De Renzi, Silvia
- Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
|DOI (Digital Object Identifier) Link:||http://doi.org/10.1353/bhm.2010.0026|
|Google Scholar:||Look up in Google Scholar|
In seventeenth-century Rome a popular financial scheme made it crucial to establish if pregnancy or childbirth had caused a woman’s death. Courts sought medical advice and this prompted physicians to reconsider the issues. Their disagreements provide historians with evidence from which to reassess received views of early modern doctors’ involvement with birthing bodies. Among others, Paolo Zacchia intervened, revealing discord between physicians and jurists on how to establish the causes of death. One of his testimonies in a case shows more broadly how legal, medical, and lay views on pregnancy and childbirth intersected in courts of law. In Roman tribunals the very distinction between healthy and preternatural births was contentious, and the parties had an interest in having births either proved healthy in medical terms or construed as pathological. The controversies, the author argues, challenge historical expectations about early modern perceptions, including the boundaries between female and male, private and public, healthy and pathological.
|Item Type:||Journal Article|
|Copyright Holders:||2010 The Johns Hopkins University Press|
|Keywords:||causes; childbirth; expert witnesses; legal medicine; Paolo Zacchia; physicians; pregnancy|
|Academic Unit/Department:||Arts > History
|Depositing User:||Silvia De Renzi|
|Date Deposited:||22 Jan 2011 22:51|
|Last Modified:||23 Feb 2016 20:57|
|Share this page:|
Download history for this item
These details should be considered as only a guide to the number of downloads performed manually. Algorithmic methods have been applied in an attempt to remove automated downloads from the displayed statistics but no guarantee can be made as to the accuracy of the figures.