↓ Skip to main content

Fischer’s Lexicon of Slavic beliefs and customs: a previously unknown contribution to the ethnobotany of Ukraine and Poland

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Fischer’s Lexicon of Slavic beliefs and customs: a previously unknown contribution to the ethnobotany of Ukraine and Poland
Published in
Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13002-015-0073-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Monika Kujawska, Łukasz Łuczaj, Joanna Typek

Abstract

Historical ethnobotanical studies are important, even if they are only descriptive, because they help to throw light on the missing chains needed for diachronic analysis. However, the documentation of traditional uses of plants in some countries, e.g. Ukraine, is still fragmentary. The aim of this contribution is to fill the gap and present a portion of the data set, from western Ukraine, which was collected by Adam Fischer, a Polish ethnographer from Lviv, in the 1930s. These data were originally gathered to be published in the first part of the Lexicon of Slavic beliefs and customs, dedicated to plant uses in traditional Slavonic culture. The idea of writing the Lexicon arose in 1929 during the I Congress of Slavic Philologists in Prague and was intended to be a joint international enterprise, but has never actually been fulfilled. In this article we used information from south-eastern Poland at that time - nowadays western Ukraine, collected in four provinces, 11 counties and 28 localities by Fischer's collaborators. The majority of the information was accompanied by voucher specimens, which were determined by botanists at the Jan Kazimierz University. These data are still unpublished and stored on filecards in the archives of the Polish Ethnological Society in Wrocław, Poland. In our analysis we applied two indices: one to measure general plant versatility - Use Value, and another regarding medicinal plants - Relative Importance Value. In total, 179 plant taxa used in peasant culture in the western Ukraine in the 1930s were registered. The species which achieved the highest Use Values were: Achillea millefolium, Allium sativum, Vinca minor, Hypericum sp. and Juniperus communis. Among the collected plant names, Polish names dominate (59 %) over clearly Ukrainian and Ruthenian ones (31 %). The remaining 10 % of names were of unclear origin or could have been used by both groups. The most salient use categories were medicinal, followed by ritual - chiefly plants used in church ceremonies, followed by animal wellbeing (veterinary and fodder). However we learn very little about plant management in the peasant culture from the data set. Analysis of the archival data threw new light on plant use and management in the Galicja region in the interwar period. It also increased our understanding of the central role of plants in spheres such as folk medicine, church ceremonies and animal wellbeing.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Poland 1 2%
Unknown 47 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 17%
Other 7 15%
Student > Master 7 15%
Researcher 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Other 14 29%
Unknown 3 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 35%
Social Sciences 3 6%
Environmental Science 3 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Other 10 21%
Unknown 9 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 January 2016.
All research outputs
#18,433,196
of 22,836,570 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#611
of 735 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#281,953
of 390,633 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#17
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,836,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 735 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 390,633 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.