© 2016 Peter BABULKA
2016 – №2 (12)
Keywords: medicinal plants, Carpathian Basin, Hungarians, ethnomedicine, aromatherapy, apitherapy, phytotherapy, Hungaricum, ethnopharmacobotany, human and veterinary practice.
Abstract: Hungarian people living in the Carpathian Basin for more than 1100 years applied several peculiar and interesting healing procedures (e.g. “symbolic” or “surgical” trepanation, hirudinization by leeches or apitherapy). Besides these, they acquired a huge amount of knowledge about the curative effect of medicinal plants and other natural substances (fungi, products of animal origin). Putting down the information in a written form began at the end of the 12th century. The first herbal in Hungarian language was released in 1578, which was followed by the publication of additional herbals and medico-botanical works in the succeeding 3 centuries. At the beginning of the 19th century purely botanical works separated from herbals and other books that detailed the curative effects of medicinal plants as well. The first calls that urged physicians to get familiar with the herbal and other traditional procedures of the folk were formulated in the late 1830s, for the reason that these traditional means possessed remarkable curative effects in many cases. Ethnobotanical and ethnopharmacobotanical collecting work became more pronounced following World War II, and the first ethnopharmacological studies began that time as well. The first experimental station of the world for medicinal plants was established in Kolozsvár (today Cluj-Napoca, Romania) in 1904, where ethnopharmacobotanical research work was initiated along with cultivation and agro-technical experiments. Béla Páter (1860-1936), founder of the institute laid down the basis of a medicinal herbal school – a real Hungaricum –, the fourth generation of which is still working today, following the example of their antecedents with an up to date approach, harnessed with extensive and novel knowledge. Evaluation of medicinal plants used by Hungarians living in the Carpathian Basin in folk medicine from various points of view was performed mostly in the last few centuries. According to these analyses there are at least 600 plant species in Hungarian ethnomedicine, the application of which can be supported by data from more than one acquisition points of the area.
After looking through many thousands of data related to the traditional use of medicinal plants collected among the Hungarians living in the Carpathian-Basin it can be concluded that a significant portion of the species applied in Hungarian ethnomedicine from the 19th century till now is commonly utilized during modern phyto- and aromatherapeutic treatments nowadays as well. Furthermore, they play a decisive role in the increasingly more popular and widespread self healing.
In remembrance of our traditional healers, informants and researchers
Introduction
The role of substances of natural origin is ever increasing during the production of medicinal preparations, and there are pharmaceutical companies all over the world (several acknowledged ones as well) that endeavor to manufacture and market standardized products with certified efficacy and high quality, and taking ethnomedicinal experience into account. Collecting and evaluating traditional knowledge (traditional medicinal resources) concerning the application of medicinal plants and other natural substances by various nations requires an up to date approach, because these data can serve as good starting points for the manufacturing of new phytotherapeutic preparations and paramedicinal products of plant origin. The above mentioned statements are well supported by the fact that more than 400 herbal drugs (different parts of medicinal plants) are listed in various critically evaluated monographs on medicinal plants (Comission-E, ESCOP, WHO, EMA, Medline Plus, Alternative Medicine Review, Longwood Herbal Task Force, American Herbal Pharmacopoeia etc.), the modern use of which are based mostly on traditional knowledge. Some of these monographs contain detailed descriptions of the traditional use of medicinal plants (e.g. WHO, Longwood Herbal Task Force).
Major historical, linguistic and medico-botanical data
Prior to discussing some important fields of usage of the traditionally used medicinal plants, it is worthy and indispensable to rough in the centuries preceding the start of Hungarian ethnomedicinal and ethnobotanical research, by presenting some of the titles of noteworthy source-books and remarkable herbals.
Several research works verify the occurrence – and partly, therapeutical utilization – of a number of herbal species in Hungary from the 12th century on, that can be tracked in glossaries, herbals and ethnomedicinal records up to the present day. Furthermore, we do possess convincing evidence that our ancestors in the 9th century were familiar with and possibly benefited from some herbal remedies that are still in use today.
Tamás Grynaeus published a volume on the knowledge concerning the diseases and the healing of the time of the Hungarian Conquest and Árpád Dynasty (9-14th century), while in an article he and his son, András Grynaeus, inform us about the knowledge and usage of medicinal herbs and phytogeography of the same period of time. According to their research – based on words referring to plant names, place-names and the usage of plants – the medical use of onion (Allium sp.), burdock (Arctium sp.), horseradish (Armoracia sp.), species of wormwood (Artemisia sp.), birch (Betula sp.), sour cherry (Cerasus vulgaris), pines (Pinus, Picea sp.), poplar (Populus sp.), linden-tree (Tilia sp.) and nettles (Urtica sp.) can be rendered probable in the 9-14th century (Grynaeus 1985; Grynaeus 1996a, 1996b; Grynaeus and Grynaeus 2001).
By the end of the 12th century, more than 600 Hungarian monasteries were kept count of by the annals. In part, these monasteries underlie the establishment of medical, botanical and flower-gardens of the ensuing centuries (Fazekas1982, Stirling 1985). Beautiful examples of reviving the traditions of the horticulture of monastery-gardens can be encountered today in Pannonhalma (Benedictine abbey) and Bakonybél (Benedictine monastery), where high quality medicinal plant culture and herbal product manufacturing (e.g. lavender oil, herbal tea mixtures) is performed.
The appearance and therapeutic usage of several species in Hungary can be indicated in old documents, commentaries, herbals and ethnomedicinal records. There are 382 species listed within the index of old 15-17th century (medicinal) herbs by Tamás Grynaeus and József Papp. Their identification has been facilitated by the illustrated herbal descriptions and the Hungarian and/or Latin names (Grynaeus and Papp 1977, 1978; the author’s note: at least 1/3 of these species has been used in the European phytotherapy in the form of teas, extracts and factory made products).
Hungary published its own herbals from the 16th century that were inspired by the active scientific life of the country [especially in places like Sárvár, Németújvár (nowadays Güssing, Austria), Kolozsvár (nowadays Cluj-Napoca, Rumania) with the participation of physicians, medico-botanists that received their degrees at German, Dutch, Italian universities, and the noble support of progressive aristocrats with European education (e.g. Tamás Nádasdy, Boldizsár Batthyány and others) (Hoppál and Törő 1975; Fazekas 1982; Grynaeus 1985; Szabó 1996; Szabó and Tóth 1993).
Author of the first Hungarian herbal was bishop of Debrecen, Péter Melius Juhász, whose work Herbarium was first published six years after his death (1578) in Kolozsvár. The work contained the description of 275 herbal species and 1236 Hungarian names of plants (Melius 1978).
The famous Belgian medico-botanist, Carolus Clusius visited Boldizsár Batthyány in Németújvár in 1582 (nowadays Güssing in Austria), who was well trained in botany, as well. Clusius, who wandered all over the fields of Western Transdanubia and the Németújvár district together with István Beythe (botanist, reformed pastor), published the first individual work of the universal botany on ethnobotany together with Beythe in Németújvár in 1583, under the title Stirpium Nomenclator Pannonicus, which was the list of the knowledge of the Hungarian population on plants. The Hungarian herbal names of the Nomenclator (which was collected by Beythe) entered the European herbal literature and Clusius worked a considerable part of these names into the “World Flora” (Rariorum plantarum historia) of the 17th century (Fazekas 1982; Szabó 1996).
Systema Naturae, the work of the Swedish botanist, Carl Linnaeus, published in 1735 facilitated the emergence of botany as an independent science, which also favored the separation of Hungarian herbals from the “purely” botanical works. This process is also reflected in the fact that the Orvosi Füvészkönyv [Medical Herbal, 1813] of Sámuel Diószegi was already published as a supplement to the Magyar Füvészkönyv [Hungarian Herbal, 1807] written together with Mihály Fazekas (Diószegi and Fazekas 1807; Diószegi 1813).
The „era of the Herbals” was over in the 19th century, and the work of one of the greatest Hungarian medical historians, Gyula Magyary-Kossa (1865-1944) on the effect of our medicinal herbs was published sometime in the first decades of the twentieth century without the indication of the year of publishing (Magyary-Kossa Gyula).
Institutes for medicinal plant research
The first experimental station for the medicinal plants of the world (named Gyógynövény Kísérleti Állomás – Experimental Station for Medicinal Plants) was established in Kolozsvár (today Cluj-Napoca, Rumania) in 1904, where ethnopharmacobotanical research work was initiated along with cultivation and agro-technical experiments. Béla Páter (1860-1936), founder of the institute, laid down the basis of the “Transylvanian medicinal herbal school“ – a real Hungaricum –, the fourth generation of which is still working today, following the example of their antecedents with an up to date approach, harnessed with extensive and novel knowledge. The first paper of Páter was published in 1896 in “Természettudományi Közlöny” [Scientific Bulletin] under the title of “A nép orvosi növényei” [Medicinal plants of the folk], which forecasted his life-long interest in medicinal plants and ethnobotany. Páter was a scientist of botanical, zoological, geological and geographical knowledge, whose books about medicinal herbs were translated to Rumanian, German and French as well (Páter 1911; Rácz-Kotilla and Rácz 2004; Babulka and Rácz 2006).
The name of the internationally acknowledged medicinal plant researcher and chemotaxonomist, Professor Péter Tétényi (1924-2009) should also be mentioned, who was the head of the Research Institute for Medicinal Plants in Budapest, between 1957 and 1990 and creator of the first chemotaxonomical botanical garden in the world. The Institute was established in 1915 under the name of Experimental Station for Medicinal Plants.
Ethnomedicinal and ethno(pharmaco)botanical research
The first calls urging the necessity of Hungarian ethnomedicinal research date back to 180 years ago. The first call addressed to physicians appeared in the doctoral thesis of Mózes Krezmír (1837), and urged to get to know the medicines used by the public. A year later, Pál Bugát (physician and member of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences) also discussed the importance and advantages that physicians get familiar with the various substances of folk medicine and the knowledge of “common people” about healing (Hoppál and Törő 1975; Oláh 1986).
Recording the healing methods of ethnomedicine performed by ethnographers, linguists, physicians and pharmacists interested in medical history and ethnomedicine began at the end of the 19th century. Ethnographical collections carried out in the decades just preceding World War II provide abundant data about the role of various herbs in healing and nutrition; however, in most of the cases, botanical identification seems to be improper or missing, therefore – from a scientific point of view – these data can only be evaluated in folk beliefs research. In the collecting work starting from the 1950s several researchers began to lay great emphasis on the botanical identification of plants and the preparation of herbal specimens for herbaria. Owing to the important changes in methodology of collecting work, papers, studies (manuscripts) and volumes discussing ethno(pharmaco)botany and ethnomedicine were published one after the other, the data of which concerning the utilization of medicinal and food plants opened the door to intense and all-round evaluation. Some of these collections refer to the ethnopharmacobotany of a larger geographical or ethnographical region, a town or a village; others refer mainly to the detailed investigation of a given issue (e.g. traditional ways of birth control, traditional use of a given species) (Vajkai 1948; Gémes 1979, 1987; Rácz 1979; Szabó and Péntek 1976; Kóczián et al. 1979; Halászné Zelnik 1981; Rab 1982, 1991; Kóczián 1985; Péntek and Szabó 1985; Oláh 1985, 1987; Oláh and Babulka 1985; Szabó 1990; Szabó and Kóczián 1982; Grynaeus 2001).
It is important to note that the teams under the leadership of Gábor Rácz and Erzsébet Rácz-Kotilla working at the University of Medicine and Pharmacy at Marosvásárhely (nowadays Tirgu-Mures, Rumania) performed experiments with an ethnopharmacological approach from the 1960s on based on extensive ethnomedicinal collections that resulted in the assessment of efficacy and the development of herbal remedies. They made the pharmacological investigation of some 500 species in animal tests (Rácz et al. 1982; Rácz-Kotilla and Rácz 2001). Their experiments were conducted well before Holmstedt and Bruhn in 1982 determined and published the definition of ethnopharmacology and the goals of ethnopharmacological research in the Journal of Ethnopharmacology (Holmstedt and Bruhn 1982, 1983).
Medicinal plants in the human and veterinary practice
Results from investigations aiming at the ethnopharmacobotanical review and theoretical analysis of medicinal and food plants used in Hungarian ethnomedicine indicate that the number of wild and cultivated plant species utilized for ethnomedicinal purposes by the Hungarians in the last one and a half centuries is more than 600 (the number of the higher, phanerogamic plant species in the Carpathian Basin is approximately 3000). The number of medicinal plants used in one or another area of medicine (e.g. treatment of wounds and gastrointestinal disorders or animal diseases) exceeds 150 (see Table 1.) (Babulka, 1993, 1996, 1997, 2000, 2005a, 2005b, 2007, 2011; Babulka and Oláh 1983; Babulka and Pataki 1996, 1997; Goetz and Babulka 1998; Grynaeus and Babulka 1986; Tamasi and Babulka, 1990a, 1990b; Vohora et al. 1987).
Many of the traditionally used plants in Hungarian ethnomedicine were consumed as fruits, vegetables or spices, but there were also the most important cereals (wheat, barley, rye, oat, millet, corn, etc.) and oily seeds (e.g. sunflower, flax) among them. Many nutrition plants (e.g. garlic, onions, potatoes, tomatoes, peppers, corn, etc.) have been still used in ethnomedicine, and their usage was certified by scientific examinations (many Hungarian herbal products contain the extracts and active agents of garlic, onions, hot peppers and corn pistil).
Beside using the most various herbal parts in preparation of medicines, they also used at least 50 kinds of supplements of herbal or animal origin that either were not or just partly were responsible for the healing.
The gathered and processed parts involved almost everything from mushroom spores to pinecone, or from the roots to the flower petals, depending on the usage of higher or lower plant species (moss, lichen, mushrooms).
The way of using herbal parts had a great variety, as well. Various parts of the plants were used chopped or squeezed, raw, boiled, steamed or fried, or in the form of medicinal teas or other herbal medicines, which were made from the dried herbal parts.
In making herbal medicines or gaining herbal extracts they used mostly water or alcoholic drinks: beer, fruit wines (made of grapes, raspberry, red-currants, rosehips, mulberry) and brandy (distilled mainly from plums) as solvent. They also used herbal oils and animal fats (lard, goose or duck fat, milk) in order to gain active agents. These fats promoted the smooth application of the powdered or pulped herbs on the skin surface.
The most popular ways of gaining extracts were maceration (cold soaking), scalding and preparation of decoctions, for which both fresh and dried herbal parts were used.
The various medicinal forms were made of the proper parts of only one or two kind of herbs. We can often find a magic element of the ethnomedicine, the magic numerals at the medicines made of 3, 7 or 9 herbal ingredients. Most of these preparations contained non-herbal elements, too. The most widely used medicinal forms were scaldings (majority of medicinal teas), decoctions (watery extracts used in medicinal baths and for washing injuries), alcoholic extracts made with alcohol of various concentration, creams (‘ír’), plasters, syrups and powdered medicines.
Herbal medicines were used both externally and internally. A part of them was freshly made on spot, but others were found in every household (mainly alcoholic extracts and creams made of them). One of these types was the caraway seed brandy used in the treatment of intestinal spasm, or the alcoholic extracts made of horse-radish, hot pepper or wild chestnut, which were used in the treatment of rheumatic pains.
Medicines for internal usage were medicinal teas, alcoholic extracts of certain plants, however, several kinds of plants of curative effect were consumed in raw form (e.g. horse-radish, garlic, onion) in the treatment of various complaints.
Medicinal forms for external application contained plasters made of the leaves, bulbs or petals of certain herbs, decoctions used for poultice, bathing or enema, and embrocations. A well-known form of application was medicinal bath, steaming in the vapour of medicinal decoctions, or inhalation.
Sometimes they applied special methods in veterinary medicine, such as stimulus therapy, in which they provoked inflammation by placing an herbal part under the skin, thus stimulating the immune reaction of the animal.
Healers were conscious of the advantageous and harmful effects (hot or poisonous) of herbs and herbal medicines and informed their patients on the proper quantities. In veterinary medicine, however, they more often applied herbs of strong effect than in human medicine.
The frequently used medicinal plants in Hungarian human and veterinary ethnomedicine and the main fields of their application are summarized in Table 2. (Babulka 2011b, 2015).
Phytomedicines and paramedicinal products on the Hungarian herbal productmarket
Beside the thousands of medicines and dietary supplements, currently some 50 phytomedicines and nearly 300 paramedicinal products – containing a herbal active substance, extract, essential or fatty oil – are marketed. These products include domestic herbal tea mixtures and other herbal products (formulae) as well, during the development of which ethnomedicinal experience has also been utilized, and their effective use and the unfluctuating demand of the market towards these products are supported by favorable evidence of many years of medicinal use or – in some cases – results of clinical studies.
Conclusions
After looking through many thousands of data related to the traditional use of medicinal plants collected among the Hungarians living in the Carpathian-Basin it can be concluded that a significant portion of the species applied in Hungarian ethnomedicine from the 19th century till now is commonly utilized during modern phyto- and aromatherapeutic treatments nowadays as well. Furthermore, they play a decisive role in the increasingly more popular and widespread self healing. More than 150 plant species are listed in various records – herbal and drug schedules, monographs and review volumes of authorities that deal with the evaluation and marketing authorization of medicinal plants and/or products containing medicinal plants, as well as in national or international pharmacopoeias – that are also utilized by Hungarian ethnomedicine to treat human disorders. Furthermore, it is noteworthy that about 40% of the plant species discussed in the most important technical books used in European education of pharmacognosy and phytotherapy are applied in Hungarian ethnomedicine as well, which could substantiate the efficacy and safety of these species.
Table 1.
Methods and results of the evaluation of Hungarian ethnopharmacobotany and ethnophytotherapy
| Methods of investigation for the assessment of the traditional application of medicinal plants | Conclusions and remarks |
| Collecting and monographic processing of plant species applied traditionally in a village, township, geographical or ethnographical area | The number of medicinal plant species used in the mentioned regions (a village, township, geographic or ethnographic area) may approach 300 (Halászné Zelnik 1981; Kóczián 1985; Oláh 1987; Rab 1982, 1991; Szabó 1985; Halász 2010; Papp et al. 2011). |
| Ethnopharmacobotanical review of medicinal plants used for the treatment of wounds and skin diseases | The number of medicinal plants used for the treatment of pyogenic skin disorders, wounds and injuries resulting from external violent impacts, eczema and other undefined wounds may reach 200 species (Babulka and Oláh 1983). |
| Ethnopharmacobotanical review of medicinal plants used for the treatment of rheumatic disorders and its actuality in European phytotherapy | The number of medicinal plants in Hungarian ethnomedicine comprises approximately 80 species that are used for the treatment of rheumatic complaints induced by prolonged cold, cold and moist environment, exertion, inadequate nutrition, unfavorable alteration of the composition of blood. A certain portion of these herbs are also of primary importance in European phytotherapy (Goetz and Babulka 1998). |
| Ethnopharmacobotanical review of medicinal plants used for the treatment of gastrointestinal disorders | The number of medicinal plant species used for the treatment of indigestion, diarrhea, constipation, lack of appetite, helminthiasis, biliary complaints reaches 150 (Babulka 2007) |
| Ethnopharmacobotanical review of medicinal plants used for the treatment of urinary tract complaints | At least 70 species were utilized in the last few centuries, several of them are assessed by monographs and they play a decisive role in phytotherapy as well (Tamasi and Babulka 1990). |
| Ethnopharmacobotanical review of anxiolytic and sedative medicinal plants | At least 30 medicinal herbs are used for the treatment of heart complaints accompanied by anxiety, and against the pavor nocturnus of children (Tamasi and Babulka 1990). |
| Ethnopharmacobotanical review of the traditionally used antitussive medicinal plants | The number of antitussive medicinal plant species reaches 100. The folk distinguishes productive and unproductive types of cough, but this is not always reflected by the recommendation of a herbal mixture or other herbal remedy (Grynaeus and Babulka 1986). |
| Application of essential oil containing plants in traditional Hungarian and Indian medicine | Hungarian ethnomedicine utilizes approximately 80 species, 1/3 of which is also used for the same purposes in traditional Indian medicine (Vohora et al. 1987). |
| Investigation of the ethnomedicinal application of a certain species or genus | Dock species – Rumex spp. (Oláh and Babulka 1985), Ear herb – Sempervivum tectorum (Grynaeus 2001), Hellebore species – Helleborus spp. (Kóczián et al. 1979). |
| Ethnopharmacobotanical review of medicinal and alimentary plants used from conception to ablactation | The number of plants used in the indicated period of life of the mother and the child is at least 80. The application of most plants deserves attention form a nutritional, prophylactic and therapeutic point of view as well (e.g. recommended and contraindicated foods; herbs used for the treatment of rhagades of mamma, skin disorders of the newborn) (Babulka and Pataki 1996, 1997). |
| Ethnopharmacobotanical review of medicinal plants used in traditional veterinary medicine | The number of plants used for the treatment of gastrointestinal, urogenital, respiratory tract disorders, wounds and various infectious diseases approaches 150 species. One third of these species are also used in the form of various preparations in modern veterinary phytotherapy and forage as well. Ethnomedicinal data are especially noteworthy for ecological stock-farmers. In Hungary veterinary medicine students may participate in undergraduate lectures beginning from 2001, dealing with ethnopharmacobotany and veterinary phytotherapy. Furthermore, veterinary medicine of the folk and veterinary phytotherapy were discussed at several national conferences and workshops organized around the issue of alternative and ecological veterinary medicine (Babulka 2005a, 2011a). |
| Ethnopharmacobotanical review of the traditional application of food plants | The number of food plants – including agrarian herbs consumed during destitution – used by Hungarians is at least 130, among which some 100 (!) species are applied for therapeutic purposes as well (Babulka 1996, 2005b). |
| Review of the magical elements in the healing methods and usage of medicinal plants |
– healing of a given illness at a defined time of the day – the collection of herbs at a prescribed date, such as e.g. St. George’s day (April 23rd), midsummer day (June 23rd) or the Feast of St. Stephen, King of Hungary (August 20th) – the preparation of medicinal baths may also be prescribed for a certain time of a day
– the place at which the act of healing takes place is also frequently prescribed (garden, threshold, fireplace, well)
– the number of time the act of healing has to be repeated is often prescribed (3, 7, 9)
– spells, curses
– symbolic analogy – color analogy (Babulka 1996). |
Table 2.
Frequently used medicinal plants in Hungarian human and veterinary ethnomedicine and the main fields of their application*
| Names of plants | Fields of application* | |||||||
|
1 |
2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
8 |
|
| Abies alba Mill. – Silver Fir |
X |
X | X | X | ||||
| Achillea spp. [A. asplenifolia Vent., A. millefolium L., A. nobilis L., A. pannonica Scheele, A. ptarmica L., A. setacea W.et K., A. crithmifolia Waldst. & Kit., A. collina (Becker ex Rchb.f.) Heimerl.] – Yarrow species |
X |
X | X | X |
X |
|||
| Aesculus hippocastanum L. – Horse Chestnut | X | X |
X |
|||||
| Agrimonia eupatoria L. – Agrimony |
X |
X | X |
X |
||||
| Allium cepa L. – Onion |
X |
X | X |
X |
||||
| Allium sativum L. – Garlic | X | X | X |
X |
||||
| Alnus spp. [A. glutinosa (L.) Gaertn., A. incana (L.) Moench] – Adler species | X |
X |
||||||
| Althaea officinalis L. – Marsmallow |
X |
X | X |
X |
||||
| Anethum graveolens L. – Dill | X |
X |
||||||
| Angelica spp. [A. archangelica L., A. sylvestris L.] – Angelica species | X |
X |
||||||
| Apium graveolens L. – Celery | X | X | X | |||||
| Arctium spp. [A. lappa L., A. tomentosum Mill., A. minus (Hill.) Bernh.] – Burdock species |
X |
X |
X |
|||||
| Aristolochia clematitis L. – Birtwort |
X |
X |
||||||
| Armoracia rusticana P.Gaertn., B.Mey. & Scherb. – Horse Radish | X | X | X |
X |
||||
| Artemisia absinthium L. – Wormwood |
X |
X |
X |
|||||
| Artemisia dracunculus L. – Tarragon | X | X |
X |
|||||
| Atropa belladonna L. – Deadly Nigthshade | X |
X |
||||||
| Avena sativa L.- Oat |
|
X | X |
X |
||||
| Betula pendula Roth. – Silver Birch |
X |
X | X |
X |
||||
| Brassica oleracea L. convar. capitata L. – Cabbage |
X |
X | X |
X |
||||
| Bryonia spp. [B. alba L., B. cretica subsp. dioica (Jacq.) Tutin] – Bryony species | X |
X |
||||||
| Calendula officinalis L. – Marigold |
X |
X |
X |
|||||
| Cannabis sativa L. – Hemp |
X |
X | X |
X |
||||
| Capsicum annuum L. – Paprika |
X |
X | X | X |
X |
|||
| Carum carvi L. – Caraway | X | X |
X |
|||||
| Centaurium spp. [C. erythraea Rafn., C. pulchellum (Sw.) Druce., C. uliginosum G. Beck ex Ronn.] – Centaury species |
X |
X |
X |
|||||
| Cerasus avium L. – Sweet Cherry | X | X | ||||||
| Chelidonium majus L. -Grater Celandine |
X |
X |
X |
|||||
| Chenopodium spp. [C. album L., C. bonus-henricus L., C. botrys L., C. hybridum L., C. schraderianum Schult., C. vulvaria L.] – Goosefoot species |
X |
X |
X |
|||||
| Cichorium intybus L. – Chicory |
X |
X | X |
X |
||||
| Citrullus lanatus (Thun.) Matsum. & Nakai – Watermelon | X | |||||||
| Cornus mas L. – Cornelian cherry | X |
X |
||||||
| Crataegus spp. [C. monogyna Jacq., C. laevigata (Poir.) DC] – Hawthorn species | X | |||||||
| Cucurbita pepo L. – Pumpkin | X |
X |
||||||
| Cydonia oblonga Mill. – Quince | X |
X |
||||||
| Datura stramonium L. – Thorn-Apple |
X |
X |
X |
|||||
| Daucus carota L. ssp. sativus (Hoffm.) Arcang. – Carrot |
X |
X | ||||||
| Dryopteris filix-mas (L.) Schott – Male fern |
X |
|||||||
| Echium vulgare L. – Viper’s Bugloss |
X |
X |
X |
|||||
| Eryngium spp. [E. campestre L., E. planum L.] – Eryngo species | X |
X |
||||||
| Equisetum arvense L. – Common Horsetail |
X |
X | X | X |
X |
|||
| Euphorbia spp. [E. amygdaloides L., E. cyparissias L., E. lathyris L., E. lucida W.et K., E. platyphyllos L., E. seguierana Necker] – Spurge species |
X |
X |
||||||
| Fagus silvatica L. – Common Beech |
X |
|||||||
| Foeniculum vulgare Mill. – Fennel | X | X |
X |
|||||
| Fraxinus spp. [F. excelsior L., Fraxinus ornus L.] – Ash species | X | X |
X |
|||||
| Gentiana spp. [G. asclepiadea L., G. cruciata L., G. lutea L., G. pneumonanthe L.] – Gentian species | X |
X |
||||||
| Glycyrrhiza glabra L. – Licorice | X | |||||||
| Helleborus spp. [H. dumetorum Waldst. &. Kit. ex Willd., H. odorus Waldst. &. Kit.
ex Willd., H. purpurascens Waldst. &. Kit.] – Hellebore |
X |
X |
||||||
| Hibiscus trionum L. – Flower-of-an-hour | X | |||||||
| Humulus lupulus L. – Hop | X | X | ||||||
| Hyoscyamus niger L. – White henbane | X | X |
X |
|||||
| Hypericum spp. [H. perforatum L., H. montanum L.] – Perforate and mountain St. John’s Wort |
X |
X | X |
X |
||||
| Inula helenium L. – Elecampane |
X |
|||||||
| Juglans regia L. – Walnut |
X |
X | X |
X |
||||
| Juniperus communis L. – Common Juniper | X | X | X |
X |
||||
| Leonurus cardiaca L. – Motherwort | X | X | ||||||
| Levisticum officinale Koch. – Lovage |
X |
X |
X |
|||||
| Lilium candidum L. – Madonna Lily |
X |
X |
||||||
| Linaria spp. [L. genistifolia (L.) Mill., L. vulgaris Mill.] – Toadflax species | X |
X |
||||||
| Linum usitatissimum L. – Flax species |
X |
X |
X |
|||||
| Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. – Tomato |
X |
X |
X |
|||||
| Lythrum spp. [L. salicaria L., virgatum L.] – Purple-loseestrife | X | |||||||
| Majoranna hortensis Moench. – Marjoram | X | X | X | |||||
| Malus spp. [M. domestica Borkh., M. sylvestris (L.) Mill.] – Apple species | X | |||||||
| Malva spp. [M. alcea L., M. neglecta Wallr., M. sylvestris L., M.pusilla Sm.] – Mallow species |
X |
X | X |
X |
||||
| Marrubium vulgare L. – White Horehound | X |
X |
||||||
| Matricaria recutita L. – Chamomile |
X |
X | X | X | X |
X |
||
| Malilotus officinale (L.) Pall. – Ribbed Melilot |
X |
X | X | |||||
| Melissa officinalis L. – Melisse | X | X | ||||||
| Mentha spp. [M. aquatica L., M. arvensis L., M. longifolia L., Mentha crispa L., M. x piperita L., M. pulegium L.] – Mint species |
X |
X | X | X |
X |
|||
| Nepeta cataria L. – Catnip | X | |||||||
| Ononis spinosa L. – Spiny Restharrow |
X |
X |
||||||
| Origanum vulgare L. – Oregano |
X |
X | X |
X |
||||
| Panicum miliaceum L. – Millet |
X |
X |
||||||
| Papaver rhoeas L. – Common Poppy | X | |||||||
| Papaver somniferum L. – Poppy | X | |||||||
| Persicaria spp. [P. amphibia (L.) Delarbre, Persicaria bistorta (L.) Samp., P. hydropiper (L.) Delarbre, P. lapathifolia (L.) Delarbre] – Bistort species |
X |
X |
X |
|||||
| Petroselinum crispum (Mill.) Fuss. – Parsley | X |
X |
||||||
| Peucedanum spp. [P. officinale L., P. oreoselinum (L.) Moench., P. palustre (L.) Moench.] – Hogs fennel species | X |
X |
||||||
| Picea abies (L.) H. Karst. – Norway Spruce |
X |
X | X |
X |
||||
| Pimpinella anisum L. – Anise | X | X | ||||||
| Pinus sylvestris L. – Scots Pine |
X |
X | X |
X |
||||
| Piper nigrum L. – Black Pepper | X |
X |
||||||
| Plantago spp. [P. lanceolata L., P. major L., P. media L.] – Plantain species |
X |
X | X |
X |
||||
| Polygonum aviculare L. – Knotweed | ||||||||
| Populus spp. [P. alba L., P. nigra L., P. tremula L.) – Poplar species |
X |
X |
X |
|||||
| Potentilla spp. [P. anserina L., P. argentea L., P. erecta (L.) Raeusch., P. reptans L.] – Cinquefoil species | X |
X |
||||||
| Primula veris L. – Cowslip | X | X | ||||||
| Prunus domestica L. – Plum | X |
X |
||||||
| Prunus spinosa L. – Blackthorn | X |
X |
||||||
| Pulmonaria officinalis L. – Lungwort | X |
X |
||||||
| Pyrus spp. [P. communis L., P pyraster (L.) Burgsd] – Pear species | X | |||||||
| Quercus fajok [Q. cerris L., Q. petraea (Matt.) Liebl., Q. pubescens Willd., Q. robur L.] – Oak species |
X |
X |
X |
|||||
| Raphanus sativus L. convar. niger (Mill.) DC – Radish | X | X |
X |
|||||
| Ribes spp. [R. nigrum L., Ribes rubrum L.) – Currant species | X | |||||||
| Robinia pseudoacacia L. – Locust tree |
X |
X |
||||||
| Rosa spp. [R. canina L., R. centifolia L., R. multiflora Thunb., R.gallica L.] – Rose species |
X |
X | X |
X |
||||
| Rosmarinus officinalis L. – Rosemary | X | X | X | |||||
| Rubus spp. [R. caesius L., Rubus idaeus L.] – Dewberry, Raspberry | X |
X |
||||||
| Rumex spp. [R. acetosa L., R. acetosella L., R. alpinus L., R. aquaticus L., R. confertus Willd., R. crispus L., R. hydrolapathum Huds., R. obtusifolius L., R. patientia L., R. sanguineus L., R. scutatus L.] – Dock species |
X |
X |
X |
|||||
| Salix spp. [Salix alba L., S. caprea L., S. cinerea L., S. fragilis L., S.triandra L.] – Willow species |
X |
X |
X |
|||||
| Salvia spp. [S. nemorosa L., S. officinalis L., S. pratensis L.,] – Sage species |
X |
X | X |
X |
||||
| Sambucus spp. [S. ebulus L., Sambucus nigra L.] – Elder species |
X |
X |
X |
|||||
| Sanguisorba officinalis L. – Great Burnet |
X |
X |
X |
|||||
| Satujera spp. [S. hortensis L., S. montana L.] – Savory species |
X |
X | X |
X |
||||
| Scrophularia nodosa L. – Common Figwort |
X |
X |
||||||
| Sempervivum tectorum L. – Common Houseleek |
X |
|||||||
| Sinapis alba L. – White mustard | X | |||||||
| Solanum tuberosum L. – Bittersweet |
X |
X |
||||||
| Sorbus spp. [S. aucuparia L., Sorbus domestica L.] – Service tree species | X |
X |
||||||
| Stachys fajok [S. annua L., Stachys recta L.] – Woundwort species |
X |
X |
||||||
| Symphytum officinale L. – Common Compfrey |
X |
X | X | X |
X |
|||
| Syringa vulgaris L. – Common lilac |
X |
X |
||||||
| Tanacetum vulgare L. – Tansy | X |
X |
||||||
| Taraxacum officinale (L.) Web.(Syn.: Taraxacum campylodes
G.E.Haglund) – Dandelion |
X |
X | X |
X |
||||
| Thymus spp. [T. glabrescens Willd., T. serpyllum L. , T. vulgaris L.] – Thyme species | X | X |
X |
|||||
| Tilia spp. [T. tomentosa Moench, T. cordata Mill., T. platyphyllos Scop.] – Linden species | X | X | X |
X |
||||
| Triticum aestivum L. – Wheat |
X |
|||||||
| Tussilago farfara L. – Colt’s Foot | X | X |
X |
|||||
| Ulmus spp. [U. glabra Huds., U. laevis Pall., U. minor Mill. ] – Elm species |
X |
|||||||
| Urginea martima (L.) Baker [syn.: Drimia maritima (L.) Stearn.] – Sea-squill |
X |
|||||||
| Urtica spp. [U. dioica L., U. urens L.] – Nettle species |
X |
X | X |
X |
||||
| Vaccinium myrtillus L. – Bilberry | X |
X |
||||||
| Valeriana officinalis L. – Common Valerian | X | |||||||
| Veratrum album L. – White Hellebore |
X |
|||||||
| Verbascum spp. [V. blattaria L., V. lychnitis L., V. phlomoides L., V. speciosum., V. thapsus L.] – Mullein species |
X |
X | X |
X |
||||
| Viscum album L. – Mistletoe | X | |||||||
| Zea mays L. – Corn Silk |
X |
X |
X |
|||||
*Fields of application: treatment of wounds (1), treatment of the diseases of the digestive tract (2), treatment of the respiratory diseases (3), treatment of rheumatic diseases (4), treatment of blocked urination and the urogenital diseases (5), treatment of diseases of the cardiovascular system (6), treatment of nervous system problem (7); treatment of animal diseases (8); (notes: the numbers from 1 to 7 inlcludes the human diseases; there are many overlapping between the fields of application in human and veterinary medicine)
References
Babulka, P. (1993) Preliminary survey on medicinal plants used in Hungarian ethnomedicine, Mimeograped lecture presented at the 2nd European Colloquium on Ethnopharmacology, 11th International Conference on Ethnomedicine (AGEM), 24-27th March, Heidelberg, Germany.
Babulka, P. (1996) Evaluation of medicinal plants used in Hungarian ethnomedicine, with special reference to the medicinally used food plants. Ekkehard Schröder et al. (ed.), Medicines and foods: the ethnopharmacological approach. Paris: ORSTOM èdition Société Francaise D’Ethnopharmacologie, pp. 129-139.
Babulka, P. (1997) Gyógynövények Magyarországon a népi gyógyászatban és a fitoterápiában [Medicinal plants in the Hungarian ethnomedicine and phytotherapy] CD-ROM, Com-Com Bt., Győr
Babulka, P. (2000) Arzneipflanzen und Phytotherapie in Ungarn, Zeitschrift für Phytotherapie, Vol. 5, p. 257-263.
Babulka, P. (2005a) Gyógynövények és fitoterápia [Medicinal plants and phytotherapy]. Mátray Árpád (ed.). Az ökológiai és alternatív állatgyógyászat alapjai [Basics of the ecolological and alternative veterinary medicine], Budapest: Mezőgazda Kiadó, p. 50-79.
Babulka, P. (2005b) Gyógyhatású táplálékok, étrendkiegészítők, funkcionális élelmiszerek [Nutraceuticals, Food supplements, Functional Foods], Komplementer Medicina, Vol. 3, p. 58-66.
Babulka, P. (2007) A gyomor-bél betegségek fitoterápiás kezelése (I.-II. rész.). [Phytoterapeutic treatments of the gastrointestinal diseases, Part I.-II.], Komplementer Medicina, Vol. 2, p. 6-14; Vol. 4, p. 6-14.
Babulka, P. (2011a) Medicinal Plants Used in Hungarian Ethno- and Alternative Veterinary Practices in the 20th century, Curare Special Issue: New Perspectives in Ethnobotany and Pharmacology, Vol. 34, 1+2, p. 110-117.
Babulka, P. (2011b) Plantes médicinales, recherches ethnobotaniques et ethnopharmacologiques en Hongrie, Ethnopharmacologia, Vol. 47 (Novembre), p. 7-16.
Babulka, P. (2015) A Kárpát-medence gyógynövénykincsei [Medicinal plant treasures of the Carpathian Basin], Budapest: TercPress.
Babulka, P.; Oláh, A. (1983) Phytotherapeutische Wundbehandlung in der ungarischen Volksmedizin, Curare, Vol. 6, p.117-128.
Babulka, P.; Pataki, Á. (1996) Traditional practices and perinatal health in Hungarian peasant communities, 3rd European Colloquium on Ethnopharmacology, Genova: Erga edizioni, Abstracts, p. 189.
Babulka, P.; Pataki, Á. (1997) Folk Customs, Beliefs and Traditional Curing Methods of the Period between Conception and Weaning in Hungarian Peasant Communities. Christine E. Gottschalk-Batschkus, Judit Schuler, Doris Iding (ed.): Women and Health. Ethnomedical Perspectives, VWB – Verlag für Wissenchaft und Bildung, Curare, Special Volume 11/97. pp. 279-286.
Babulka, P.; Rácz, G. (2006) In memoriam Páter Béla és Gidófalvy István [In memoriam Béla Páter and István Gidófalvy], Nemzeti Gyógynövény Konferencia [Lecture presented at the National Conference on Medicinal Plants], Szentendre.
Diószegi, S. (1813) Orvosi Füvészkönyv, Mint A’ Magyar Füvész Könyv’ Praktika része [MedicalHerbal. Practical Part of the Hungarian Herbal], Nyomtatta Csáthy György Debreczenben.
Diószegi, S.; Fazekas, M. (1807) Magyar Füvészkönyv [Hungarian Herbal], Nyomtatta Csáthy György Debreczenben.
Fazekas, Á. (1982) A magyar nyelvű herbárium-irodalomról [On the Hungarian Herbarium literature], Communicationes de Historia Artis Medicinae, Vol. 97-99, p. 43-64.
Gémes, B. 1979 A népi orvoslás kutatás aktuális problémái Magyarországon (‘Actual problems of research on ethnomedicine in Hungary’). In: Antall J., Buzinkay G. (ed.): Népi gyógyítás Magyarországon (‘Ethnomedicine in Hungary’). Communicationes de Historia Artis Medicinae, Supplementum 11-12. pp. 23-4.
Gémes, B. (1987) A népi születésszabályozás (magzatelhajtás) Magyarországon a XIX.-XX. Században [Popular ways of birth control (Procured Abortion) in Hungary in the 19th and 20th centuries], Documentatio Ethnographica 12, Budapest: MTA Néprajzi Kutató Csoport.
Goetz, P.; Babulka, P. (1998)Les Plantes Médicinales dans le Traitement des Rhumatismes: De la Médecine Traditionelle Hongroise à la Phytotherapie Européenne Actuelle, Partie I, Revue de Phytothérapie Pratique, Vol. 2, p. 11-17.
Grynaeus, T. (1985) (Gyógy)növényismeretünk a reneszánsz és a reformáció korában [Our knowledge on (medicinal)plants in the era of Renaissance and Reformation], Communicationes de Historia Artis Medicinae, Vol. 109/112, p. 105-110.
Grynaeus, T. (1996a) ISA POR … A honfoglalás és Árpád-kori magyarság betegségei és gyógyításuk [ISA POR…. The diseases and healing of the Hungarians during the Hungarian conquest and the era of Arpád Dynasty], Budapest: Fekete Sas Kiadó.
Grynaeus, T. (1996b) A honfoglalás- és Árpád-kori magyarság növényei (Növényismeret, növényfelhasználás és növényföldrajz) [Plants of the Hungarians lived during Hungarian conquest and the era of the Árpád-dynasty]. É. Pócs and V. Voigt (szerk.) Ősök, táltosok, szentek. Tanulmányok a honfoglalás és Árpád-kor folklórjából [Ancestors, shamans and saints from the era of Hungarian conquest and Árpád Dynasty], Budapest: MTA Néprajzi Kutatócsoport, pp. 121-137.
Grynaeus, T. (2001) ‘Ear-herb’ (Sempervivum tectorum L.) in Hungarian ethnomedicine, Acta Ethnographica Hungarica, Vol. 46(3-4), p. 261-271.
Grynaeus, A.; Grynaeus, T. (2001) The geobotany of Medieval Hungary: a preliminary report, Medieum Aevum Quotidianum, Vol. 44, p. 78-93.
Grynaeus, T.; Babulka, P. (1986) Plant medicines of cough used in Hungarian ethnomedicine, 7th National Conference on Medicinal Plants, Sopron, Hungary. Abstracts, p. 95.
Grynaeus, T.; Papp J. (1977) Régi magyar (gyógy)növénynevek, 15.-17. század [Old Hungarian (medicinal) plant names, 15th-17th century], Communicationes de Historia Artis Medicinae, Supplementum 9-10, p. 31-49.
Grynaeus, T.; Papp J. (1978) Régi magyar (gyógy)növénynevek mutatója, 15.-17. század [Guide to the Old Hungarian (medicinal) plant names, 15th-17th century], Communicationes de Historia Artis Medicinae, Vol. 86, p. 131-137.
Halász, P. (2010) Növények a moldvai magyarok hagyományában és mindennapjaiban [Plants in traditions of the Hungarians living in Moldva], Budapest: General Press Kiadó.
Halászné Zelnik, K. (1981) Adatok a moldvai magyarok gyógynövény-használatához [Data to the folk use of medicinal plants of the Hungarians living in Moldva], Gyógyszerészet, Vol. 25, p. 361-367.
Holmstedt B, Bruhn J.G. (1982) Is there a place for ethnopharmacology in our time? Journal of Ethnopharmacology, Vol. 3(5), p. 181-183.
Holmstedt B, Bruhn J.G. (1983)Ethnopharmacology – a challenge, Journal of Ethnopharmacology, Vol. Sep; 8(3), p. 251-6.
Hoppál, M.; Törő, L. (1975) Népi gyógyítás Magyarországon [Ethnomedicine in Hungary], Communicationes de Historia Artis Medicinae, Supplementum 7-8, p. 13-126.
Kóczián, G. (1985) A hagyományos parasztgazdálkodás termesztett, a gyűjtögető gazdálkodás vad növényfajainak etnobotanikai értékelése. Doktori disszertáció [Ethnobotanical Evaluation of the Cultivated Plants of Traditional Agriculture, and that of Wild Plant Species of Gathering Livelihood], PhD. Thesis, Mosonmagyaróvár: ATE Mezőgazdasági Kar.
Kóczián G.; Szabó I.; Szabó L. Gy. (1979) A Helleborus– (Hunyor-) fajok népgyógyászati felhasználására vonatkozó adatok [Data on the traditional use of hellebore-species]. Antall, József and Buzinkay, Géza (ed.) Népi gyógyítás Magyarországon [Ethnomedicine in Hungary], Communicationes de Historia Artis Medicinae, Supplementum pp. 12, pp. 125-154.
Magyary-Kossa, Gy. A hazai gyógynövények hatása és orvosi használata [Therapeutical Action and Use of the Hungarian Medicinal Plants], Budapest: Aetheneum Irodalmi és Nyomdai Részvénytársulat.
Melius, P. (1978) Herbárium. A megjelenés 400. évfordulójára megjelentetett könyvet bevezető tanulmánnyal és magyarázó jegyzetekkel sajtó alá rendezte Szabó Attila [Herbárium. Reprinted on the 400th anniversary of Melius’s original work together with the preface and explanation notes of Attila Szabó], Bukarest: Kriterion Könyvkiadó.
Oláh, A. (1985) Fűbe-fába orvosság! (Békés megyei népi orvoslás) [The medicine is hidden in herbs and trees. Ethnomedicine in County Békés], Békés Megyei Tanács V. B. Tudományos-Koordinációs Szakbizottság kiadása.
Oláh, A. (1986) „Újhold, új király!” A magyar népi orvoslás életrajza [‘New Moon, New King!’ LifeHistory of the Hungarian Ethnomedicine], Budapest: Gondolat Könykiadó.
Oláh, A. (1987) Zöld varázslók, virág-orvosok. (Népi gyógynövényismeret Békés-megyében) [Green Magicians, Flower-Doctors. Folk Knowledge on Herbs in County Békés], Békés-megyei Tanács V.B. Tudományos-Koordinációs Szakbizottság Kiadása.
Oláh, A.; Babulka, P. (1985) Traditionelle Anwendung und Möglichkeiten der modernen phytotherapeutischen Verwendung der Ampferarten, Curare (Sonderband), Vol. 3, p. 121-142.
Papp, N. et al. (2011) Ethnomedical Values from some Gardens in Csinód, Curare Special Issue: New Perspectives in Ethnobotany and Pharmacology, Vol. 34, 1+2, p. 103-109.
Páter, B. (1911) A vadon termő gyógynövények. [Wild living medicinal plants], Budapest: „Pátria” Irodalmi és Nyomdai Részvénytársaság.
Péntek J.; Szabó, A. (1985) Ember és növényvilág (Kalotaszeg növényzete és népi növényismerete) [Plant Kingdom and Traditional Human Life in the Calata Area (Kalotaszeg)], Bukarest: Kriterion Könyvkiadó.
Rab, J. (1982) Újabb népgyógyászati adatok Gyimesből [Recent data on folk medicine from Gyimes (Transylvania)], Gyógyszerészet [Pharmacy], Vol. 26, p. 325-333.
Rab, J. (1991) Hagyományos gyógynövényismeret Gyergyóban. [Traditional knowledge on medicinal plants in Gyergyo (Transylvania)], Gyógyszerészet [Pharmacy], Vol. 35, p. 373-380.
Rácz, G. (1979) A népgyógyászati adatok értékelése [Evaluation of the Ethnomedicinal Data]. Antall J., Buzinkay G. (ed.), Népi gyógyítás Magyarországon [Ethnomedicine in Hungary], Communicationes de Historia Artis Medicinae, Supplementum 11-12, pp. 51-60.
Rácz, G.; Rácz-Kotilla, E.; Péter H. M.; Gáspár, M. (1982) Korszerű gyógynövényhasználat [Modern Use of Medicinal Plants], Korunk Füzetek 1, Kolozsvár-Napoca.
Rácz-Kotilla, E. and Rácz, G. (2001) Farmakotaxonómia – a növényrendszertan gyógyszerhatástani megközelítése [Pharmacotaxonomy – a pharmacological approach to plant systematics], Kanitzia Journal of Botany, Vol. 9, p. 41-58.
Rácz-Kotilla, E. and Rácz, G. (2004) 100 éve alapította Páter Béla a Kolozsvári Gyógynövény Kutató Intézetet (1904) I. rész. A kezdetektől 1914-ig. [‘Páter Béla founded the research institute of medicinal plants in Kolozsvár 100 years ago. (1904) From the beginning till 1914. (Part I.)], Kanitzia Journal of Botany, Vol. 12, p. 13-24. Szombathely.
Stirling, J. (1985) Orvosi kertek Magyarországon a XVI. században [Medical gardens in Hungary in the 16th century], Communicationes de Historia Artis Medicinae, Vol. 109-112, p. 111-115.
Szabó, L. Gy. (1990) Népi természetismeret [Folk Knowledge on Nature]. Dömötör Tekla (szerk.), Magyar néprajz [Hungarian Folklore], VII. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. pp. 725-741.
Szabó, L. GY. and Kóczián, G. (1982) Gyógynövények Sadler József „Magyarázat a magyar plánták szárított gyűjteményéhez” [Medicinal Plants in Sadler’s Work Titled Explanation to the Dried Herbal Collection], Gyógyszerészet, Vol. 26, p. 212-219.
Szabó, A. and Péntek, J. (1976) Ezerjófű. Etnobotanikai Útmutató [Centaury. An Ethnobotanical Guide], Bukarest: Kriterion Könyvkiadó.
Szabó, T. A. (1996) Tudomány, mely örök életet ád. Orvosbotanika, életismeret, gyógyítás a XVI. századi magyar tudományban [Everlasting Life of Science. Medical Botany, Life, Health Care in the 16th Century Hungarian Science], CD-ROM, Szombathely.
Szabó, T. A. and Tóth, M. (1993) Adalékok a XVI. századi magyar természettudomány születéséhez: Erdősi Sylvester János, Szegedi Kőrös Gáspár, Váradi Lencsés György, Somogyi Melius Péter és a sárvári orvosbotanikai iskola (1536-1555) [Data to the Birth of the Hungarian Natural Science in the 16th Century: János Erdősi Sylvester, Gáspár Szegedi Kőrös, György Váradi Lencsés and the Medico-Botanical School of Sárvár (1536-1555)], Communicationes de Historia Artis Medicinae, Vol. 141-144, p. 107-126.
Tamasi, J. and Babulka, P. (1990a) A húgyúti rendszer növényi terápiás szerei [Herbal medicines for the diseases of the urinary tract], Természetgyógyászat: Tudományos melléklet, június.
Tamasi, J. and Babulka, P. (1990b) Növényi nyugtatók [Herbal sedatives], Természetgyógyászat: Tudományos melléklet, augusztus.
Vajkai, A. (1948) A magyar népi orvoslás kutatása (‘Research on Hungarian Ethnomedicine’), Budapest: Magyar Orvosi Könyvkiadó Társulat.
Vohora, S.B. et al. (1987) Main features of using plants containing essential oils in Indian systems of medicine and Hungarian ethnomedicine, Curare, Vol. 10, p. 249-260.