24-11-2025, 02:21 PM
Recently I have been trying to take a 'fresh eyes' look at the plants in Herbal A to see if any of them stand out as stronger or useful matches. I know this has been done before (largely in vain) however I thought why not. My larger work is still in progress but I wanted to share my identifcation for You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. because it is one of the most interesting to me and I haven't seen it really discussed elsewhere. I believe that You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. actually is an identifiable plant and that if this identification is correct, it is potentially very helpful in shedding light on the VMS itself. So, here we go:
The roots are potentially pareidolic in nature, yet I immediately thought of a large wing with feet/talons. My first thoughts were to a griffin or eagle.
[attachment=12593]
Although this seems thin, a plant that is commonly associated with the eagle is ‘aquilegia’ (a.k.a columbine). Aquilegia has the exact colouring and drooping flowers that we see in f10v. It however, does not normally have the drooping leaves which are shown in the VMS version, although I am allowing a little wiggle room. Here we can see the visual similarities between You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and aquilegia.
[attachment=12592]
Aquilegia is named as such because the latin for eagle is ‘aquila’ and the plant is said to resemble an eagle’s talons. Based on this strong visual and mnemonic connection, I am leaning quite strongly to this identification.
An important implication of this finding (if correct) is that the association with Aquilegia and the eagle are largely Italian and German, whilst French sources tend to use the name ‘columbine’ which comes from the latin for a dove or pigeon. From my perspective, the ‘wing’ in the root points much more to a large bird like an eagle rather than a dove or pigeon. This then points to the illustrator thinking of (or knowing it as) the latin for eagle rather than the latin for dove/pigeon, maybe pointing to a specific area.
We also know that Aquilegia was discussed by Hildegard von Bingen (she called it agleya) as useful for curing fever. Albertus Magnus also mentions it. Therefore, it would not be out of place to be discussed given its believed properties. Aquilegia vulgaris has also been connected to Christianity and been cultivated within monastery gardens in England, Germany and Italy during the 1300-1400s. Likewise, many Aquilegia species are native to Western Europe and the Alpine regions.
I'm happy to hear everyones opinion on this idea (and whether or not I am just retreading other's work).
The roots are potentially pareidolic in nature, yet I immediately thought of a large wing with feet/talons. My first thoughts were to a griffin or eagle.
[attachment=12593]
Although this seems thin, a plant that is commonly associated with the eagle is ‘aquilegia’ (a.k.a columbine). Aquilegia has the exact colouring and drooping flowers that we see in f10v. It however, does not normally have the drooping leaves which are shown in the VMS version, although I am allowing a little wiggle room. Here we can see the visual similarities between You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and aquilegia.
[attachment=12592]
Aquilegia is named as such because the latin for eagle is ‘aquila’ and the plant is said to resemble an eagle’s talons. Based on this strong visual and mnemonic connection, I am leaning quite strongly to this identification.
An important implication of this finding (if correct) is that the association with Aquilegia and the eagle are largely Italian and German, whilst French sources tend to use the name ‘columbine’ which comes from the latin for a dove or pigeon. From my perspective, the ‘wing’ in the root points much more to a large bird like an eagle rather than a dove or pigeon. This then points to the illustrator thinking of (or knowing it as) the latin for eagle rather than the latin for dove/pigeon, maybe pointing to a specific area.
We also know that Aquilegia was discussed by Hildegard von Bingen (she called it agleya) as useful for curing fever. Albertus Magnus also mentions it. Therefore, it would not be out of place to be discussed given its believed properties. Aquilegia vulgaris has also been connected to Christianity and been cultivated within monastery gardens in England, Germany and Italy during the 1300-1400s. Likewise, many Aquilegia species are native to Western Europe and the Alpine regions.
I'm happy to hear everyones opinion on this idea (and whether or not I am just retreading other's work).
) and I strongly agree. I would further add that we should not generalize. Some plants may very well have been fully (and badly?) copied from another herbal or even live or herbalised plant material like f9v , the majority however indeed appears to be a mixture of different sources + the author's own ideas. We should not look at this from a modern scientific perspective but through the lens of a 15th century 'artist' possibly one who himself had very little idea what the plants depicted in his sources looked like in real life.