f54r

[Diane]

Anton, I'm not sure where you found mention of Carthamus tinctorius in connection with folio 54r, and I'm not trying to do more than offer the fact when I say that such was my own identification. I published that quite some time ago and will send you a copy of it if you'd like to know the evidence and reasoning behind it.

To judge from the quality of silence which met my opinion, nothing of the sort had been said before, and if anyone else has repeated the id since, I've not had any ping-backs.

But the short story is - yes - you have at least one person to cite for that id.

On this - I might say that while Fr.Petersen's id's are his own, "Steve D" is a source which it is better not to quote - his method was astoundingly inappropriate, and his respect for future researcher as minimal for those whose work he plundered.  Unless his supposed "id" is presented exactly as proffered by Fr.Petersen or Dana Scott, it is best not mentioned at all.  I'll spare everyone the details. It's enough that anyone hoping to use botanical ids as key to the text should know to avoid it.