Notable Commentaries on the History of Plants

TO THE MOST ILLUSTRIOUS PRINCE, LORD JOACHIM

...to summon adulterated Greek or Latin names for them, lest we should also have to ascribe to them false powers along with their illegitimate names. We mentioned above that this happened to some who wrote on botany original: "re herbaria". Therefore, where we were able to have a Greek term that corresponds in every way to the German name, we applied this to them rather than some false name from Dioscorides Pedanius Dioscorides, a 1st-century Greek physician whose "De Materia Medica" was the standard botanical text for 1,500 years..

Why many and confused plant names in Dioscorides were omitted.

In other plants that Dioscorides knew, we took unique care not to list all their names found at the beginnings of chapters, because we knew that almost all of them were added by certain pretenders sciolis: pseudo-scholars or those with superficial knowledge from Apuleius or another author of that kind, and were rashly swept into the context of Dioscorides. We have seen that nothing has so hindered the knowledge of herbs, or brought greater loss, than that confused accumulation of names. It is better, therefore, to use very few names, and those true and legitimate, lest a confusion of names also produce a confusion of things for us.

Why histories and images of certain trees were added.

Furthermore, we have also added histories and images of several trees, not because it was our plan to describe every single one—for that would be a task of infinite labor—but since Dioscorides and other writers on botany compare the leaves of certain plants to them, and thus the whole history cannot be sufficiently understood without their depiction, we wished to insert some of these into these commentaries, so that students might look to them in learning the history of plants. Therefore, fair judges will judge that what we have done was done by judgment, not by error.

What must be considered in the recording of the properties of plants.

In recording their properties facultates: the medicinal powers or virtues of a plant, we took the greatest care not to assign any false or illegitimate ones to any of the plants, which many have done, not without the greatest error and expense to human life. Therefore, in the history of plants which the ancients knew, we have reported only those things handed down by Dioscorides, Galen A 2nd-century Greek physician whose theories dominated Western medicine for centuries., and Pliny Pliny the Elder, author of the Roman "Natural History.", and sometimes also by Aëtius, Paul Paul of Aegina, a 7th-century Byzantine physician., and Simeon Sethi An 11th-century Byzantine Jewish physician.. This was done primarily so that everyone would know those properties in which those three agree are of such a kind that one may place certain hope in them, as being the most legitimate. For if they disagree among themselves, then the opinion of Galen rather than Dioscorides, and his in turn more than Pliny, should be followed. Now, the reason why Galen's opinion is to be preferred above all others is nothing else than because he understood the properties of plants partly by a certain reason and method, which he subsequently committed to writing, and partly learned by experience. In the remaining plants that were unknown to the ancients, we have followed Galen's example: for we have recorded only those properties which the experience of many has proven, which have been accepted by all through long use, and which were not inconsistent with their qualities.

The reasoning for the order in these commentaries.

As for the fact that in these commentaries we have followed the order of the Greek alphabet original: "græcarum literarum ordinem", we did so as if necessity itself were forcing us. For we would have much preferred, following the example of Dioscorides, to connect related herbs together everywhere, rather than following the order we established, if the illustrations themselves had not made that impossible for us. Indeed, since we had decided to insert no plant's history without its living image into these commentaries of ours, yet we obtained the plants themselves and their genera only at various times—and sometimes with intervals of several years coming between—we were forced to follow this order of the Greek letters. Although I do not see why I need such an exquisite excuse, since Galen, Pliny, and after them Paul, Aëtius, and many others were not ashamed to follow this order.

What the pictures and images are like.

Regarding the pictures themselves, each of which has certainly been expressed according to the features and likenesses of living plants, we took unique care that they should be most perfect; and we applied the greatest diligence so that every plant would be painted with its own roots, stems, leaves, flowers, seeds, and fruits. We purposely and by design took care that the natural form of the herbs should not be obliterated by shadows Fuchs famously insisted on "flat" woodcuts without cross-hatching to ensure botanical clarity. and other less necessary things by which painters sometimes strive for the glory of their art; nor did we allow the artists to indulge their whims in such a way that the picture would then correspond less to the truth.

Veit Rudolf Speckle, the engraver.

Veit Rudolf Speckle original: "Vitus Rodolphus Specklin", a woodcutter from Strasbourg original: "Argentoracensis" and by far the best, has excellently imitated the wonderful industry of the painters, who by carving each picture...