Show simple item record

dc.contributor.editorBradley, Mark
dc.contributor.editorLeonard, Victoria
dc.contributor.editorTotelin, Laurence
dc.date.accessioned2022-05-20T10:06:30Z
dc.date.available2022-05-20T10:06:30Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.urihttps://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/54633
dc.description.abstractMedical and philosophical theories of generation from the classical world are often classified according to whether the female as well as the male produces ‘seed’, the fluid substance which does the most important work in procreation. Aristotle is usually identified as the most influential proponent of the ‘one-seed model’, while Galen champions the ‘two-seed’ cause, and the debate between them continues to matter for centuries. At stake here is not just theoretical efficiency – how well the full complexities of parental resemblance are accounted for by the contending notions, for example — but also, it has been suggested, politics and patriarchy. Two seeds are better, more egalitarian, than one: the female role in generation is more positively valued in this model. This chapter will argue that, not only this characterisation, but the division itself, is misleading: particularly if viewed from a fluid perspective. Another way must be found to understand the key concepts involved in these foundational ancient debates about human procreation.en_US
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.subject.otherMedicine / The body / Identity / Gender / Sexuality / Ancient Egypt / Greece / Rome / Byzantium / Persia / Reception / Sensory turn / Emotions / Classical literature / Ancient religionen_US
dc.titleBodily Fluids in Antiquityen_US
dc.typebook
oapen.relation.isPublishedBy7b3c7b10-5b1e-40b3-860e-c6dd5197f0bben_US
oapen.relation.hasChapter7de24290-c82b-40ee-b14b-c13450e07d9b
oapen.relation.isbn9781138343726en_US
oapen.relation.isbn9780367764067en_US
oapen.relation.isbn9780429438974en_US
oapen.imprintRoutledgeen_US
peerreview.anonymitySingle-anonymised
peerreview.idbc80075c-96cc-4740-a9f3-a234bc2598f1
peerreview.open.reviewNo
peerreview.publish.responsibilityPublisher
peerreview.review.stagePre-publication
peerreview.review.typeProposal
peerreview.reviewer.typeInternal editor
peerreview.reviewer.typeExternal peer reviewer
peerreview.titleProposal review
oapen.review.commentsTaylor & Francis open access titles are reviewed as a minimum at proposal stage by at least two external peer reviewers and an internal editor (additional reviews may be sought and additional content reviewed as required).


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record