15-09-2017, 09:00 PM
I don't know, Koen. They have been careful to represent the elements of the plant they consider important for identification - the shape of the leaves, the flowers, even the number of stamens within the flowers. They've added another leaf, but it's in the same shape and form as the other two, and it's probably just so as not to leave a big blank space to the left.
Although I don't know why they've added the veins.
But they've considered the roots irrelevant - they've recreated the roots as they think roots should be. Which indicates they thought only the above ground part of the plant was useful.
Maybe they recognised the plant and drew it to life?
So they've tried to recreate the plant, but only concentrated on the useful bits, and despite using their own artistic tradition to draw it, have tried to be faithful to the original.
And the text is a pretty good copy, actually. If it were, say, Cyrillic, done by a non-native speaker, then I reckon a Cyrillic speaker would recognise and understand it. The text gets better towards the end as the scribe gains practice.
But the artistic style looks modern to me too. Possibly late 18th century, at a pinch.
I'm also looking at the parchment. It seems to be trimmed top, bottom and right, but is irregular on the left -as if it were cut out of a book. Are the dimensions the same as the codex? It could be some prepared parchment that was cut down to fit.
Although I don't know why they've added the veins.
But they've considered the roots irrelevant - they've recreated the roots as they think roots should be. Which indicates they thought only the above ground part of the plant was useful.
Maybe they recognised the plant and drew it to life?
So they've tried to recreate the plant, but only concentrated on the useful bits, and despite using their own artistic tradition to draw it, have tried to be faithful to the original.
And the text is a pretty good copy, actually. If it were, say, Cyrillic, done by a non-native speaker, then I reckon a Cyrillic speaker would recognise and understand it. The text gets better towards the end as the scribe gains practice.
But the artistic style looks modern to me too. Possibly late 18th century, at a pinch.
I'm also looking at the parchment. It seems to be trimmed top, bottom and right, but is irregular on the left -as if it were cut out of a book. Are the dimensions the same as the codex? It could be some prepared parchment that was cut down to fit.