17-09-2016, 08:49 AM
(16-09-2016, 11:16 PM)-JKP- wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(16-09-2016, 07:18 PM)Koen Gh. wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.1) The botanical folios in the manuscript exclusively refer to plants and plant parts. There is no reference to animal products.
You might want to reword "refer to" to "represent" (or "depict"). When you say "refer to" it has a broader meaning. It's possible the plants refer to all sorts of non-plant concepts, but they do seem to represent plants.
To answer the question...
It depends whether the "cube" in the small plants section is resin or mineral (or something else). If it's resin (e.g., myrrh, frankincense, dried balsam, bdellium, etc.) then they may all be plants/plant parts.
If the cube is alchemical mercury or a mineral, then it would be an exception to this statement.
Hi David,
I agree with your suggestion: we don't know what the text refers to, while we can discuss what the images depict.
I guess that Koen is referring only to the herbal section, excluding the pharma section.
A good way to make this clear would be to list the folio range you consider relevant.
Another possible "small plants" exception is the frog in f102r2
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.