- Options
- Login
- Desktop Style
Options
Vitus Auslasser's herbal (1479)
- Vitus Auslasser's herbal (1479)
-
RE: Vitus Auslasser's herbal (1479)
-JKP- > 08-01-2017, 11:58 PM
(08-01-2017, 11:50 PM)Anton Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view."xp" or "xpi" is a shortcut for "Christus" or "Christi" (see Cappelli), so this is "Crux Christi" beyond doubt.
Yes, I know, but you are turning the "p" into a "t" (the abbreviation for Christi is "xti") and the label not a "t", plus the last letter with the swooped tail on the "u" is a very common ending for "-um" and the plant name directly after it (Umblicus veneris) is a two-name designation (as in most botanical names), so it's quite possible the first one is, as well, in which case it's Creux crispum which is completely acceptable as a plant name.
Never mind, I just checked (I should have known this), xpi is also a common abbreviation for Christi. You are correct in that it can be interpreted that way. It may also be crispum, in line with the name that follows it.
Well, if it's Solomon's seal, then it's no relation to Paris. I still think it's possible these may be part of a remedy. -
RE: Vitus Auslasser's herbal (1479)
-JKP- > 09-01-2017, 12:05 AM
(08-01-2017, 11:50 PM)Anton Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The book that Oocephalus referred to above says that Umbilicus veneris is Paris. Dunno if they don't borrow this from Auslasser's herbal though. But it also lists Venussiegel as the German name for Paris. Sounds good, does not it?
OMG! Anton, that is a very perceptive observation.
Maybe they DID copy it from Auslasser without any critical analysis!! -
RE: Vitus Auslasser's herbal (1479)
Helmut Winkler > 09-01-2017, 11:05 AM
This thread is a very good example of what is wrong with some of the discussions going on on this site. -
RE: Vitus Auslasser's herbal (1479)
VViews > 09-01-2017, 11:22 AM
Helmut Winkler would you care to elaborate?
Is there something you were expecting to find in this thread but didn't?
How can the discussions on this thread be improved, in your opinion? -
RE: Vitus Auslasser's herbal (1479)
Helmut Winkler > 09-01-2017, 11:42 AM
What I am complaining about is the lack of some of the fundamentals. The labels of the Auslasser Herbal are easy to read and in most cases unambiguous, but this does not stop people to proclaim obvious misreadings. The best example is the Einbeere. VA painted an obvious Paris quadrifolia, I think 10 seconds of thinking should bring anyone to the conclusion that he wrote ainper and not amper. The other example is the crux christi, where you have chi rho iota, not cpi. The book to consult would have been Marzell, Pflanzennamen, not to mention the publications about Auslasser. Even a look at the German Wiki Einbeere would have helped. And so on, I have no more time to waste -
RE: Vitus Auslasser's herbal (1479)
Anton > 09-01-2017, 01:11 PM
Hi Helmut,
Maybe what he wrote was "ainper", but that effort yielded "amper".
Please also remember that not everybody in this forum is a German speaker and thus not everyone is a happy user of the German Wiki.
This forum is a community discussion board, not a professional body of botany historians where everyone should be an expert in pflanzennamen under the threat of expulsion.
So I encourage everyone to return to the discussion of the herbal. -
RE: Vitus Auslasser's herbal (1479)
VViews > 09-01-2017, 01:52 PM
Thanks for your reply Helmut Winkler.
You mentioned providing transcriptions of the Auslasser German plant names eight months ago, and it is normal that others have tried to advance in the interval.
Nothing wrong with any of that: people do their best with the time they have, and nobody can be expected to be an expert at everything.
The Marzell book: unfortunately it seems that there are no online versions available, which may also explain why the Pflanzennamen hasn't been consulted here. Please correct me if I am wrong about that, as I would really like to have a look at this book.
As for publications about Auslasser, if you have recommendations I'd be very interested in some links! -
RE: Vitus Auslasser's herbal (1479)
Helmut Winkler > 09-01-2017, 06:30 PM
-
RE: Vitus Auslasser's herbal (1479)
Anton > 09-01-2017, 06:43 PM
Quote:Hi Anton,
he wrote ainper and we read ainper, that isa question of internal logic
Well, that's actually good because it fits to Paris without the need to involve additional explanations. -
RE: Vitus Auslasser's herbal (1479)
-JKP- > 09-01-2017, 08:56 PM
Quote: Helmut Winkler Wrote: Hi Anton,
he wrote ainper and we read ainper, that isa question of internal logic
Hi VViews,
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and Daems, Willem Frans, Auslasser, Veit in: Verfasserlexikon 1 (1978), Sp. 552-553, and I am sorry to say, you will have to use a library
It's not Ainper. Anyone who copied that from Auslasser in the old days, and those who re-copied from them, got it wrong (and I got it wrong the first time I looked at it and assumed an A). Anton's instincts about Ainper maybe originating from Auslasser are probably correct.
So, here's my evidence, since I know this is not going to be accepted until you really look at it...
It's not an A. Other scribes write A like that but HE doesn't write A like that, he writes "I" like that. The A is rounded, the I always has a long hook to the left.
Here is what I see. Look at the A, the I, and the small "m". That slight extra line across the capital-I can be mistaken for a crossbar on a capital-A but he does not write A in that style. Imbeer-kraut is Einbeere, also written Embeere (with "m"), both of which are common names for Paris.
It's Imper chrawt and we all know the p is used for b in many words throughout Auslasser's herbal, so that gives us Imber which can be pronounced Imbeer and the name Imbeer-kraut is attested to in Freywillig aufgesprungener Granat-Apffel des christlichen Samariters (Trautner, 1731, p. 294 on Google Books scan). In Freywillig, it says it's used for Blut harnen (blood in the urine), which probably refers to bladder infections.
Those who interpreted the text in the past may have been more knowledgeable about plants than about paleography and misread the handwriting.