Re: VMs: Viola tricolor

[Dennis <tsalagi@xxxxxxxx>]

	I wish to recall something here.  Medieval herbals
were not drawn from life, but from copies of classical
originals (Dioscorides, etc.) that had been deformed by
successive copying.  So botany and observation may be
irrelevant. 

	However, Rene said a long time ago that the VMs plants
do not resemble known distorted images in medieval
herbals either.  Also, the VMs belongs to the
Renaissance, when the herbal was in the process of
change.  Would someone who knows the subject better say
more?  (Jim Reeds' wife is one of the world's experts,
but she got tired of our questions in the dim forgotten
past, and Jim is gone anyway, alas.) 

	I do not recall the derivation of the "alchemical
herbals".  Toresella gave a manuscript tradition tree,
but I do not recall more.  The images were fanciful,
but not entirely fanciful.  T. did say the VMs is not
the same anyway.

Dennis

Jan wrote:
> 
> Well, it is not a pansy, we all agree - but was it supposed to be a pansy?  If not, all comparison is
>  simply meaningless. Again, it seems that we are confusing his painting skill with bad observation
>  - painting antitalent is expressed differently, he certainly would not put leaves on stems if he
>  did not see them there :-). Unless he did not see them - or did not see the plant at all.
>  Drawing so many plants, he surely knew that he has to be rather accurate. It's the differences which
>  counts, otherwise the pictures would look all alike, say  the leaves would be  on all stems - and they
>  definitely do not. What you are saying is  that he was also a bad botanist, because what you mention
>  are the main distinguishing signs, the main points for recognition. If he could not draw what he
>  saw accurately, he would never find those plants himself  :-).
______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list