01-11-2016, 09:57 PM
(This post was last modified: 01-11-2016, 09:58 PM by Diane.
Edit Reason: add
)
Marco,
(re your earlier comment on Touwaide..)
I think that here you may have expressed well the standard opinon about this detail, going back perhaps two decades.
The differences are mainly about the nature of the ingredients and final preparations. You agree with me, I see, in emphasising the importance of connecting the block to the detail below it, and here again I doubt if either of us was the first to do that.
Basically, Touwaide has re-stated everyone's opinon in general, over the past couple of decades, but he has intelligently avoided assumptions about the intended purpose of either the botanical images or this section.
Since the vessels are not albarelli, or any sort of pharmacy jar known to have been used in medieval European pharmacies, I think he was wise to avoid that assumption. But Touwaide is agreeing with the views expressed by earlier researchers (though not all of them), rather than creating a new evaluation of these sections. To suggest otherwise would be a mistake. It is certainly gratifying to have an eminent scholar agree with the opinions expressed earlier, but one wouldn't like to see a false impression given that no similar evaluation had been provided earlier.
(re your earlier comment on Touwaide..)
I think that here you may have expressed well the standard opinon about this detail, going back perhaps two decades.
The differences are mainly about the nature of the ingredients and final preparations. You agree with me, I see, in emphasising the importance of connecting the block to the detail below it, and here again I doubt if either of us was the first to do that.
Basically, Touwaide has re-stated everyone's opinon in general, over the past couple of decades, but he has intelligently avoided assumptions about the intended purpose of either the botanical images or this section.
Since the vessels are not albarelli, or any sort of pharmacy jar known to have been used in medieval European pharmacies, I think he was wise to avoid that assumption. But Touwaide is agreeing with the views expressed by earlier researchers (though not all of them), rather than creating a new evaluation of these sections. To suggest otherwise would be a mistake. It is certainly gratifying to have an eminent scholar agree with the opinions expressed earlier, but one wouldn't like to see a false impression given that no similar evaluation had been provided earlier.