[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: VMS -- Doctrine of Signatures
Maybe this is old news to some but as far as the
associations of the doctrine of signatures go, I recently found a list of
all correspondences between plants and planets, according to Paracelsus; it
is rather tedious to translate here, and I haven't found it on the Internet
yet but if anyone wants it I'll type it out. It gives planetary associations
for about 140 plants.
----- Original Message -----
From: Dana F. Scott <dfscott@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Nick Pelling <incoming@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2001 1:14 AM
Subject: Re: VMS -- Doctrine of Signatures
> Yes, I believe the DoS was literalistic. I was simply repeating the title
> article. While there seem to be references to the DoS in the VMS, I think
> I am perhaps more interested in finding articles that are relative to the
> which will help dispel any views that its content is somehow completely
> mysterious and foreign to our 'modern' understanding. A great deal of what
> Paracelsus wrote has helped me gain further insight into the VMS. Culpeper
> (post VMS?) may also assist us in further understanding some of the
> Astrological apsects of the VMS. Of course, one needs to be careful and
> just arbitrariliy apply to the VMS what the ancients have written as fact.
> main idea, I think, is that we can learn from these great teachers of the
> I don't know where Paracelsus learned the concept of the DoS, though it
> apparently known to Hippocrates and practiced in China and India.
> Dana Scott
> Recommended Reading:
> "Paracelsus, Selected Writings", edited by Jolande Jacobi, translated by
> Norbert Guterman.
> Bollingen Series XXVIII, Princeton University Press, 1979. ISBN
> (pbk.), 286 pages.
> Dana Scott
> Nick Pelling wrote:
> > Hi Dana,
> > >Here is a nice article on "The Doctrine of Signatures" that may help
> > >provide some insight into the Nature of the VMS.
> > >
> > >http://www.b-and-t-world-seeds.com/signs.htm
> > Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the Doctrine of Signatures
> > was rather more literalistic than as presented in this article: it's
> > about Culpeper's herbal astrology, and that was basically a populist
> > version of the "London Pharmacopoeia" (first edition 1616, IIRC).
> > AIUI, the DoS was the idea (revived by Paracelsus about 1530 or so, but
> > been dormant for several centuries before that) that plants with a
> > particular visual affinity with a disease were placed on Earth in order
> > that the similarity be recognised by man as a sign that that was the
> > to treat an ailment. Basically, if the cap fits, eat it and be cured.
> > In the case of lungwort, the speckles on the leaves (so the theory goes)
> > are a sign that it should be taken be those with lung problems. And so
> > The lungwort identification in the VMS is a curious (yet probably highly
> > demonstrative) one. The spots are stylised, quite unlike any actual
> > lungwort - as if the plant was being drawn by someone who had only heard
> > (or read) it described (perhaps a town-dweller?), or was drawing to
> > emphasise the spot in a very stylised way.
> > Still, I'm quite comfortable with the idea that the inclusion of
> > could be read as a possible indication that the Doctrine Of Signatures
> > one of the sources of information the VMS contains. Is this what you're
> > saying? :-)
> > I wonder - if Paracelsus is too late for the VMS, does anyone know from
> > what person or source Paracelsus learnt of the Doctrine Of Signatures?
> > Perhaps by tracing this backwards in time, we may be able to tie down
> > provenance of the VMS from yet another direction. :-)
> > Just a thought. :-)
> > Cheers, .....Nick Pelling.....