Ratzenschwantz

[MarcoP]

Sorry, I meant Cyperus (the sedge plant).

I'm always trying to do five things at once (I have three monitors and usually 6 apps running, and 25 tabs open in the browser at any given time). The forum is very hit-and-run for me as I'm working long hours. I should read my posts and check them before posting, but I don't because there's always something more urgent that needs to be done for a deadline.


So my bad. Cypress I typed, Cyperus I meant (probably Cyperus melanorhizus, C. longus or C. rotundus which have rounded root tubers, hence the name nut-sedge).

Sorry, I did not notice that Ellie wrote cyperus and so you obviously meant cyperus too.

---

What I infer from this thread is that medieval manuscripts presented plants in a complete mess. Which is not that good from the perspective of the analysis of the VMS.

Of course it's an extremely complex subject. A few users here (Rene, JKP, Ellie and possibly others) have clearly seen numberless images and they have provided a lot of useful information. The only way to make progress with this is the study of ancient herbals in general and from the XIV and XV century in particular. The fact that it is "a complete mess" is what makes the subject attractive

In You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. wrote that it contains drawings of well identifiable botanic species documented in many manuscripts ("disegni di specie botaniche ben indentificabili e attestate da molteplici manoscitti"). Of course, for hobbyists like us, approaching this huge and complex visual tradition is extremely difficult, but I am sure it is well worth the effort.