Text on Herbal Folk Medicine as a Narrative
Renata Sõukand
Abstract: Knowledge of folk medicine is today widely used in production of
natural medicines; proof has been found that folk medical herbs are
pharmacologically active. The Estonian Folklore Archive holds up to 10 000 texts
on Estonian herbal folk medicine, dating from the 19th century; to date this
material is poorly analyzed, mostly because of its unevenness and variety of
interpretation possibilities. According to their information density the texts could
be divided into three categories: 1) short statements (the most represented),
2) descriptions of preparation of herbal remedies, description of herb or disease;
3) detailed analysis of phenomena from the perspective of informers. All these
texts could be "read" differently, and indeed, there is no methodology for
analyzing them so far. Sometimes it is difficult to tell who talks to us through the
text - is it the individual or the community? Or in fact the researcher, who draws
from the text the information that he/she can or wants to see? The text, even the
short one, is a communication process; thus herbal folk medicine could be looked
at in the light of Jakobson's model of communication. Transmission of
information on an herbal remedy is affected by its position in folk religion, usage
in the home, and the personal expectations of the transmitter. The text could be
viewed as an insect caught in a web of narrations coming from nature and culture,
the future and the past, hopes and expectations. In the paper the author proposes a
semiotic model that helps to read the message itself as well as the context of
Estonian herbal folk medicine.
Keywords: ethnobotanical text, historical data, narrative, Estonian folk medicine.
Knowledge of folk medicine is today widely used in production of natural medicines
and as pharmacological industry develops, more and more folk medical herbs are
found to be pharmacologicaly active. European folk medicine, as being under longlasting influence of Western medicine is usually left aside. Indeed, most of the
contemporary European folk medical knowledge seems to be originating from books
on popular herbal healing or TV shows. But there is one quite underestimated source:
the written texts originating form the time long before advanced technology reached
the seemingly control over the health-keeping behavior of lay people. Buenz et al
(2004) already developed a methodology of reading historical herbal text as a
resource for the search for new potent medicines using NAPRALERT, a database on
natural products.
Estonian Folklore Archive holds up to 10 000 texts on Estonian herbal folk medicine,
the collection, that is only of its kind in the whole World. Those texts, dating back to
19th century, might be a perfect research material for ethnopharmacological studies.
Although the amount of records is imposing, they all describe a large number of
phenomena. But the question is not really in pharmaceutical value of the information.
The whole corpus of the texts has immense cultural value that may even overcome the
immediate benefit gained form production of the new medicines. It is practical
knowledge of oral culture, that has been transmitted to us through short text and it’s
function was not only to find out and preserve pharmacologicaly potent medicines,
but also help to organize human experience in the field, constructing simultaneously
the models of “herbal healing reality”. For me this sounds like being a narrative1.
Are this texts really narrations? To answer this question, we have to explore some
aspects of the texts and the ways of their transmission.
The Texts
The first appeal to collect folk medical heritage in Estonia was announced by Jakob
Hurt in 1888 and several others appeals followed it (for more detailed description see
Sõukand & Raal 2006). This early date of the start of collection makes the material
unique not only because of the considerable amount of the texts collected by
medically illiterate peasants, but also because it is probably possible to follow the
introduction of new herbs (or usage of the old ones) into folk medical lore through the
books and almanacs published since 18th century. But that is the subject for future
research.
First of all we have to explore the nature of texts under discussion. Taking into the
account the information density, the texts could be divided in three conditional
categories. Although it is quite impossible to draw a strict line between following
categories, the attempt to classify them gives us some overview of the material.
The first category is made up of brief notes, the contents (and also the
controversiality) of which can be understood after a larger quantity of the material is
worked through:
Plantain leaves were put on wounds. AES MT 226, 6 > Ambla, Lehtse, Kurge
manor farm – V. Saar (1938)
1
By narrative here I mean telling a story or something that may create a story-feeling in recipient.
Treatment of St. Anthony's fire. Spread on scrapings from bird cherry. E
51789 (5) > Paistu Kaarli v., Ridala k. – A . Johanson (1921)
This material gives the biggest variation in possibilities, as there are often several
unknown in the “formula”. Estonian “roos” translated in the second text as “St.
Anthony's fire” could be whatever furuncle or abscess or just a pink pigment spot on
the skin. “Tieleht” translated in the later text as “plantain leaves” could be one of four
species of Plantago family. Thus, the information this kind of texts bear may be even
misleading, as there are no certain milestones to relay on. From the pharmaceutical
point of view those texts have no or little use, especially if consider, that some
majority of them are derived from books (as the informer might be assumed that
everyone already knew the plant and the disease he or she is bearing in mind). But on
the other hand the texts of first category, being predominant in the amount especially
among later texts (form the beginning of 20th century), bring the diversity and
possibility to “play around” with different ideas on relations between the disease and
the herb and also the choosing process of the medicinal herb.
The second category includes more detailed explanations about the use of the plant
(recipe of collecting or preparation, description of the plant etc.):
Wart – cut the potato into half, press the wart three times with these halves,
put the potato back together and place it in the ground to rot. When the potato
is rotten, the wart has disappeared. RKM II 111, 157/8 (494) > Kingissepa
district. Sõrve, Mäebe village. – E. Aer (1961) > Ann Järvela, b.1877
Boils were often not treated at all. They were just let heal by themselves, and
to make the furuncle ”run” sooner (make the pus flow out), colt's foot was put
on the boil, or boil plaster was brought from the pharmacy. ERA II 203, 407
(83) > Vastse-Otepää parish, Aiaste village – A. Kroon (1938)
This category of texts is quite rational, restricting the possible interpretation
possibilities and opening some new dimension of transmission of folk herbal heritage.
The way the preparation of the remedy is described gives us the information on
attitudes toward medicine preparation as well as description on herb (it’s growing
place, appearance, taste, other qualities) or the disease gives notion of the part
particular herb may play in the world picture of the informant. Thus from the point of
view of cultural studies, this material is also quite interesting and promising. Those
texts are more characteristic to earlier informants (although given example texts are
from later collections), as the informers probably realized that there is no complete
compendium on the usage of folk medicinal herbs. Also, Jakob Hurt and Mattias
Johann Eisen (the early collectors of Estonian folklore) clearly identified the need for
more profound explanations about herbs used and diseases cured and by this guided
informer to give out more than just a keywords as it is usual for later texts. From the
pharmacological point of view this data is most promising, as it is possible to restrict
the list of possible species to work with.
In the third category the more informative material could be placed, which in addition
to the rational description of the plant use also opens the folk religious aspect of the
plant or the disease. Those texts are made up of lengthier and more detailed
descriptions. They are found less frequently, but the information they bear is often
unique and such texts demand a “personal approach” – they may include detailed
knowledge of folk medicine or be the “creation” of the correspondent.
To avoid backache during the harvesting of rye, a snake must be driven across a
leather belt or a woven belt. The snake surely does not want to go over the belt
because of its varied colors, and to make it cross the belt; the snake is driven
with a rowan-tree rod, whereas it is believed that the rowan-tree rod has a
divine power for making the snake across the belt. E 50821; Saarde – J. Nugis
(1916)
The texts of the later category are presented in the whole material spatially, maybe
only slightly more in the compendium of earlier texts. Such text can themselves be
viewed as narrative. Telling a story, driving reader into the fragment of the reality of
the informant – and transmitting the power of believes in the potency of the given
medicinal herb. From the pharmaceutical point of view those texts have no value and
usually left aside by earlier researchers coming from the pharmacological field, but
culturally they may tell the story of the informant.
So far, only little part of the texts under research could be recognized as narratives
directly. On the other hand, majority of the texts seems to have some narrativity
hidden behind the words. What do they tell us? Is that some specific information or a
context that forms narration?
Position of the herb in local culture and nature
Frequency and amplitude of usage of an herb in folk medicine is affected by several
factors. For example alien species, that have been introduced into Estonian cultural
gardening and also into menthal medical field by local Germans, are often more
valued in the folk medicine that locally grown herbs, which we can call “own”. But
seems, that in order to became popular, the herb has to became at least partly “own”,
retaining just maybe flavor of being “alien”.
We can take as an example two species of “invaders” that became ones of the most
popular medicinal herbs of Estonian folk medicine, one through natural
acclimatization and another through cultural acclimatization.
The first of the two species of Chamomile (Matricaria sp) were introduced to
Estonian gardening in the middle of 17th century (Annual Chamomile Matricaria
recutita) and the second in the middle of 19t century (Pineapple Mayweed Matricaria
matricaroides) (Vilbaste 1993: 422-423). From the two species, the first did not
spread into nature, as it needs some human care. The later arriver expanded quickly
into local nature and occupied waysides and field paths. Although they were growing
in totally different places and had totally different appearance, local peoples did not
differentiated two species at least on the level of the names. As the folk name
“kanaperse” that could be translated as “chicken’s butt” sounds as a sing of bad taste,
the German word “Kamille” was changed for “kummel”, more convenient for local
language.
Another example is “arnica”. Local German landlord’s wives were promoting use of
Arnica (Arnica Montana) since the beginning of 18th century. But Arnika montana
does not grow wildly in Estonia and even do not develop well even if cultivated. But
still, Estonian people knew several “arnicas” reported to be found in local forest,
which they were using as homemade medicine in substitude for real Arnica. People
consider most of the yellow flowers being “arnica”, but according to scintific
classification those were mostly species from Leontodon, Hieracium, Crepis and
Solidago families. (Vilbaste 1993: 174) There are 19 different species in Estonian
ethnobotany recognized as “arnica”, among them also Chamomille (Sõukand 2005).
As we see, quite many natural species are named “arnica” and presumably used as
“arnica”. That means, we can only guess whish species was meant with one or another
folk ethnobotanical name. Of cause, we can eliminate those represented by only one
example, but where is guarantee that our database is complete?
Even better example is so called “runner herb”, the name, that stresses the fact, that
the herb is used for healing “runner” (est jooksva), the disease that constantly moves
form one place of the body to another and that in academic medicine can be classified
as arthritis, joint pain or rheumatisms. There are 48 different species known as
“runnerherbs” (est jooksvarohi) or herb for healing “runner”. Eight most popular and
widespread are: Creeping Spearwort (Ranunculus flammula), Bittersweet (Solanum
dulcamara), Common Speedwell (Veronica officinalis), Bird’s-eye Speedwell
(Veronica chamaedrys), Tall Buttercup (Ranunculus acris), Twinflower (Linnea
borealis), May-Lily (Maianthemum bifolium) and Silverweed (Potentilla anserina)
All those plants, although different in appearance, have some specific characteristic
(the way and the place the plant grows, the smell, the other use in folk medicine), that
might be affecting usage for and naming after “runner”. The interesting moment to
notice is, that no any of culturally or agriculturally important plants, also widely used
for healing “runner”, as for example birch, stinging nettle, pine etc is named
“runnerherb”. (Sõukand 2004)
Picture 1. Six most widespread “Runnerherbs”.
One more example of the potency of the name is so called “ninemighty”: two species
of mullein. Common people did not make any difference between those two, at the
same time, in the pharmcognosy, the medical herb is only common mullein, as dark
mullein is totally unused.
Picture 2. Two “Ninemigthys”
Thus, cultural importance, as well as culturally “sound” name gives an herb strong
priority for being used as a medicine. Another good examples here are Rowan
(Sorpbus aucuparia) and Juniper (Juniperus communis), named potent in folk
medicine as they are reported to have “cross on their berries”. If we look more
closely, then the reality is a bit misleading: rowan has a sign with five branches, and
juniper with three.
Picture 3. Rowan and Juniper with the “crosses” seen.
Indeed, behind the text describing the usage of herb in folk medicine is not only the
story of pharmacological activity but also wide cultural and natural background. The
way community accepts a new herb into the cultural landscape or how another herb
acclimatizes in natural landscape show sustainability and flexibility of healing
traditions of given society. Names indicating usage and potential power of the herb in
folk medicine seem to make the milestones of traditional medicine of given
community. But do we really can tell if it is a voice of traditional community who
speaks through the given texts?
Individual versus community, traditional versus literary
Who’s really talking through the texts: Is it the community or individual, who,
transmitting the information, at the same time brings out from the text the information
that he/she can or want to see? To answer this question I want to quote Charles
Sanders Pierce, who brings out two seemingly opposing, but at the same time
simultaneously valid statements:
This conception, that another man's thought or sentiment may be equivalent to
one's own, is a distinctly new step, and a highly important one. It arises from an
impulse too strong in man to be suppressed, without danger of destroying the
human species. Unless we make ourselves hermits, we shall necessarily
influence each other's opinions; so that the problem becomes how to fix belief,
not in the individual merely, but in the community. (Peirce 1931–1935: V 378.)
For us that means, that the narratives transmitted by herbal text are widely spread in
the community and shared by several members of it. That is the usual approach to folk
medicine generally and to herbal medicine specifically: “knowledge transmitted from
generation to generation about usage of local plants and other medicines” – as may
average encyclopedia state. For some reports it seems to be the case at least of
author’s own opinion.
If someone has “underlanders”, the <---> should be taken... (This usage is
known in Tori, among the people of the Sindi parish. 5-6 years ago the method
was used, especially by old farmwives. I don’t know, whether it is also used
elsewhere. H I 5, 148 (3) < Lääne-Nigula parish - Johan Reimann (1894)But
even here we cannot underestimate the power of mistakes occurring in transmission of
oral culture. Something that is meant widespread can be just a reflection of generally
known through the knowledge and experience of the person reporting it. And if we
need a helping hand from authority, Peirce is saying about it in his special way. The
question, what are the shares of uniformity and variety in the phenomena of the
universe, is a question which has never been agitated in any public dispute that
has attracted general attention. The consequence is that everybody in a semiunconscious way forms his own opinion about it, usually a pretty vague opinion;
and he has the impression that all his neighbors think as he does about it. But,
on questioning people closely, it will be found that there are no less than five
different opinions that are widely spread on this subject” (Peirce 1931–1935: VI
88.)
That means, that we call “collective” is in fact the personal knowledge of one specific
informant and the folk medicine is a scope of individual healing practices.
And wheat bran were put into the towel, into washing water, when the child is
still young, this will clean the child’s body from all pimples. I did it recently with
my child. H II 27, 357 (14) < Palamuse parish, Luua - M. Uus (schoolteacher)
(1888).
This example text reflects only personal experience with usage of the herb, while
there can also be common knowledge integrated. Most of the texts under research
show little compassion for the researcher and offers no even slight hint on where the
knowledge is originated, as in the first two examples given in the text categorization
chapter.
It is also quite difficult to differentiate the source according to its traditionality. We
use to think, that folk knowledge comes form community and is “traditional” in its
best way. And that is, again, something that is by default a prerequisite for being “folk
medicine” for medical professionals. We can say so with some restrictions while
reading the following example:
Healing: Grandma broke 9 parts from the juniper. Boiled, washed the child with
this water and gave the child from her palm three times the same to drink,
saying: "silma sitta nõna mutta, hamba ahju otsa külge." H I 2, 541 (4) <
Otepää parish, Neeruti - Hans Nugin (1888)
But another dimension is approached, if we notice in the text obvious citations or
words that do not belong to traditional presentation. For example:
<---> If you cut yourself, and the bleeding don’t want to stop, take clean leaves
of yarrow [Pforfdgoewbau(?)], rub them long, so they became juicy, drip the
juice at the wound and the bleeding stops. (I’ve heard it from people, but doubt
it was known much before; but the value of this knowledge is so big, that I
couldn’t leave it unwritten. J.Koit). H I 5, 583 (8) < Kolga-Jaani parish - Jakob
Koit (1894).
Indeed, most of “citations” are difficult to recognize. They are hidden beneath the
traditional interpretation and could be seen only when the time of introduction of
given method is precisely dated or the text citied is precisely known by reader. In such
cases there are no references given and the “borrowed” information is usually
presented as own or “traditional”. And often there is no any reason to criticize the
informer, as he or she probably even did not notice the usage of “foreign thought”
(see also Umberto Eco’s note on “impreceptible quotations” (1997: 21)). But still,
even the information in first hand received from the written source goes through
transmission process while the informant is writing down the message.
Although it is sometimes possible to differentiate personal and communal or/and
written and oral origin of the information given in the text, the whole true will never
appear to the reader of the text. The text communicates to researcher some
information he or she has to interpret. The reach of interpretation trueness depends on
the extent the researcher knows background of formation of the text. But before
viewing the relations between text, interpreter and informant, we have to understand
the ways of transmissions of information on medicinal herbs.
The texts in the light of the model of communication
The best possibility to view the ways of transmission is to use Roman Jakobson’s
linguistic model of communication. That helps us to open new levels of
interpretations and, depending on the origin of the source, at least three different
levels could be seen in transmission of the message. With closer look it is possible to
identify even more, but our task here is just to get an idea of most possible ways.
context
referential
message
poetic
addresser
addressee
-------------------------------
emotive
connatative
contact
phatic
code
metalinguistic
Figure 1. Roman Jakobson’s model of communication (1981: 22, 27)
If we look at the process of transmission of medical information from the point of
view of oral tradition, the addresser is usually representative of the same culture,
probably older, sometimes learned “folk doctor”, whereas addressee is usually the
representative of lay people, in our case informer. The context is some given
situation, where the transmission takes place: some garden, field, healing room and it
precedes the actual usage of the information given in the message. Code is
understandable for both and the contact is immediate and all misunderstandings can
be cleared at the sight.
Another situation occurs, when transmission of the information comes form the
medical literature to layperson. Here the addresser is either learned doctor or more
often for 19th century, the translator. Addressee is the same, maybe more literate
person. Probably in the situation of reading he/she does not have a need to use the
information, but just memorizes (part of) it. Addresser may know the addressee
generally to some extent as for example Friedrich Reinhold Kreutzwald, a learned
doctor who published several editions of his practice-based book in the end of 19th
century (Kreutzwald 1879); or not at all as the translator of some almanac text of
evidently foreign origin, that had nothing to tell locals, as the text there asked to
collect herbs, that certainly did not grow in Estonia (for an example see ERK 1857).
Here the transmission is in one way anonymous. The code (made to sound like being
popular, often odd medical language) is written down and addresser does not control
the context, as there is no immediate contact. Even if the message is given teaching,
there is no guarantee, that the addressee receives what was sent.
In the case of transmission of knowledge through the archive texts the researcher
(addressee) is anonymous for informer (addresser), who might have received the
knowledge he or she transfers in one of two previously described ways. Or maybe
those tow ways are even combined… The researcher is facing the text (first meant for
the collector – Hurt, Eisen or later, collected for archive practice) stored in the
archives. Here we have the situation, where the openness of the context depends only
upon addressee’s knowledge of supposed situation, the message is given information
that sometimes helps to open the context. Contact is written (thus anonymous), code
learned by addressee (the extent of mastery of reading this code depends on different
circumstances).
The following table illustrates three different communication situations using
principles of Roman Jakobson’s model of communication.
Addresser
Oral history
Medical literature
Archive texts
Another peasant
Learned doctor,
Informer
translator
Addressee
Informer
Informer(s)
Researcher/s
Context
Given situation
Informant’s previous
Researchers
knowledge
knowledge
Message
Information
Teaching
Teaching/information
Contact
Direct
Written
Written
Code
Spoken language
Folk “medical language”
Archaic language
The deepness of information reach in those three cases is different as well as are
different the circumstances of transmission, but we a not going to continue this
analysis. For us the model of communication plays a role of tool unfolding the
narrative beneath the plain words that do not seem at first glance to construct any
narrative structure. Indeed, there can be told already three stories of how the
information we get had been formed and what transmission processes undergone
before reaching our sight. But the “story” is more complex and communication
process is just a part of it.
The text in the web
To see the whole complexity of the interpretation of the text and thus the narrative
behind it we have to incorporate in our model all previously mentioned aspects that
are in connection to our texts under research. What we get, describes the way of the
formation of interpreted text, the one we see in the results of the researchers work.
The text written firsthand and affected by several factors as informers knowledge of
culture, nature, and literature, expectances of collector and/or mediator, as well as
influences of community etc. is only a part of this web. The other part comes from the
researcher’s side and includes literally the same aspects maybe with the same shifts.
Also, the final result is affected by the deepness of the interest of the researcher to
consider the context behind the text under examination affects the final result. The
simplified model of the web of formation of the interpreted text is shown on the
Figure 2.
WEB OF THE FORMATION OF THE TEXT
TEXT INTERPRETED
CULTURE
NATURE
RESEARCHER
present
COMMUNITY
TEXT
RESEARCHER’S
KNOWLEDGE OF
SELF-REALIZATION
LITERATURE
INFORMANT
COMMUNITY
COLLECTOR
MEDIATOR
distant past
NATURE
CULTURE
PERSONAL EXPERIENCE
Figure 2. The model of the web of the formation of the text.
The text could be viewed as fly in the midst of web of narrations coming from nature
and culture, future and past, hopes and fears that surround and overwhelm its creator.
The same forces affect the researcher, whose task is to interpret the text according to
his or her best knowledge. That is the place where narration comes into life, as the
researcher tells the story of what he or she see, behind the curtain of simple words,
only briefly describing the phenomena. For researcher there is an immense temptation
to interpret those words in the first possible way, but going more toward the initial
narrative hidden in telegraphic text, opens more and more interpretation possibilities
and gives the opportunity to retell the story in several different ways.
Instead of conclusion
It is still quite difficult to say, that the text on herbal folk medicine is a narrative in it’s
classical way. It would be more confident to state, that the text itself only possesses
narrative qualities. It is the researcher, who recognizes the potential narration in it,
and finally makes the text to narrate. Every bit of additional information, gained by
persistent researcher, adds some new meaning to the text in front of him/her. The
reader who reads the text already interpreted (analyzed, systematized) by researcher
sees only the part that started to talk to the researcher. Indeed, the reader receives the
text as a picture in the mirror of researchers thoughts. This means that with every
interpretation we receive about the one or group of the texts, we may ask the question:
how and why the researcher constructed just this particular narration and what
episodes he or she omitted or maybe misinterpreted.
References
Buenz, Eric J., Schnepple, David J., Bauer, Bent A., Elkin, Peter L., Riddle, John M.,
Motley, Timothy J. (2004) Techniques: Bioprospecting historical herbal texts by
hunting for new leads in old tomes. TRENDS in Pharmacological Scienses. Vol.
25 No 9, 494–498.
Eco, Umberto (1997) Innovation and repetition: Between Modern and Post-Modern
Aesthetics. In: Reading Eco. An Anthology. Ed. Rocco Capozzi. Indiana
University Press, Bloomington, 14–33.
ERK 1857: Eesti rahwa Kalender se 1858 aasta peale pärrast J. Kristusse sündimist
[Almanac of Estonian people for the 1858th year after the birth of J Crist].
Hartung.
Jakobson, Roman (1981) Linguistics and Poetics. In: Jakobson; Roman Selected
Writings III. Poetry of Grammar and Grammar of Poetry. The Hague: Mouton
Publishers, 18–51.
Kreutzwald, Friedrich Reinhold (1879) Kodutohter: Õpetus, kuda haigedega peab
ümber käidama ja neile arsti abi puudusel kergitust tehtama [Home doctor: how
ill persons have to be treated and helped in the absence of the doctor]. Tartu:
Schnakenburg
Sõukand, Renata. 2004. “Jooksvarohud” Eesti rahvameditsiinis [Herbs for Treating
Rheumatism in Estonian Folk Medicine]. Akadeemia 2004: 11, 2475–2493.
Sõukand, Renata 2005. Loodus eesti rahvameditsiinis [Nature in Estonian Folk
Medicine]. Kultuur-loodus [Cultural nature]. Editors Maran, Timo and Tüür,
Kadri. Tartu: Estonian Literary Museum, 55–80.
Sõukand, Renata, Raal, Ain. 2005. Plants in Estonian Folk Medicine: Collection,
Formation and Overview of Previous Research. Folklore 29, 173–200.
Vilbaste, Gustav, 1993. Eesti taimenimetused [Popularly Used Plants of Estonia].
Eesti TA Emakeele Seltsi Toimetised 20 (67).