The Lasting Presence of Gerard's Herball

More documents

Recommendations

Info

$Worksheet 1, Math 126 Applications of Linear Approximation ...$

(apothecaries); Gerard was a member of the Barber-Surgeons’ Company for much of his life. Rohde (1971) notes that we know little of the details of his life, but she and others point to his knowledge of plants and his gardening skill. He served as head gardener for Sir William Cecil Knight, Baron of Burghley, for many years, and was probably a well- known plant expert by the end of his life. He had his own garden in Holborn for twenty years, publishing a catalogue of his plants in 1596 (Rohde, 1971). This catalogue is one of the first known published lists of the plants in a single garden (Gunther, 1922). John Norton published the first edition of Gerard’s Herball in 1597. Norton commissioned a Dr. Priest to translate Dodoens’ herbal, Pemptades, from Latin into English, but unfortunately, Priest died before the translation was complete. Gerard picked up the project and finished with the help of Mathias de l’Obel, who was apparently more proficient in Latin. L’Obel corrected numerous mistakes—Gerard frequently mismatched the woodcut illustrations and botanical descriptions. These efforts to complete Priest’s translation of Dodoens’ work are the source of much of the criticism of Gerard. He is accused of plagiarizing Priest (he gives Priest no credit in the introductory passages of the Herball). He is further criticized, rightly or wrongly, for lacking the requisite botanical knowledge to undertake the task of translation in the first place (Arber, 1953). According to Martyn Rix (1990, p.43), the 1597 edition of the Herball was a financial success. Perusing Arber’s Appendix I—a list of herbals and related botanical works published between 1470 and 1670—one can see that no English botanical works were published between 1597 and 1629, when John Parkinson’s Paradisi was printed. Perhaps the publication of a competing work prompted Thomas Johnson, a London apothecary 4
and botanist, to undertake the project of updating Gerard’s Herball. R. T. Gunther (1922) credits one of the finest British botanists of the day, John Goodyer, with significant contribution to the effort. Goodyer “made the fullest use of the [1597] Herbal” and sometime between 1621 and 1622 he sent Johnson 27 pages of notes for inclusion in an updated edition. The first revision of Gerard’s work was published in 1633. (A second edition, unchanged, was published in 1636. I examined copies of both editions. I spent most of my time studying the 1636 edition and quote from it.) Historical claims that Johnson produced the revised edition by himself in a single year are probably exaggerated. More noteworthy is the collaboration between Johnson and Goodyer. The Hon. Mrs. Evelyn Cecil (1910) states, “It is refreshing to see the way in which [the] old herbalists wrote to each other, and helped one another. Johnson, even more than Gerard, worked in harmony with other botanists and physicians, and they went on expeditions together in search of rare flowers” (p.149). Johnson’s collaboration with Goodyer is an event highlighting the impetus for an improved herbal coming from the maturing science of botany. III. The Herball and botany The herbal tradition is closely tied to both the history of botany and the history of medicine. As defined by Arber (1953), the study of plants since classical times has pursued two paths: the first, a path of inquiry aligned with natural philosophy and emphasizing plant form and structure; the second, a pragmatic path subservient to the needs of medicine and agriculture. The first path suffered in antiquity from a lack of attention to the plant itself. The second path has been driven more or less by direct observation, since understanding the virtues and uses of plants requires experiment and 5
Page 1 and 2: The Lasting Presence of Gerard’s
Page 3: years. I say “person to person”
Page 7 and 8: At the same time, Gerard’s Herbal
Page 9 and 10: additional information. Or perhaps
Page 11 and 12: The short answer is that we do not
Page 13 and 14: like. Wright (1935) notes that in t
Page 15 and 16: a great mixing of people and ideas
Page 17 and 18: inding the signatures. I looked for
Page 19 and 20: their own. People like John Jossely
Page 21: Ioice Norton, and Richard Whitakers

The Lasting Presence of Gerard's Herball

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?