Drugs in the 16th century. Revolutionary or conventional?

Since prehistoric times people have used plants to treat the afflictions and diseases they suffered. In classical times these effects were connected to the medical theory of the four humours. This tradition was continued throughout the Middle Ages.

My talk will concern the developments in the 16th century that affected this tradition. How was it affected by humanism and the plea for educational reform that humanism entailed? Why did physicians start to look at plants in their natural surroundings? How it change their outlook on drugs? To answer these questions I will appeal to the historiographies of botany, natural history and medicine. Especially the last two have distinctly different aims and styleÕs of writing. I have supplemented this historiography with my own research.

I will argue that the traditional narrative of the origin of natural history in the 16th century is insufficient to provide the answers I was looking for. This narrative can not explain why plants became so important to academic physicians of the 16th century. Furthermore I will suggest that the traditional story underestimates the influence of the medical tradition. This tradition strongly influenced the way in which physicians examined and used the plants they encountered, both in their own city and across the ocean in South America. Finally, the traditional narrative overestimates the role of empiricism as a tool of revolution. Empiricism had a long history in medicine and when botanical gardens were founded and field expeditions were organised in the 16th century, they did little to influence medical theory or to affect the traditional authority of academic physicians.

You are most welcome to join me in discussing these issues and share your thoughts.