Part 21 (1/2)

Rhubarb, too, we are told, by the doctrine of signatures, was the ”life, soul, heart, and treacle of the liver.” Mr. Folkard [24] mentions a curious superst.i.tion which exists in the neighbourhood of Orleans, where a seventh son without a daughter intervening is called a Marcon. It is believed that, ”the Marcon's body is marked somewhere with a Fleur-de-Lis, and that if a patient suffering under king's-evil touch this Fleur-de-Lis, or if the Marcon breathe upon him, the malady will be sure to disappear.”

As shaking is one of the chief characteristics of that tedious and obstinate complaint ague, so there was a prevalent notion that the quaking-gra.s.s (_Briza media_), when dried and kept in the house, acted as a most powerful deterrent. For the same reason, the aspen, from its constant trembling, has been held a specific for this disease. The lesser celandine (_Ranunculus ficaria_) is known in many country places as the pilewort, because its peculiar tuberous root was long thought to be efficacious as a remedial agent. And Coles, in his ”Art of Simpling,”

speaks of the purple marsh-wort (_Comarum pal.u.s.tre_) as ”an excellent remedy against the purples.” The common tormentil (_Tormentilla officinalis_), from the red colour of its root, was nicknamed the ”blood-root,” and was said to be efficacious in dysentery; while the bullock's-lungwort derives its name from the resemblance of its leaf to a dewlap, and was on this account held as a remedy for the pneumonia of bullocks.[25] Such is the curious old folk-lore doctrine of signatures, which in olden times was regarded with so much favour, and for a very long time was recognised, without any questioning, as worthy of men's acceptation. It is one of those popular delusions which scientific research has scattered to the winds, having in its place discovered the true medicinal properties of plants, by the aid of chemical a.n.a.lysis.

Footnotes:

1. Pettigrew's ”Medical Superst.i.tions,” 1844, p. 18.

2. Tylor's ”Researches into the Early History of Mankind,” 1865, p. 123; Chapiel's ”La Doctrine des Signatures,” Paris, 1866.

3. ”Flowering Plants of Great Britain,” iv. 109; see Dr. Prior's ”Popular Names of British Plants,” 1870-72.

4. Tylor's ”Researches into the Early History of Mankind,” p. 123.

5. See Porter Smith's ”Chinese Materia Medica,” p. 103; Lockhart, ”Medical Missionary in China,” 2nd edition, p. 107; ”Reports on Trade at the Treaty Ports of China,” 1868, p. 63.

6. Fiske, ”Myths and Mythmakers,” 1873, p. 43.

7. Dr. Prior's ”Popular Names of British Plants,” p. 134.

8. See Kelly's ”Indo-European Tradition Folk-lore,” 1863, pp. 193-198; Ralston's ”Russian Folk-Songs,” 1872, p. 98.

9. ”Mystic Trees and Flowers,” Mr. D. Conway, _Frasers Magazine_, Nov.

1870, p. 608.

10. The ”receipt,” so called, was the formula of magic words to be employed during the process. See Grindon's ”Shakspere Flora,” 1883, p. 242.

11. ”Popular Antiquities,” 1849, i. 315.

12. ”Indo-European Tradition and Folk-lore,” p. 197.

13. See Dr. Prior's ”Popular Names of British Plants,” p. 130; Phillips'

”Flora Historica,” i. 163.

14. See Sowerby's ”English Botany,” 1864, i., p. 144.

15. See ”Folk-lore of British Plants,” _Dublin University Magazine_, September 1873, p. 318.

15. See Thorpe's ”Northern Mythology,” 1852, iii. 168.

17. ”Sketches of Imposture, Deception, and Credulity,” 1837, p. 300.

18. See Phillips' ”Pomarium Britannic.u.m,” 1821, p. 351.

19. ”Plant-lore of Shakespeare,” 1878, p. 101.

20. See Dr. Prior's ”Popular Names of British Plants,” p. 154.