(22-02-2021, 02:31 PM)ReneZ wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.It's the drawings in the alchemical herbals that I would refer to as "fantasy".
There are several authoritative sources for these herbals.
These manuscripts are quite consistent in all respects: illustrations, text and naming of the plants.
I can remember one "fish root" and Marco had a nice blog post about it, which I have not been able to find back
I must think of the word "fantasy" differently. To me, a fantasy plant is a work of the imagination. Made up. Invented.
I think the herbals of the alchemists were created for practical use, not as fantasy illustrations (as one might find in a book of fables or monsters). It is my opinion, after studying them for years (since 2008) that most of the entries are plants that are particularly useful for distillation purposes, with some that may be included for their symbolic value (symbolism was part of the gnostic proclivities of the alchemists).
They are real plants. We know this. They are labeled, and the shape of the drawing matches the label. A fish root is not a "fantasy" attachment, it's a mnemonic. A snake by the root is not a fantasy animal, it's a mnemonic for "toxic" or for a plant part that is used for snake bite.
In my view, they are practical manuals of real plants, intended for professional use, not fantasy creations.