Dragons

Dracunculus vulgaris

HRB-0107Entry “DRAGONS” in the 1850 textNot in the 1652 first edition: added by Culpeper in 1653 or by a later editor up to 1850

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

What it does, in Culpeper: Counter-poison

Culpeper’s claims about it: 6, under 6 headings

  1. CankersCLM-0004051850 index
    it consumes cankers, and that flesh growing in the nostrils, which they call Polypus:
    QUO-000340Papers and the EMA’s verdict, in the Concordance
  2. Also the distilled water being dropped into the eyes, takes away spots there, or the pin and web, and mends the dimness of sight;
    QUO-000522Papers and the EMA’s verdict, in the Concordance
  3. it is excellently good against pestilence and poison.
    QUO-000947Papers and the EMA’s verdict, in the Concordance
  4. PolypusCLM-001429
    it consumes cankers, and that flesh growing in the nostrils, which they call Polypus:
    QUO-000340Papers and the EMA’s verdict, in the Concordance
  5. UlcersCLM-001938
    an ointment of it is held to be good in wounds and ulcers;
    QUO-001221Papers and the EMA’s verdict, in the Concordance
  6. WoundsCLM-002182
    an ointment of it is held to be good in wounds and ulcers;
    QUO-001221Papers 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.