Hunt Institute for Botanical Documentation
A Research Division of Carnegie Mellon University

Hunt Institute Archives Text Discovery Platform

Search a large and growing portion of our online collections, including handwritten documents.
PROTOTYPE

This prototype uses state-of-the-art artificial intelligence, including a vision-language model (VLM) capable of reading handwritten documents as well as typed and printed text, to create searchable transcriptions of digitized materials in the Hunt Institute Archives. This makes it possible to search the textual contents of individual pages, including material that may not be described in the archival catalog.

Use Keyword search for specific words, names, dates, scientific names, or phrases. Try Semantic search (experimental) to describe a topic, question, or kind of material when you do not know the exact wording used in the documents.

About the AI-generated transcriptions

The transcriptions are generated automatically from page images and may contain errors, especially with difficult handwriting, unusual names, multiple languages, image-quality problems, or complex layouts. They are intended primarily as a discovery aid rather than authoritative transcriptions.

Each result provides the generated transcription and links to the original digitized material and associated archival description so that readings can be checked against the source. The transcription workflow uses AI models run locally by the Hunt Institute.

About Keyword and Semantic search

Keyword search is the default and matches the wording in the transcriptions. Results contain all your terms. Use quotes for an exact phrase. Substring matching is supported, so aceae can find plant-family names ending in -aceae.

Semantic search (experimental) is useful when you know what kind of material you are looking for but do not know the words used in the documents. It ranks transcribed passages by similarity of meaning, so relevant results may not contain the exact words in your query.

Semantic queries can be broad research topics, descriptions of activities or relationships, or natural-language questions. For example:

Semantic search is not a chatbot: a question is used as a search query, and the system returns archival passages that appear conceptually related to it rather than generating an answer or summary. Short descriptions and ordinary research questions generally work better than lists of disconnected keywords. Quotation marks have no special meaning in Semantic mode. Cross-language matching may work in some cases, but it should not be treated as translation.

Keyword and Semantic search are complementary. Keyword search lets you require particular wording; Semantic search can surface differently worded passages about the same subject. Depending on the research question, trying both can reveal different useful material.

Open a result: use the prominent page-and-transcription link to see the metadata, PDF, and full transcription. Keyword-search terms are highlighted in the transcription.

Archives Collections Database (ArchivesSpace): the Collection, Item/Folder, and Digital Object links open the corresponding archival records. Collection-level dates describe the collection as a whole, not necessarily the specific item or page.

If a PDF does not load: on the detail page, use the Digital Object link, click “Go to file” in ArchivesSpace, and navigate to the page number shown here.

Current limitations
  • Automated transcriptions can contain missing or incorrect text or unintended repetition. Difficult handwriting, image quality, unusual layouts, and multiple languages can reduce accuracy. Always consult the original page image when an exact reading matters.
  • Semantic search remains experimental. Its rankings are an additional discovery aid, not a complete or definitive set of relevant results, and highly ranked pages can sometimes be only broadly related.
  • This is an active prototype. Search coverage, transcriptions, functionality, and the interface may continue to change as additional archival material is processed and the system is improved.

← Back to results

Page 130 · DO #1265 · 53_Arber_Box4FF1r

Collection
Agnes Robertson Arber (1879–1960) papers
Item/Folder
Articles and notes for articles -- Ar [1], 2–5, 7–19, 1927–1958
Digital Object
DO #1265, page 130
Collection-level dates
1886–1985
Open PDF at page 130 ↗

Page transcription

of plants, which he had received from his friend Goodyer, were printed in a form which made them readily recognisable.

We have so little knowledge of Thomas Johnson's personal life,
that it is a pleasure to find that there is in existence a letter, relating
to the Herball, indicating that a friendship existed between him and the poet,
Sir Henry Wotton, the author of that perfect distich upon Lady Morton:

"He first deceased; she for a little tried
To live without him, liked it not, and died".

The letter in question is addressed "To my verie loving and
learned friend Mr. Johnson Apothecarie, at his howse on Snowe Hill, London".
Wotton explains that he is sending his servant with the request that Johnson
will tell him "where he may buy one of your Gerrards, well and strongly
bound: Next, where I may have for my monye, all kinde of coloured Pynkes
to sett in a Quarter of my Garden or any such flowers as perfume the Ayre".
We can easily guess what directions Johnson gave to wotton's servant, for in
the Herbal, after describing "Gillofloures, Pinkes and the like", he recommends
"such as are addicted to these commendable and harmlesse delights" to "repaire
to the garden of Mistresse Tuggy ...in Westminster, which in excellencie and
varietie of these delights exceedeth all that I have seenes".

In 1639 Johnson made his last herborizing excursion, the famous
Welsh journey, in the course of which he ascended Snowdon, and found alpine
plants such Silene acaulis, the cushion Pink. Though his fame
is founded on his edition of Gerard, in reality his most important work was
the Mercurius Botanicus, which was based primarily upon the results of his
various plant-hunting expeditions. This work, which was published in
two parts in 1634 and 1641, was, in a sense, the earliest British flora, for
it was the first work in which the attempt was made to enumerate all the
known British plants, and to deal with them alone; the herbals, on
the other hand, had aimed at comprehensiveness, and had not concentrated on the
plants of this country. He had indeed planned to carry this undertaking
much further, and, in collaboration with John Goodyer, to produce a regular