I am grateful to the Aspasia editors for the invitation to take part in the Forum since the problem at the centre of the discussion has helped me identify and explain some vague ideas and dissatisfaction with my own research practice. My chief concern was with the reasons, ways, and consequences of the act of naming our predecessors’ actions and principles. What is behind our aspiration to categorise women? Why should we invent new labels for them or import/apply terms derived from completely different contexts? Does it help to understand better their heritage or just simplify our tasks? Giving women ‘generic names’, don’t we deprive them of their own voices?