisanium C

(40) 157 Stranguriam paciuntur tam uiri quam X X X X X

mulieres (41) 158 Item ad lapidem decoquimus saxifra- X X X X X

gam (42) 159 Sequitur de curis magistri Ferrarii X X X X X (42) d

160 Sunt quedam mulieres que fluxum X X X X X

apostematis (23) 161 Sunt et alie steriles simili modo sa- X X X X X niem educentem (23) 162 Sunt et alie iuuenes que eodem X X X X X

modo (23) 163 Sunt quedam que fluxum habent sa- X X X X X

niosum (23) 164 Item ad idem, accipe pulegium pu- X X X X X

luerizatum (23) 165 Sunt quedam ut diximus que per X X X X X

muliebria uentum (20) 166 Quibus quandoque partes ille pru- X X X X X

riunt (20) 167 Vnguentum satis ualens ad solis X X X X X adustionem e (61) 168 Sunt quedam mulieres que de nocte X X X X X (34) 169 Sunt quedam dissinteriam pacientes XC xC XC X xC pacientes (43) 170 Sunt quedam quibus frustra (24) X X X X X

171 Ad pediculos qui in pectine (44) X X X X X

c. This redpe originated in the revised ensemble when that editor treated a variant reading of '11 155 as a separate recipe.

d. Kraut omits mention of Ferrarius. e. Repeated in the DOM section of the ensemble as '11 290. Cr. also 'if 232g below. f. Order of 'if 169 and 170 reversed.

192 MONICA H. GREEN

172 Et ad pediculos qui circa oculos fiunt (44) 173 Ad scabiem coxarum (45) la) Ad impetiginem fricanius loca) 174 Ad faciem dealbandam, accipe radi­cem draguntee (61) 175 Ad ruborem faciei, accipe radicem uiticeUe (61) 176 Ad rugosas uetulas, accipe spatu­lam (61) 177 Ad lentigines faciei que sunt ex acci­denti (61) 178 Ad fetorem oris ex uicio stomachi (52) 179 Ad rubores faciei tollendos, sanguis­sugas (61) la) Ad uerrucas cum acu circumquaque eleuamus) 180 Ad uenas que apparent in naso (61) 181 Ad guttam oris (61) 182 Ad dentes nigros et male colora­tos (61) 183 Cancrum ubicumque sit in corpore (46) 184 Sunt quedam que fissuras labiorum (61) 185 Item sunt alie que fissuram (61) 186 Et aliter, secundum magistrum Fer­rarium (61)i 187 Sunt quedam quibus dentes a fri­gore (-) 188 Hiis qui casum uuule paciuntur (20, 53)k 189 In exitu uuIue post partum inponimus plumaceolum (20) 190 Constrictorium ad uuluam ut quasi puelle (-)

191 Accipe corticem ylicis renatium (-) 192 Item accipe puluerum nitri uel mori (-)

x

x X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

g. This is found only in the meretrices group.

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

x, X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

A:­B:x

X

A:­B:_h

X X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

,X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

h. 9T 179a and 180 are missing from both extant copies of Group A. One copy of Group B (ms 94) retains 9T 179 a in this position, while two other copies (mss 19 and 87) move it to a later position (now 9T 199) where it was to stay in all later versions of the ensemble.

i. See previous note. j. Kraut omits mention of Ferrarius. k. In Kraut's cap. 20, the remedy is abbreviated and, because of a misreading of uulue

for uuule, included among cures for uterine prolapse.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA 193

193 Item que dam sunt immunde et cor- X X X X X

rupte (-) 194 Aliter, accipe gallas, rosas (35) X X X X X 195 Quod ut melius fiat una nocte (-) X X X X X

[a) Item aliud accipe spongiam intinctam X xl

in recenti sanguine columbe) [b) Aliter. Accipe sumach, plantaginem) m A:-

B: X

196 V ulua mulieris quandoque inflatur X X X X X

(31) 197 Ad subitam inflationem faciei (61) X X X X X

198 Item ad inflacionem eiusdem et ocu- X X X lorum (61) 199 Ad uerrucas deponendas (-) n n n X X

200 Ad dolorem mamillarum ex lacte (20) X X X X X

201 Sunt quedam que in mamillis habent X X X X X

apostemata (20) 202 Quod si iste locus fuerit fistulatus (20) X X X X X

203 Nota quod dolor qui accidit in mamil- X X X X X lis (20) 204 Passioni puerorum que est quasi X X X X XO

tussis (25) 205 Sunt quedam que habent sudorem X X X X X

fetidum (26) 206 Ad inflacionem uulue. Accipe pule- p xq X X X

gium (31) 207 Ad formicaciones et syrones ubi- X X X X X

cumque (48) [a) Ad colorationem capillorum ut flaui X X * (91 254) * * fiant) [b) Ad denigrandos capillos. Primo pre- X X * (91 256) * * dicto modo) [c) Ad tineam capillorum. Decoquantur X X * (91 258) * * flores mirice) [d) Puluis ad occulorum maculas que re- X X * (91 259) * * manent post ruborem) [e) Ad inflaturam matricis. Accipe pu- X

legium) [f) Ad capillos cadentes. Apes quam plu- X X * (91 261) * * res)

1. Found in only three copies (mss 8, 24, and 86). m. This recipe is found in only one ms of the proto-ensemble (ms 85). n. In DCM 1-2 and the proto-ensemble, this recipe had been placed earlier (cf.

91 179a above). o.This chapter was lost early in the transmission of the intermediate ensemble, being

found now in only two of the extant mss (8 and 86). p. Appears later as."II 207 e. q. Order of 91 206 and 207 reversed in DCM 2. r. Appears earlier as 91 206;

13

194 MONlCA H. GREEN

[g) Ad idem. Agrimoniam tritam x x * (9f 262) * * [h) Vt pilli nascantur ubicumque uolueris. X X * (9f 263) * * Panem ordeacium) [i) Ad capillos denigrandos. Puluere~ X X * (9f 257) * * gallarum) [j) Perpetua ablutio capillorum. Accipe X X * (9f 264) * * oua formicarum) [k) Item aliud accipe oua formicarum, X S

gummi hedere) [I) Experimentum dominarum ad flaues- X X * (9f 265) * * cendos capillos) [m) Ad capillos uero crispandos. Radice X X * (9f 267) * * caput ebuli) In) Item ad flauos capillos. Accipe mirte X X * (9f 266) * * radicem, rubee maioris) (0) Vt pilli spissi nascantur. Agrimoniam) X X * (9f 268) * * 208 Ad dolorem oculorum, accipe ma- X X X X X luam (27) 209 Si tela sit in oculo, accipe concham X X X X X (28) 210 Si de fleumate fuerit, accipe polium X X X X X (28) 211 Vnguentum ad idem, accipe aloe X X X X X epatici (28) 212 Ad cancrum nasi, recipe pallam (47) X X X X X 213 Ad menstrua prouocanda, accipe X X X uerbenam (2) [a) Ad menstrua restringenda, accipe X A:- u u

saluiam) B:x 214 Ad dolorem matricis quando surgit X X X ex duricie (22) 215 Aliquando contingit pedes inflari (49) X X X 216 Ad menstrua constringenda, accipe A:x X saluiam (3) B: - v

217 Quando pueris inciditur umbili- X X X cus (-) [a) Et si uermes habuerit, accipe radi- X A:x X cem)W B: ~ [b) Ad gutturis inflationem) X A:x X

B: -[c) Arthemisia calida (glandulas») X x

s. This is only a slight variation of the previous recipe, employing ivy gum instead of ivy root, and wine instead of vinegar.

t. In DCM 1-2, the entire sequence of material from 9f 213-219 had been found at the end of the text (9f 232 a-d, i-I, and p-r).

u. Moved to later position (9f 216). v. Appe~ed earlier (see 9f 213a above). w. DCM 2 substituted sal indicum for radicem. This reading appeared in all other

versions that retain the recipe. x. Moved to later position (9f 224 below).

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA 195

(d) Ad morsuram serpentis, saniculam) x A:x x B: -

218 Ad eiciendum uermem de manibus x x X

(digge) (54) 219 Item accipe paleam auene (54) X X X

220 Nota quod si locus corrodatur (54) X

221 Ad surditatem aurium. Accipe pin- -Y X X X , guedinem (55) 222 Item ad uermem aurium. Accipe po-mum (-) 223 Ad testiculos inflatos fomentum (50) X X X X X

224 Arthemisia calida siue trita aa aa aa X X

(glandulas) (56) 225 Dolor matricis contingit ex aborsu X X X X X

(22) 226 Si autem ex calore fit (22) X X X X X

227 Ad exitum matricis post partum, ac- X X X X X cipe iuniperum (20)

X ab X ab 228 Ad rupturam inferiorum partium X X X

(20,32) 229 Ad dolorem uulue post partum, ac- X X X X X

cipe rutam (33) 230 Ad emorroydas innatas uicio partus X X X X X

(20, 57) 231 Aliter, accipe solutares ueteres (57) X X X X X

232 Ad partum matricis et ad secundi- X X X X X

nam educendam (57) (a) Ad menstrua prouocanda Accipe uer- X X (91 213) benam) (b) Ad menstrua restringenda. Accipe X X (91 213a) saluiam) (c) Ad dolorem matricis quando contingit X X (91 214) ex duricie ipsius. Accipe saxifragam) (d) Contingit aliquando ex dolore matricis X X (91 215) pedes inflare) (e) Mel ad cutem grossam in facie subti- X X * ( 91 286) * * liandam. Malum terre) (f) Ad uermes faciei delendos. Accipe X X ~ (91 287) * * olibani) (g) Ad ustionem faciei per calorem solis. X x ac * (91 290) * * Accipe radicem lilii domestici)

y. This recipe appears in ms 72 within a miscellany of Salernitan recipes (f. 114 VO) where it carries no attribution, not in the DCM.

z. This is found in only one copy, ms 94, which is a conflation of the transitional and revised ensembles. '

aa. 'This appeared in a later position in DCM 1-2 (91 2321), and in an earlier position in the proto-ensemble (91 217 c).

ab. Order of 91 228 and 229 r~versed in DCM 2 and proto-ensemble. ac. The order of 91 232 g and 232 h is inverted in ms 44, just as it will be in the tran­

sitional ensemble.

196 MONICA H. GREEN

[h) Ad serplgmem. accipe lapaceolum x x * (91 288) * * paruum) [i) Quando pueri inciditur umbilicus. sic X X (91 217) dicas) W Et si uermes habuerit. accipe radicem) X X (91 217a) [k) Ad inflationem gutturis que quando- X X (91 217b) que contingit) [I) Arthemesia calida siue frigida trita et X X (91 217c) superposita glandulas dissoluit)

ad [m) Ad faciendos capillos longos. accipe X *(91269) * * radicem de galla) In) Ad siriones capillos corrodentes. tu- X * (91 270) * * riones mirte) (0) Item ad idem. Lupinos pulueriza) X * (91 271) * * [p) Ad morsuram serpentis. Saniculam X (91 217d) tere) Iq) Ad eiciendum uermem qui anglice di- X (91 218) citur digge. Accipe laterem calefactum) [r) Ad idem. Accipe paleam auene et con- X (91 219) bure) 233 Contra aborsum assuetum fieri (37) A:-

B: X ae

234 Ad scabiem manuum sanandam (60) X X X 235 Item aliter. af Accipe lapatium (-) X X X 236 Unguentum ad faciem dealban- A:- ah xai dam. ag Recipe ceruse (61) B:x ai 237 Ad dentes nigros dealbandos et con- A: _ aj xai fortandos gingiuas (61) B:x ai 238 Item ut dentes nigri fiant albi (-) A:- ak X

B:x 239 Ad dolorem dentium et eos confor- A:- al X tandos (58) B:x 240 Item aliter. de succo pimpinelle (58) A:- am X

B:x

ad. Although the sole full copy of DCM 1 (ms 72) ends here. I think it likely that the subsequent six recipes witnessed by DCM 2 . were also found in the original DCM 1.

ae. Occurs after 91 235. af. This was originally a test for virginity. The original heading (Ad probandum si aZiqua

sit corrupta) was quickly lost (only one copy each of the proto- and transitional ensembles retain it). In all other instances this is assumed to be another recipe for scabies of the hands.

ago In the transitional and intermediate ensembles. this recipe was called Unguentum uwris Petri Viviani.

ah. Found at end of DOM (91 309f). ai. Order of 91 236 and 237 reversed. aj. Found at end of DOM (91 305 a). ak. Found at end of DOM (91 305b). am. Found at end of DOM (91 305c). am. Found at end of DOM (91 305d).

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROruLA

241 Ad manus dealbandas et lenifican­das, affrodilli (61)

A: _an

B:x

Table III : The De omatu muiierum (9f 241a-312)

197

x

This third concordance' collates the three versions of the DOM with the texts of the transitional and intermediate ensembles. The proto-ensemble is omitted because the few paragraphs found in the extant manuscripts vary from copy to copy. The proto-ensemble editor was, however, responsible for the initial transposition of many of the DCM cosmetic chapters into the DOM; in the transitional ensemble column, therefore, I have indicated the original DCM paragraph number in parentheses.

Standardized ensemble DOMl DaM 2 DaM 3 Transit. Intermed. (Kraut ed.) ensemble ensemble

la) preface: Ut ait Ypocras) X x a X xb 242 Ut mulier suauissima et planissima x x x x x fiat (61) 243 Postea etiam ungat se totam hoc psi- X x X X X

lotro (61) ·244 Aliud depilatorium. Accipe calcem X X X X X

uiuam, auripigmentum (61) 245 Unguentum pro nobilihus quod pilos X X X X X

remouet (61) 246 Cum mulier hoc psilotro se totam X X X X X

totam inunxerit (61) 247 Post exitum balnei ornet suos capil- X X X X X

los (61) 248 Cum autem pectinauerit se (61) X X X X X

249 Nobiles etiam mulieres ferant mus- X X X X

cum in capillis (61) 250 Si mulier uelit habere longos ca- X X X X

pillos (61) 251 Experimentum .Sarracenicum. Ac- X X X X X

cipe corticem malis granati (61) 252 Si uero multos et nigros habere uo- X X X X X

lueris capillos (61) 253 Si uero molles et lenes et subtiles X X X X X

habere uolueris (61) 254 Ad colorationem capillorum ut flaui X (9f 207 a) X

fiant (61) 255 Item fecem uini albi (61) A:- X

B: X

an. Found at end of DOM (9f 305e).

a. The prefa~e is an abbreviated form of that found in DOM 1 and 3; in some mss it is rewritten, and in others it is omitted altogether.

b. Only the 'abbreviated preface of DOM 2 is found with the transitional ensemble.

198 MONICA H. GREEN

256 Ad capillos denigrandos. Prius pre­dicto modo parantur ut inueniantur habi­les ad tincturam (61) 257 Item ad idem. Puluerem 'galange (61) 258 Ad tincturam d capillorum, coque florem mirte (61) 259 Puluis ad maculas oculorum que remanent post ruborem (29) 260 Ad capillos aureos faciendos. Re­cipe medianum corticem buxi (61) 261 Ad capillos candendos, e apes quam­plures (61) 262 Ad idem ualet agrimonia (61) 263 Vt capilli crescant ubi uis. Accipe pane m ordeaceum (61) 264 Vt fiat perpetua ablatio capillorum. Recipe oua formicarum (61) 265 Vt capilli fiant flaui, decoque celido­doniam et agrimonie radicem f (61) 266 Item ad idem. Recipe radicem celi­donie et rubee maioris (61) 267 Ad capillos crispandos. Radicem ebuli tere (61) 268 Vt capilli fiant spissi. Accipe agri­moniam et corticem ulmi (61) 269 Ad capillos longos faciendos. Radi­cem altee tere (61) 270 Ad syrones rodentes capillos. Recipe mirte, geneste (61) 271 Item lupinos amaros (61) 272 Post ornatum capillorum facies est X

ornanda (61) g

273 Oleum de tartaro sic fit (61) h X

274 Amidum sic fit (-) 275 Hoc facto, eat ad balneum (61) X

276 Recipe colofoniam, ceram (61) X

la) Quociens autem hoc depilatorio iungi X

uoluerit) i

-

X

X

X

X xi

X

X

X

X

X

X (91 207 b) X

A : X (91 207 i) X

B: - c

X (91 207c) X

X (91 207 d) X

A:- X

B:x X (91 207f) X

X (91 207g) X

X (91 207h) X

X (91 207j) X

x(9I 2071) X

X (91 207 n) X

X (91 207m) X

X (91 2070) X

X (91 232m) X

x(9I 232n) X

X (91 2320) X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

c. Found only in ms 94, which has other characteristics of the revised ensemble as well. d. In earlier versions, the reading had been tineam, not tincturam. e. This had originally been for hair loss (capilli cadentes). f. In DCM I, this recipe had been called Experimentum dominarum. g. Kraut prints this twice, with rephrasing. h. Kraut omits instructions for making oleum tartarum. i. This passage had explained that the unguent should be applied warm, with either

unguentum citrinum or with a cerusa, instructions for the preparation of which then follow. j. 91 276a is omitted from many copies of DOM 2.

I I I I I I I I I I I I

I

i

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROrULA

277 Item ad pannum remouendum post partum (61) 278 Cerotum de quo potest facies omni die inungi ad earn dealbandam sic fit. k

Recipe oleum uiolarum (-) 279 Nota quod omnis cera que debet poni in ceroto sic dealbatur (-) 280 Item alio modo facies dealbatur, panem porcinum (-) (a) Ad maculam panni linei remouendam]

(b) Item. Ad faciem dealbandam. Acci­piantur hee radices: panis porcinus (ce­rusa sarracenica)] (c) Cum mulier uoluerit hac cerusa faciem suam dealbare] n (d) Item ad dealbandam facie m puluis. Accipe fabe] (e) Item unguentum ad faciem mundifi­candam et clarificandam. Accipiatur succus maliterre ... medulle uaccine] (f) Item aliud mel ad lentigenes et pan­num faciei... et mundandam ab omni sordicie. Accipe succum mali terre, suc­cum yreos... mel dispumatum] (g) Aliud ad pannum faciei tolendum. Tartarum] (h) Item ad pilos tollendos ... calcem ui­uam] 5

(i) Ad faciem excoriandam· inungatur succo yreos] 281 Vnguentum de quo facies potes ungi omni tempore. Recipe cristalli (-) 282 Ad faciem dealbandam. Accipe suc­cum ciclaminis (-) 283 Ad asperitatem faciei de sole uel uento (61)

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

·X

u

x

x x

x X

x X

x X

x

x

x X

x

x X

x x

x X

x X

u

x

A:­B:x

X

X

X

A:x B:­A:x B:-

A:x B: -A:x B:­A:x B:-

A:x B :-

A:x B:­A:x B: -A:x B: -

X

X

X

k. In DOM 1-3, this had been introduced simply as Cerusa uel cerota sic fit. 1. This is repositioned near the end of the text ('if 309g). m. Repositioned near the end of the text (cf. 'if 309h below). n. This passage gave instructions for how to apply the cerusa sarracenica. o. Repositioned nead end of text (cf. 'if 309i below). p. Repositioned near end of the text (cf. 'if 310 below). q. Repositioned near end of text (cf. 'if 310a below). r. Repositioned near end of text (cf. 'if 310b below). s. The order of 'if. 280hand 280i is inverted in many copies of DOM 2. t. Repositioned at ~nd of text (cf. 'if 312 below). . u. Appears in later position in DOM 1 and 2 ('if 284a).

199

X

X

X

X

m

o

X

X

X

200 MONICA H. GREEN

284 Ad facie m dealbandam, ponantur oua integra (61) [a) Ad faciem dealbandam. Accipe suc­cum ciclaminis]" 285 Vel quod melius est, radix lilii (61) 286 Ad cutem subtiliandum in facie. Dragunteam uel maluam tere (61) 287 Ad uermes faciei delendos, quibus quid am depilantur (61) 288 Ad serpiginem faciei. Accipe lapacii parum (61) 289 Mulieres Salernitane ponunt radi­cem uiticelle (61) 290 Contra solis adustionem (-)

[a) Mulieres Salernitane ponunt radicem uiticelle] 291 Ad fistulam experimentum proba­turn. Accipe folium caulis rubei (59) 292 Nota quod si fistula fuerit in aliquo loco (59) 293 Valet ad idem auancia et philipen­dula (59) [a) Signa inter ydropisim ex matrice et inpregnationem] [b) Signa fetus mortui hec sunt] [c) Salernitane mulieres sic ornant facies suas. Radicem spatule fetide] ab

x

x

v. Transposed to new position above as 91 282. w. Appears in position of 91 290a.

x

x X

v v

X X

X (91 232e) x.

X (91 232f) X

X (91 232h) X

w w

X (91 232g X

+ 91 167) x xy X

X

X

X

aa X

aa X

A:x x. B: -

x. This is composed of the second occurrence of the recipe in the original DCM (see Concordance 2 above, 91 232g) plus the mixing instructions from the first (91 167).

y. This paragraph is adapted from Bernard de Provence, Commentanum super Tabulas Salemi (ed. DE RENZI, 5 : 273 : « Mulieres Salernitane ponunt radicem uitiscelle in melle et de tali n.elle inungunt facies suas et facies excoriata iuuenescit »). Group A also had a second extract from Bernard (91 293c below), thus producing a sequence of three chap­ters all discussing the practices of the mulieres Salemitane.

z. 91 291-92 are found in their full form only in ms 94, which probably conflates the transitional ensemble with the intermediate ensemble. However, ms 87, also in Group B of the transitional ensemble, has the last sentence of 91 291 (here following directly 91 288), which suggests that this material may have entered the Trotula prior to the intermediate ensemble.

aa. 91 293a-b were added in the bottom margin of ms 87 (a copy of Group B), f. 81 vOa, on the same page as the DCM chapter on women who labor in childbirth with a dead fetus (91 145).

ab. Like 91 289 above, this is adapted from Bernard de Provence, Commentarium super Tabulas Salemi (ed. DE RENZI, 5 ": 290) : « mulieres Salernitane radicem spatule fetide coquunt in melle et cum melle tali ungunt facies suas et ruge earum removentur et sic facies vetularum coguntur iuvenescere. ~

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROrULA

294 Mulieres ornunt sic facies suas, et labia sic (61) 295 Si autem colorare se debeat (61) 296 Color compositus sic fit. Accipe her­barn marinam (-) [a) Labiorum liuiditas remouetur)

• [b) Item. Si labia acu. pungantur)

297 Labiorum fissure remouentur pe­runcte cum oleo rosaceo (61) 298 Valet ad idem succus absinthii (61)

299 Labiorum grossicies attenuatur cum unctione mellis (61) [a) Corporis grossicies subtiliatur cum unctione mellis) 300 De hiis bene siccatis, fiat puluis (see err 304 below) (61) 301 Si fetor oris fuerit causa stoma­chi ae (61) 302 Dentes sic dealbantur. Accipe mar­mor album (61) 303 Item dentes emundat et albissimos reddit (61) 304 Si. mulier habet os fetidum causa putredinis gingiuarum af (61) [a) Si fetor oris causa intestinorum uel stomachi = err 301) 305 Ego uidi quamdam Sarracenam [= Item si mulier parum de folio lauri) ah

(61) [a) Dentifrigium ad dealbandos dentes nigros et comestas gingiuas et ad os male olens optime facit. Recipe cinamomi, gariofili) [b) Dentifrigium ut dentes nigri albi fiant, punicis usti)

ac. Found only in ms 94.

x X X

X X X

X X X

X X X

X X X

X X X

X X X

X X X

X

X

X

A : X

B : -A: X

B: -A : X

B :- ac

A: X

B :- ac

A: X

B :-A : X

B: X

X

X

xag

xag

X

A:x B :- ai

A:x B: _aj

201

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X ad

X

X

X

X

X

ai

ad. err 299 and 299 a are here conflated into a single paragraph. The error was corrected in neither the· revised nor the standardized ensemble.

ae. Originally found as err 304a below. af. The last part. of this paragraph (from De hiis bene siccatis to the end) and the

paragraph that should have followed it (err 304a) were misplaced above in the revised ensemble, hence the «creation» of err 300.

ago Omitted ms 94. ah. In DOM 1-3 and transitional ensemble, the phrase Ego uidi quamdam Sarracenam

cum hac medicina multos liberare was found at the end of the previous paragraph. ai. Transposed to end of DCM (err 237). aj .. Transposed to end of DC M (err 238).

202 MONICA H. GREEN

[c) Dentifrigium ad dentium dolorem, ad confortandum eorum si moti fiunt. Recipe salis amoniaci] [d) Aliud dentifrigium fit 'de succo pi m­pinelle] [e) Ad manus dealhandas et lenifican­das. Affrodillos in aqua] [f) Sunt nonnulle mulieres (ad constric­tionem uulue et grauis odoris remotio­nem)] [g) Licet superius de hoc tractauimus (additional depilatory)] [h) In hoc enim modico tractatu que­dam ad ornatum mulierum pertinencia (colophon) 306 Ad pannum faciei remouendum, tar­tarum (61) 307 Vt uirgo putetur que corrupta fuit. Recipe sanguinis draconis (35) 308 Aliter. Vt uulua stringatur. Recipe lapidem ematichis (-) 309 Aliud. Accipe gallas et pone in aqua (-) [a) Ad ruborem faciei matrici inducen­dum. Si forte ex nimio fluxu menstruo­rum pallescit] [b) Ad faciem dealbandam. Radicem leuistici] aq

[c) Unguentem ad cutem subtiliandam. Recipe frumenti acidi] [d) Ad idem unguentum. Cerusa optima] [e) Ad faciem splendidam faciendam, ra­dicem] [f) Unguentum uxoris Petri Viviani ad fa­ciem dealhandam. Recipe ceruse] [g) Ad maculam panni linei] [h) Ad faciem dealhandam. Accipe radi­cem panis porcinus (ceru.sa sarracenica)]

x

ak. Transposed to end of DCM ("If 239). al. Transposed to end of DCM ("If 240). am. Transposed to end of DCM ("If 241). an. Ms 87, a copy of Group B, ends here. ao. Found only in ms 94. ap. Moved here from earlier position ("If 280g).

X

X

X

A:x 'B: _ak

A:x B:_ al

A:x B: _am

X ag, an

ao

X

X

X

A: X

B :-

ar

A: X

B:-

A: X

B:-A: X

B: - as

aq. Occurs later in the revised and standardized ensembles as "If 311. ar. Found only in ms 94. as. Moved to the end of DCM ("If 236). at. Moved to this new position from i~ earlier site ("If 280a) above. au. Moved to this new position from its earlier site ("If 280b) above.

al

am

X

X ap

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

as

X al

X au

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TROTULA

[i) Cum autem mulier faciem suam deal­bare) 310 Ad faciem dealbandam et clarifican­dam. Recipe succi mali terre ... medullam bouinam (-) [a) Ad pannum faciei ... m~l dispumatum) [b) Ad pannum faciei ... tartanim de op-timo uino factum = abbrev. of."II 306) 311 Aliud. Recipe leuistici (-) 312 Ad idem et pilos tollendos. Recipe ealeem uiuam (-)

av. Moved to this new position from its earlier site ("11 280c) above. aw. Found only in ms 94. ax. Moved to this new position from its earlier site ("11 280e) above. ay. Moved to this new position from its earlier site ("11 280{) above. az. Moved to this new position from its earlier site ("11 280g) above. ba. Appears before "11 310b in the intermediate ensemble. bb. Found only in ms 94. be. Moved to this new position from its earlier site ("11 280h) above.

aw

bb

203

X av

x ax

X ay

x az

ba

x bc