Pavord 2005 - Revision history

Wtrettien at 17:47, 14 August 2010

2010-08-14T17:47:30Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:47, 14 August 2010
Line 74:		Line 74:


	general plant-animal connections:		'''general plant-animal connections:'''
	* plant inks on animal skins [book connection]		* plant inks on animal skins [book connection]
	* mushroom/fungi genetically closer to animals than plants		* mushroom/fungi genetically closer to animals than plants

Wtrettien at 17:47, 14 August 2010

2010-08-14T17:47:01Z

@@ Line 30: / Line 30: @@
 Otto Brunfels, ''Herbarum vivae eicones'' (1530-6)
 * woodcuts by Hans Weiditz, Durer's pupil
-* Brunfels complains about how the woodcuts take over the book; couldn't arrange the book the way he wants because he's beholden to the block-cutters
+* Brunfels complains about how the woodcuts take over the book; couldn't arrange the book the way he wants because he's beholden to the block-cutters (164)
 :"'''The book was published in separate parts as sufficient material was gathered together''', the first volume, which came out in 1530, was followed by a second in 1531-2 and a third, published posthumously, in 1536." (164)
@@ Line 37: / Line 37: @@
 * in 1545, "pocket edition" released by Isingrin of Basel, "to the end that '''all those who cherish the desire to learn about plants thoroughly  can carry them conveniently in their pockets when walking about or travelling, and can compare them with the growing plants'''" (quoted on 191)
 * worked on a second history, 3x as big as the first; but remains unpublished

Wtrettien at 01:12, 13 August 2010

2010-08-13T01:12:36Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:12, 13 August 2010
Line 32:		Line 32:
	* Brunfels complains about how the woodcuts take over the book; couldn't arrange the book the way he wants because he's beholden to the block-cutters		* Brunfels complains about how the woodcuts take over the book; couldn't arrange the book the way he wants because he's beholden to the block-cutters
	:"'''The book was published in separate parts as sufficient material was gathered together''', the first volume, which came out in 1530, was followed by a second in 1531-2 and a third, published posthumously, in 1536." (164)		:"'''The book was published in separate parts as sufficient material was gathered together''', the first volume, which came out in 1530, was followed by a second in 1531-2 and a third, published posthumously, in 1536." (164)


			Leonhart Fuchs, ''De historia stirpium'' (1542)
			* in 1545, "pocket edition" released by Isingrin of Basel, "to the end that '''all those who cherish the desire to learn about plants thoroughly can carry them conveniently in their pockets when walking about or travelling, and can compare them with the growing plants'''" (quoted on 191)
			* worked on a second history, 3x as big as the first; but remains unpublished

Wtrettien at 00:52, 13 August 2010

2010-08-13T00:52:44Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:52, 13 August 2010
Line 25:		Line 25:


	Maria Boas on woodcuts, ''The Scientific Renaissance'': were copied from manuscripts, meant to illustrate the text, not nature		:Maria Boas on woodcuts, ''The Scientific Renaissance'': were copied from manuscripts, meant to illustrate the text, not nature


			Otto Brunfels, ''Herbarum vivae eicones'' (1530-6)
			* woodcuts by Hans Weiditz, Durer's pupil
			* Brunfels complains about how the woodcuts take over the book; couldn't arrange the book the way he wants because he's beholden to the block-cutters
			:"'''The book was published in separate parts as sufficient material was gathered together''', the first volume, which came out in 1530, was followed by a second in 1531-2 and a third, published posthumously, in 1536." (164)

Wtrettien at 21:46, 12 August 2010

2010-08-12T21:46:34Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:46, 12 August 2010
Line 25:		Line 25:


	Maria Boas on woodcuts, ''The Scientific Renaissance''		Maria Boas on woodcuts, ''The Scientific Renaissance'': were copied from manuscripts, meant to illustrate the text, not nature

Wtrettien at 21:46, 12 August 2010

2010-08-12T21:46:08Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:46, 12 August 2010
Line 23:		Line 23:
	* digital edition of 1499 printing: [[http://diglib.hab.de/inkunabeln/45-1-phys-2f/start.htm]]		* digital edition of 1499 printing: [[http://diglib.hab.de/inkunabeln/45-1-phys-2f/start.htm]]
	* first illustration of plants in books; Pavod has ''terrible'' things to say about it, not the least being that the woodcut is "catastrophically awful" (150) -- but in fact it's quite beautiful		* first illustration of plants in books; Pavod has ''terrible'' things to say about it, not the least being that the woodcut is "catastrophically awful" (150) -- but in fact it's quite beautiful


			Maria Boas on woodcuts, ''The Scientific Renaissance''

Wtrettien at 20:57, 12 August 2010

2010-08-12T20:57:47Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:57, 12 August 2010
Line 3:		Line 3:

	:"Theophrastus started with a concept of the plant as an animal with its feet in the air and its mouth in the ground. In some ways, he could make the analogy work: like animals, plants could be described in terms of their veins, nerves and flesh." (23)		:"Theophrastus started with a concept of the plant as an animal with its feet in the air and its mouth in the ground. In some ways, he could make the analogy work: like animals, plants could be described in terms of their veins, nerves and flesh." (23)
			* Latin had no words for plant parts that Theophrastus describes; made them up (148)


	''Apuleius'' herbal in Cotton Vitellius C III		''Apuleius'' herbal in Cotton Vitellius C III (~1000-1066)
	* mandrake description, pg. 118 of Pavord		* mandrake description, pg. 118 of Pavord
	* again, Anglo-Saxon scribe is ridiculed by Pavord: "it's irritating, the blindness of these medieval scribes" (120)		* again, Anglo-Saxon scribe is ridiculed by Pavord: "it's irritating, the blindness of these medieval scribes" (120)
	* ink used to illustrate the plants is eating at the vellum -- '''vegetable inks eating plant materials'''		* ink used to illustrate the plants is eating at the vellum -- '''vegetable inks eating plant materials'''


			Albertus Magnus, ''De vegetabilibus'' (~1256)
			* indirectly copied Theophrastus
			* believed in the soul of plants
			*mandrake illustration, male and female, on pg 145
			:"In his opinion, '''neither sexes nor sexual processes existed in the plant world'''; he thought all plants were of one sex, with male and female characters combined in the same plant. He used those words "male" and "female", but only in the sense of distinguishing between plants with particular characteristics. "Male" plants had narrow leaves, were hard, dry, and rough, and bore small fruits and seeds. His "female" plants are relatively broad-leaved, soft, moist, smooth; they produce larger seeds and fruits than male plants." (144)


			Konrad von Megenberg, ''Buch der Natur'' (written 1349-1351, printed beginning 1478 in Augsburg)
			* digital edition of manuscript version: [[http://diglit.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/diglit/cpg300/0176]]
			* digital edition of 1499 printing: [[http://diglib.hab.de/inkunabeln/45-1-phys-2f/start.htm]]
			* first illustration of plants in books; Pavod has ''terrible'' things to say about it, not the least being that the woodcut is "catastrophically awful" (150) -- but in fact it's quite beautiful

Wtrettien at 19:56, 12 August 2010

2010-08-12T19:56:24Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:56, 12 August 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
			''in general'': entire book has progressionist view of botany, botanical history; medieval period consistently seen as stupid, backwards; any thinker who doesn't attempt to identify plants within the "natural order of things" (as we've come to do through botany) is seen as not making any "progress"


	:"Theophrastus started with a concept of the plant as an animal with its feet in the air and its mouth in the ground. In some ways, he could make the analogy work: like animals, plants could be described in terms of their veins, nerves and flesh." (23)		:"Theophrastus started with a concept of the plant as an animal with its feet in the air and its mouth in the ground. In some ways, he could make the analogy work: like animals, plants could be described in terms of their veins, nerves and flesh." (23)


			''Apuleius'' herbal in Cotton Vitellius C III
			* mandrake description, pg. 118 of Pavord
			* again, Anglo-Saxon scribe is ridiculed by Pavord: "it's irritating, the blindness of these medieval scribes" (120)
			* ink used to illustrate the plants is eating at the vellum -- '''vegetable inks eating plant materials'''

Wtrettien: Created page with ':"Theophrastus started with a concept of the plant as an animal with its feet in the air and its mouth in the ground. In some ways, he could make the analogy work: like animals, …'

2010-08-10T17:12:09Z

Created page with ':"Theophrastus started with a concept of the plant as an animal with its feet in the air and its mouth in the ground. In some ways, he could make the analogy work: like animals, …'

New page

:"Theophrastus started with a concept of the plant as an animal with its feet in the air and its mouth in the ground. In some ways, he could make the analogy work: like animals, plants could be described in terms of their veins, nerves and flesh." (23)