In early modern English medicine, the balance of fluids in the body was seen as key to health. Menstruation was widely believed to regulate blood levels in the body and so was extensively discussed in medical texts. Sara Read examines all forms of literature, from plays and poems, to life-writing, and compares these texts with the medical theories.
A competent survey of extant opinions/representation of female bleeding throughout the early modern period - however, it did feel slightly disembodied in the sense that there seemed to be a lack of solid historical grounding. While I appreciate that the material and topic in question has not left a long legacy of extant source material, I feel that in places there was an over-reliance on literature and, occasionally, an over-stretching of the material to fit an argument. That being said, this is a very good introduction to early modern menstruation/female bleeding (though I would recommend a familiarity with the period in general, for I don't feel you get that in this particular monograph), and I particularly enjoyed the chapters "'Women's Monthly Sickness': Accounting for Menstruation", "'Wearing of the Double Clout: Dealing With Menstrual Flow in Practice and Religious Doctrine" (especially the section discussing the conflation of menstrous/monstrous), "'The Flower of Virginity': Hymenal Bleeding and Becoming a Woman" (especially the commentary on how hymenal bleeding came to be eroticized, something I feel can be extended quite comfortably into the modern period), and "The 'Cleansing of the Flowers after Birth': Managing Pregnancy and Post-Partum Bleeding".
incredible starting point with so much information as I head into further research for my thesis. learned a lot of weird stuff, read some hilarious thoughts men had about monstrous coochies, etc.