Aga Tentakulus wrote:I say it again and again, one should also look at wiki in other languages. The differences are huge.
I don't base my plant knowledge on Wikipedia. I go to the botany sites. But when I do read the Wikis, I read them in several languages, including French and German.
The German Wiki on Paris quadrifolia has several mistakes. This is one of them:
"Eine Pflanzenabbildung, auf der die Einbeere sicher zu erkennen ist, finden wir erstmals 1479 im Kräuterbuch des Bayerischen Mönchs You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.."
This is not true. There are at least four herbals between 1430 and 1460 that have recognizable pictures of Paris quadrifolia.
"Die Pflanze wird darin als „Crux Christi“, „Umbilicus veneris“ und „Ainper chrawt“ bezeichnet."
This is misleading. It makes it sound like all three plant names are plant labels for the drawing. The last one is a label for this plant, but the other two are not. They are probably ingredients to be used with P. quadrifolia (maybe a medicinal recipe) or else they may be cross references to some of the other drawings. I've looked at the Auslasser herbal quite closely.
This is why I often avoid other people's research. Much of it is wrong, including Wikipedia.