By Anne Stobart
This is the last of four posts about my investigation into
traditionally used native (folkloric) plants in medicinal
seventeenth-century recipes. In the first two posts (here and here)
I looked at the most frequently appearing plants and some differences
in recipe indications in print and manuscript contexts. In my third post
I discussed some less frequent plant ingredients. In this post I want
to flag up some factors which might have affected the inclusion of these
plants in remedies. The ideas presented here draw on the chapter on the
nature of medicinal ingredients in my forthcoming book Household Medicine in Seventeenth-Century England.[1] Views of simples versus exotics
Knowledge of native plants in traditional use may have been regarded
by some in the seventeenth century as less than worthy, and Rebecca Laroche notes that the word ‘simples’ was removed by John Parkinson in the title of Theatrum Botanicum (previously
the ‘Garden of Simples’).[2] Patrick Wallis describes substantial
increases in seventeenth-century medicinal imports, showing that the use
of ‘exotics’ was widespread. [3] So it might not be so surprising if
native plants appeared somewhat less often in medicinal recipes. If
knowledge about such plants was passed on orally then perhaps we might
not expect to see any of them in medicinal recipes. However, when I
looked at the occurrence of forty common native plants in my database of
seventeenth-century recipes I found variable numbers. Thus, some native
plants that were also known in the scholarly tradition were almost as
common as spices, while others, especially acrid plants, were far less
common, particularly in the later seventeenth century. Fewer recipes for external use in the later seventeenth century?
Another factor affecting the likelihood of a native plant appearing
in a recipe might have been the changing nature of recipe preparations:
from recipes for external use such as plasters and ointments to those
for internal use such as drinks. I compared the numbers of internal and
external preparations in my database of 6500 recipes. Such an analysis
has to be tentative as the dating of recipes is not always accurate. In
the first half of the seventeenth century, they split almost evenly: the
printed recipes favoured external preparations at 56% of all recipes, a
little more than external preparations in the household recipes at 49%.
However, in the second half of the seventeenth century, the balance
shifted noticeably towards internal preparations in both household and
printed recipes. The proportion of external preparations decreased to to
nearly 42% in printed books, and less than 38% of recipes in household
collections. It is possible that this shift could have contributed to
less frequent inclusion of some native plants. Figure 1. Elder flower and leaf (Sambucus nigra)
Interest in simples
Conversely, some native traditional plants did reappear towards the
latter half of the seventeenth century. An example is elder (Sambucus nigra)
(Figure 1), a frequently mentioned ingredient in the King’s evil
recipes collected by the Boscawen family in Cornwall. Earlier in the
century elder was listed in recipes for burns and sores as well as
plague and ague remedies. By the later half of the seventeenth century,
use was recommended by friends and lay advisers for the KIng’s evil.[4]
Another suggested recipe contained foxglove (Digitalis purpurea) (Figure 2) as a simple: Figure 2. Foxglove (Digitalis purpurea)An Excelent Medicine for the Kings Evill Take of the flowers of fox gloves and infuse them in Butter soe
long in an oven as may be Convenient to sooke out the vertue of the said
flowers then take the butter of and anoynt the plate and the thinn
Cloth that is to be applyed and soe Contynnue to dresse it by Anoynting
the Cloth as is usuall in a Scald. [5]
Interest in simples was also promoted by Helmontian physicians, and
the powers of purified remedies provided strong advertising claims by
commercial remedy sellers.[6] Conclusion
Understanding the knowledge and use of traditional native plants in
seventeenth-century medicinal recipes is not straightforward. Many of
these plants were included in external preparations which were declining
in the seventeenth century. Yet, towards the early eighteenth century
some native plants were reappearing in favour both in recipes and as
simples.
[1] Anne Stobart, Household Medicine in Seventeenth-Century England (London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2016).
[2] Rebecca Laroche, Medical Authority and Englishwomen’s Herbal Texts, 1550-1650 (Farnham: Ashgate, 2009), p.151.
[3] Patrick Wallis, ‘Exotic Drugs and English Medicine: England’s Drug Trade, c. 1550–c. 1800’. Social History of Medicine 25, no. 1 (2012): 20–46.
[4] Anne Stobart, ‘”Lett Her Refrain from All Hott Spices”: Medicinal
Recipes and Advice in the Treatment of the King’s Evil in
Seventeenth-Century South-West England’. In Reading and Writing Recipe Books, 1550-1800, edited by Michelle DiMeo and Sara Pennell, 203-24. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2013.
[5] Fortescue of Castle Hill papers, 1262M/FC/7. Exeter: Devon Heritage Centre, item 18.
[6] David B. Haycock, ‘A Thing Ridiculous’? Chemical Medicines and the Prolongation of Human Life in Seventeenth-Century England (London: London School of Economics, 2006), p. 23.
