An effort was made here not too long ago to use the most probable VMs plant iDs to match with corresponding monographs from medieval herbals, in the hope that VMs text would match with historical herbal text. It was a total strike out. Nothing was found.
That's not exactly what you are doing, but it has already been suggested that if the strongest matchings can't prove your hypothesis, the weak examples can hardly be expected to add much.
I have already made my contribution.
I also see no reason to repeat it every time.
What more proof do you need?
I have now given you the examples and they are historically proven in medicine.
Now bring me your examples that prove otherwise. It is easy to claim something when you have no idea yourself.
(24-09-2023, 12:33 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I filled in my column. Sometimes it's quite subjective though, so if we want to get a decent selection we need a handful of people to do their own.
Stick a fork in me, I'm done.
I filled in my evaluations in the spreadsheet. Mark is still working on his and there is one column remaining for someone else to add theirs. Since it didn't take long to get 4 people to work on this, then once one more person starts responding, we may want to add one or more additional columns. 5 including Mark would be a pretty small sample.
Mark may also want to check out the work that has been done already on this (e.g. Nick's work that tavie noted) and add to the current 108 matches any additional ones he agrees with. If so, we should leave the spreadsheet open long enough for Mark to add those matches here and for everyone to evaluate them as well.
My life is filled with spreadsheets currently. This one was a lot more fun than the ones for work...I'm in the middle of benefits open enrollment prep and it starts next week. More spreadsheets and formulas than you might imagine. Ugh!
I think Wladimir also posted about this at one point, though my recollection of it is vague. These should definitely be compared and supplemented it necessary.
To be honest my main interest in this is to see if something can be learned about the original order of the large plants and the connection between both sections. I am pessimistic about matching labels to text, but you never know of course.
(25-09-2023, 04:11 AM)merrimacga Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Since it didn't take long to get 4 people to work on this, then once one more person starts responding, we may want to add one or more additional columns. 5 including Mark would be a pretty small sample.
Getting more than a few people to actually fill something in can be surprisingly hard. Many either don't care enough or feel like they're in no position to contribute. But I added some more columns: You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.
[
attachment=7697]
@tavie, and thank you
I looked on the link.
In fact, I already wrote the same thing back then.
After all these years, there is no reason or new evidence why I should change my mind.
(24-09-2023, 09:42 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.And of course if anyone has a match to add that I have missed I would be very interested.
You've found all the matches that are listed in the ZL transliteration:
Code:
Match 69 f1v: Same plant as f102r1[3,2] (Petersen, Stolfi)
Match 13 f18v: Same plant as f102r2[3,1] ? (FSG, Stolfi)
Match 59 f19r: Same plant as f102v1[2,2] ? (Stolfi)
Match 14 f23r: Same plant as f102r2[3,2] (FSG, GL) ------------------ ZL: f102r2[3,1] (mistake)
Match 61 f32v: Same plant as f102r2[1,2] ? (FSG, Stolfi)
Match 12 f37v: Same plant as f102r1[3,1] ? (Stolfi)
Match 91 f39r: Same plant as f95r2 ? (Stolfi)
Match 20 f47v: Same plant as f102r2[1,1] (Petersen)
Match 47 f48r: Same plant as f89v2[3,4] ? (Stolfi)
Match 9 f48v: Same plant as f89v2[1,4] ? (Stolfi) ------------------- ZL: f89v[1,4] (mistake)
Match 77 f90v2: Same plant as f100v[2,2] ? (Stolfi) ------------------ ZL: f100r[1,3] (mistake)
Match 72 f90v1: Same plant as f100r[1,3] ? (Stolfi)
Match 90 f96v: Same plant as f99r[4,1] ? (GL)
A good one that I found this morning:
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. - f87v[1,1] leaves and roots
If individual features are of interest:
f89v1[1,3] - f90v1 clawed roots
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. - f89r1[3,2] faces in roots
(25-09-2023, 12:25 PM)nablator Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (24-09-2023, 09:42 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.And of course if anyone has a match to add that I have missed I would be very interested.
You've found all the matches that are listed in the ZL transliteration:
Code:
Match 69 f1v: Same plant as f102r1[3,2] (Petersen, Stolfi)
Match 13 f18v: Same plant as f102r2[3,1] ? (FSG, Stolfi)
Match 59 f19r: Same plant as f102v1[2,2] ? (Stolfi)
Match 14 f23r: Same plant as f102r2[3,2] (FSG, GL) ------------------ ZL: f102r2[3,1] (mistake)
Match 61 f32v: Same plant as f102r2[1,2] ? (FSG, Stolfi)
Match 12 f37v: Same plant as f102r1[3,1] ? (Stolfi)
Match 91 f39r: Same plant as f95r2 ? (Stolfi)
Match 20 f47v: Same plant as f102r2[1,1] (Petersen)
Match 47 f48r: Same plant as f89v2[3,4] ? (Stolfi)
Match 9 f48v: Same plant as f89v2[1,4] ? (Stolfi) ------------------- ZL: f89v[1,4] (mistake)
Match 77 f90v2: Same plant as f100v[2,2] ? (Stolfi) ------------------ ZL: f100r[1,3] (mistake)
Match 72 f90v1: Same plant as f100r[1,3] ? (Stolfi)
Match 90 f96v: Same plant as f99r[4,1] ? (GL)
A good one that I found this morning:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. - f87v[1,1] leaves and roots
If individual features are of interest:
f89v1[1,3] - f90v1 clawed roots
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. - f89r1[3,2] faces in roots
Are there any that are not on my list that you would suggest I add?
(25-09-2023, 06:11 AM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I think Wladimir also posted about this at one point, though my recollection of it is vague. These should definitely be compared and supplemented it necessary.
To be honest my main interest in this is to see if something can be learned about the original order of the large plants and the connection between both sections. I am pessimistic about matching labels to text, but you never know of course.
I think you are right that Wladimir is the other person who has done most in this area. I think I have taken the matching further than him(though I suppose that one might think that I would say that) and he has done a little textual comparison, but not in much depth if I recall. I think there is scope for doing a much more thorough and exhaustive analysis; in order to do that I need to organise the matchings with all the correct folio position reference points.
You are right to be pessimistic about matching labels to labels to text, as long as that pessimism doesn't stop one from doing that analysis, because whilst there is the smallest possibility of there being textual relationships they should definitely be investigated.
(25-09-2023, 04:22 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Are there any that are not on my list that you would suggest I add?
Yes, this one is a close match (roots and leaves): You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. - f87v[1,1].
There are more here: You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.