Bird’s Foot

Ornithopus perpusillus

HRB-0037Entry “BIRD’S FOOT” in the 1850 textIn Culpeper’s 1652 first edition

Open in the Concordance

Old claims, quoted verbatim: not medical advice. A warning sits above the claims and never hides them; no warning does not mean safe, only that no source here has flagged the plant.

Historical correspondence. Ruled by Saturn, by Culpeper. A traditional astrological assignment, kept apart from the modern evidence; it is not a finding.

Culpeper’s claims about it: 3, under 3 headings

  1. RupturesCLM-001454
    and it wonderfully helps the ruptures, being taken inwardly, and outwardly applied to the place.
    QUO-000991Papers and the EMA’s verdict, in the Concordance
  2. StoneCLM-0016771850 index
    But the latter Bird’s Foot is found by experience to break the stone in the back or kidneys, and drives them forth, if the decoction thereof be taken;
    QUO-001097Papers and the EMA’s verdict, in the Concordance
  3. WoundsCLM-002160
    They belong to Saturn and are of a drying, binding quality, and thereby very good to be used in wound drinks, as also to apply outwardly for the same purpose.
    QUO-001353Papers and the EMA’s verdict, in the Concordance

Source

Nicholas Culpeper, The Complete Herbal, a new edition (London: Thomas Kelly, 1850). Project Gutenberg eBook #49513. SRC-CUL-1850

Quotations are verbatim from the 1850 text, line breaks joined. Modern research and the European regulator’s verdict on each claim are on the Concordance page, kept apart from this historical record.