HERB - Using Johnson's Gerard for A&S research (long)

[Gaylin Walli]

USING GERARD'S HERBAL FOR RESEARCH

Some Notes on Using Thomas Johnson's Revised and Enlarged 1633 
Edition of John Gerard's "The Herbal or General History of Plants" as 
published by Dover Publications

Written January 23, 2001
by Doña Iasmin de Cordoba, Middle Kingdom
also known as Gaylin J. Walli, iasmin at home.com


-- INTRODUCTION --

So you want to use John Gerard's Herbal as a source for research. 
Should you reference your findings as part of Gerard's Herbal? Maybe 
not. Some pitfalls may await you. Allow me to explain.

The most common source of Gerard's Herbal that people have available 
today is the Thomas Johnson 1633 edition [ISBN 0-486-23147-X] 
reprinted in hardcover by Dover Publications. Using Johnson's 
revision date, it's technically considered an 
out-of-the-researched-time-period work for most Society for Creative 
Anachronism (SCA) readers. The work is by no means not unusable, but 
you should note that your research will technically be in question 
unless you go to the original Gerard or go to Gerard's sources. Both 
Gerard and Johnson list the multitude of sources from which the 
Herbal was complied and gleaned (and sometimes corrupted), though not 
all sources are particularly easy to find.

Deciphering Johnson's notes is not an easy task. Johnson was careful 
about what he corrected, moved, added, and altered, though he made 
mistakes and tried to note them. He notes most of his changes 
specifically in his letter "To the Reader" at the beginning of the 
text, stating that he's marked the text in such a way as to make it 
easy for the reader to know what was his work and what was Gerard's.

Unfortunately those marks are not straightforward without at least a 
little explanation. To help you decipher Johnson's notes, I'll try to 
list all of his comments on his marks below, with examples of plants 
you might recognize where I can. Keep in mind that there are some 
differences in language from 1633 and now. Where confusion might 
reign with regard to unviewable symbols (this article is being sent 
via email, initially, and thus those symbols are hard to reproduce) 
or comments, I've taken the liberty of adding my descriptive comments 
between brackets [like this].


--JOHNSON'S CHANGES TO GERARD'S FIGURES AND THE ASSOCIATED TEXT --

Johnson mentions Gerard's inconsistent and sometimes incorrect use of 
figures for his history of plants, stating "when figures were not 
agreeable to the descriptions were formerly in any place, I give you 
notice thereof with a marke of alteration before the title, as also 
in the end of the Chapter." Johnson essentially took the pictures 
that didn't appear to match their descriptions in Gerard's text and 
either moved them to the correct spot or added information in that 
spot that corrected the figure.  One example of this might be in the 
entry on Hyssope [Hyssop, Hyssopus officinalis]. Within the picture 
on page 579/Lib.2 there is a single-headed cross at the beginning of 
the third drawing on the page (bottom left) with a note at the end of 
the chapter that reads "the figure in the third place was of the 
Satureia Romana 2 of [an illegible word]." This means that the third 
picture for this entry was in another place, near the entry of 
another plant, and Johnson moved it here to the correct spot.

Later in the book, Johnson mentions that he uses a special cross, 
this time double-headed, to signify complete insertions of text he 
created. One example of this might be the 3rd, unnumbered 4th  8th, 
11th, 13th, 14th, and 17th pictures of Glove Gillofloures [Clove 
Gillyflowers, Pinkes, or Carnations] that he added on pages 
589-595/Lib.2. Each of these has a Latin name preceded by a 
double-headed cross. Furthermore, Johnson also refers to the 
double-headed cross when he speaks of additions to description text 
saying:

"Such as were formerly figured in the booke, though put for other 
things, and so having no description therein, I have caused to be new 
cut and put into their fit places, with descriptions to them, and 
only a marke of alteration."

Again in the Gillyflower descriptions themselves we find text with 
double-headed crosses that correspond to the so-marked pictures he 
added. This text was added by Johnson, not written by Gerard. In the 
same sentence describing his figure changes Johnson confirms this 
when he says "and if they were not formerly in the booke, the then I 
give you them with a marke of addition."

Johnson was particularly careful about his significant textual 
additions. He states "[B]ut when [a description] is much altered, 
then give I you this mark [a 't' or single-bar cross] at the 
beginning there of..." and also

"you may see what is much altered or added in the Work; for this 
marke [the single-headed cross again] put either to figure, or before 
any clause, shews it to have bin otherwise put before; or that clause 
whether it be in description, Place, Time, Names, or Vertues, to be 
much altered."

Sometimes he marks just the picture of the entry where the 
description was altered and sometimes he marks both the picture and 
the text itself. A good example of the former is in the entry on 
Marsh Mallow [Marshmallow, Althaea officinalis]  on page 932/Lib.2. 
The description text, paragraph 2, clearly shows a single headed 
cross in the margin of the paragraph but no such mark is shown with 
the second picture to which the description supposedly corresponds. A 
good example of the later is shown on page 998/Lib.2 in the entry on 
Wild Strawberry [the wild fruit which we sometimes call field 
strawberries]. This entry clearly shows a cross near the name of the 
plant's picture and in the text, the following entry, in part, is 
placed with the same mark preceding it. The entry begins "This wild 
Strawberry hath leaves like the other Straw-berry, but somewhat less, 
and softer, slightly indented about the edges...."

Now, sometimes despite his best attempts, Johnson just couldn't stand 
it and felt compelled to  change portions of entries whole cloth. He 
comments on these changes, saying "but if it were such that I could 
not helpe it but by writing a new one, then shall you finde it with 
this mark [a double-headed cross] at the beginning and end thereof." 
Some good examples of this are all the entries on Aconite [Monkshood, 
Aconitum uncinatum]. Each of pictures 6 through 9 on pages 973 and 
974/Lib.2 have the characteristic double-headed cross at the 
beginning of the picture's name. The cross also appears at the 
beginning of the 4th description text and at the end of the 9th 
description text as corresponds with the added pictures indicating 
that the text between the marks was added in its entirety.


-- WHAT JOHNSON KNEW HE MISSED --

I find it very interesting that Johnson apologizes to us twice when 
he says he knew there were mistakes in his text regarding the 
addition and change marks. He first states that he has shown all the 
changes in an listing at the beginning of the book under "A Catalogue 
of Additions" stating:

"Because the markes were not so carefully and right put to these 
Figures, which were not formerly in the booke, I have thought good to 
give you the names of all such as are added, either in figure or 
description, or both: together with the booke, chapter, and number or 
place they hold in each chapter. F stands for Figure, D for 
Description, and where both are added, you shall find both these 
letters, and where the letter C is put, the Historie of the whole 
Chapter is added."

Thus in the catalogue he includes a list of abbreviated Latin names 
followed by the locations and marking he states above. Johnson also 
says about his marks:

"This other marke [the double-headed cross] put to a figure shews all 
is added until you come to another of the same marks. But because it 
is sometimes omitted, I will therefore give notice in the Errata 
where is should be put, in those places where I observe either the 
former or later to be wanting."

And the very last page of the book contains a few very long lines of 
faults that he found. It's ugly to read, being all strung together, 
and starts off the "Faults in Words and Markes" section with 
"Pag.9.lin.I. elegasis, reade 
elgans.p.31,l.32,cyriacus,r.syriacus.p.8 ..." The rest is equally 
difficult to read.


-- WHAT JOHNSON CHANGED BUT DIDN'T MARK --

Johnson specifically states that there are places where he made 
changes and *didn't* note that he was making them. For example, in a 
very long-winded sentence, Johnson states that he didn't have time to 
change or fix any names that are in suspicion, but that he got and 
Gerard got most everything from Dodoneus (Dodens) and that the reader 
should look there for corrections. He also mentions that some were so 
bad that he simply took them out and refers you to the aforementioned 
source as well.

He says again in another passage in his reader's address that there 
are "[...] descriptions, which I have in some places lightly amended, 
without giving any notice thereof." One would do well to ask what 
Johnson meant by light amendments. Without the original Gerard in 
front of me, I can only guess that he means very obvious spelling 
errors or missing words. But that is only a poor guess.

In mentioning the Tempers and Virtues sections of each plant, Johnson 
says that he noted which were incorrect, unfit for their places and 
thus transferred to the proper location, and simply added some 
information where Gerard did not see fit to add information that 
should have been there. But nowhere does he mention what the notation 
is for this. If you look in the text, there are little letters in the 
margins sometimes in these sections, but it's not clear if these are 
the notations to which he refers. In all honesty, sometimes the 
reproduction has odd smudge marks in it that you can't really tell if 
they're addition marks or something else.

Where descriptions and names of plants occur, Johnson gives this 
thanks to "Mr John Goodyer...from whom I received manye accurate 
descriptions, and some other observations concerning plants; ... as 
they may be distinguished from the rest: and thus you shall know 
them; in the beginning is the name of the plant in Latine in a line 
by is selfe, and at the end his name is inserted, so that the Reader 
may easily finde those things that I had from him ...". It's 
interesting that he notes he had some of the information from a 
trusted source, but we're not sure from his mention of the man if he 
used this man's descriptions as is or if he rewrote them himself and 
included them in the entries for which he made changes.

Finally, Johnson admits his work on Gerard was rushed and lacking 
some in scholarship when he says in his Introduction that "if there 
be any defect therein (as needs there must in all humane works) 
ascribe it in part to my haste and many businesses, and in some 
places to the want of sufficient information, especially in Exoticke 
things." To which exotic plants does Johnson refer? I have been 
unable to determine this. It's not clear if he meant plants that had 
started to make their way back from the then-New-World, from 
far-flung locations such as deepest Africa, or any number of other 
locations from which travellers may have brought back herbal 
specimens. I continue to look for these items in my copy of Gerard.


-- CONCLUSION --

Gerard's Herbal provides an excellent source of pre-1600s herbal 
knowledge to be used for research both in the SCA and in other 
organizations. With the most currently accessible Gerard text 
stemming from Thomas Johnson's 1633 edition, however, readers could 
strengthen their research by clearly noting whether their researched 
text was directly from Johnson or supposedly from Gerard himself.


[Permission is granted to reproduce this information as is, without 
changes, as long as credit is given to the author and no profit is 
derived from the reproduction of it. Any member of the SCA 
specifically may reprint this article in any SCA publication or email 
list, with the same restrictions.]
============================================================================
Go to http://lists.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.