[2] Kurt Sprengel in his ‘Geschichte der Botanik,’ i. 1817, and Ernst Meyer in his ‘Geschichte der Botanik,’ iv. 1857 have described the connection between the first beginnings of modern botany and the general state of learning in the 15th and 16th centuries; a particularly interesting notice of Valerius Cordus from the pen of Thilo Irmisch will be found in the ‘PrÜfungsprogramm’ of the Schwarzburg gymnasium of Sondershausen for 1862. Here, as throughout, the present work will be confined to the investigation and description of the development of strictly botanical ideas.

[3] Otto Brunfels, born at Mainz before the year 1500, was at first a student of theology and a monk; becoming a convert to Protestantism he was actively engaged at Strassburg first as a teacher and afterwards as a physician; he died in 1534.

[4] Beside the herbals mentioned in the text, which may be regarded as scientific works on botany, a considerable number of books on the signature of plants were written in the 16th and 17th centuries in the interests of medicine or medical superstition. It was believed that certain external marks and resemblances between parts of plants and the organs of the human body indicated the plants and the parts of them which possessed healing virtues. Pritzel mentions by name twenty-four works of the kind, which appeared between 1550 and 1697. The herbals also noticed the signatures, and even Ray has an enquiry into the subject.

[5] The fragments of Aristotelian botany which have come down to us are to be found translated from Wimmer’s edition in Ernst Meyer’s ‘Geschichte der Botanik,’ i. p. 94.

[6] Ernst Meyer (Geschichte der Botanik) gives a full account of Theophrastus, who was born at Lesbos A.C. 371 and died A.C. 286. An edition of his work ‘De historia et de causis plantarum’ was published by Theodor Gaza in 1483. See also Pritzel’s ‘Thesaurus literarum botanicarum.’

[7] See L. C. Treviranus in his work, ‘Die Anwendung des Holzschnitts zur bildlichen Darstellung der Pflanzen,’ Leipzig, 1855, and Choulant ‘Graphische Incunabeln,’ Leipzig, 1858.

[8] Konrad Gesner, born in ZÜrich in 1516, became after many vicissitudes of fortune Professor of Natural History in his native town, and died there of the plague in 1565. See Ernst Meyer, ‘Geschichte der Botanik,’ iv.

[9] Leonhard Fuchs, born at Membdingen in Bavaria in 1501, was a student of the classics under Reuchlin in Ingolstadt in 1519, and became Doctor of Medicine in 1524. Owing to his conversion to Protestantism he led an unsettled life for some years, but was finally made Professor of Medicine in TÜbingen in 1535, and died there in 1566. See Meyer, ‘Geschichte der Botanik,’ iv.

[10] Rembert Dodoens (Dodonaeus), born at Malines in 1517, was a physician, and a man of varied culture; he published a number of botanical works, some of them in Flemish, after 1552, and finally in 1583 his ‘Stirpium Historiae Pemptades vi’ (Antwerp). From 1574 to 1579 he was physician to the Emperor Maximilian II. In 1582 he became Professor in Leyden and died in 1585. See Ernst Meyer, ‘Geschichte der Botanik,’ iv. p. 340.

[11] Hieronymus Bock (Tragus) was born at Heiderbach in the ZweibrÜcken in 1498; he was destined to the cloister, but embraced Protestantism and became a schoolmaster in ZweibrÜcken and superintendent of the Prince’s garden; he was afterwards preacher in Hornbach, where he practised also as a physician and pursued his botanical studies; he died in 1554. See Ernst Meyer, ‘Geschichte der Botanik,’ iv. p. 303.

[12] Pierandrea Mattioli, who was born at Siena in 1501 and died there in 1577, was for many years physician at the court of Ferdinand I. He wrote rather in the interests of medicine than of botany; his herbal, originally a commentary on Dioscorides, was gradually enlarged and went through more than sixty editions and issues in different languages. See Meyer, ‘Geschichte der Botanik,’ vi.

[13] Charles de l’Écluse (Carolus Clusius) was born in Arras in 1526. His family suffered from religious persecution in France, and he spent the greater part of his life in Germany and the Netherlands; in 1573 he removed to Vienna by the invitation of Maximilian II; in 1593 he became professor in Leyden and died there in 1609. See Meyer, ‘Geschichte der Botanik,’ iv, who gives full information respecting the eventful life of this distinguished man.

[14] Jacques Dalechamps, a native of Caen, who died in 1588, was a philologist rather than an original investigator of nature, as is remarked by Meyer in his ‘Geschichte der Botanik,’ vi. p. 395.

[15] Mathias de l’Obel (Lobelius), the friend and fellow-countryman of Dodoens and de l’Écluse, was born at Lille in 1538 and died in England in 1616. A full account of this botanist will be found in Meyer.

[16] Kaspar Bauhin was born at Basle in 1550, and like his elder brother John studied under Fuchs; he collected plants in Switzerland, Italy, and France, and became professor in Basle; he died in 1624. Some account is given of him and of his brother by Haller in the preface to his ‘Historia Stirpium Helvetiae’ (1768), and by Sprengel in his ‘Geschichte der Botanik,’ i. p. 364 (1818).

[17] Andrea Cesalpino (Caesalpinus) of Arezzo was born in 1519. He was a pupil of Ghini and professor at Pisa, and afterwards physician to Pope Clement VIII. He died in 1603.

[18] We find it stated in Theophrastus that if the pith of the vine is destroyed the grapes contain no stones; this evidently points to a still higher antiquity for the view that the seeds are formed from the pith; see the De causis plantarum, v. ch. 5, in the ‘Theophrasti quae supersunt opera’ of Schneider, Leipzig, 1818.

[19] These words are quoted by Linnaeus in the ‘Philosophia Botanica,’ par. 159.

[20] See his biography by Guhrauer, ‘Joachim Jungius und sein Zeitalter,’ TÜbingen, 1850; on his place in philosophy consult Ueberweg (‘Geschichte der Philosophie,’ iii. p. 119), who regards him as a forerunner of Leibnitz.

[21] Morison served in the royal army against Cromwell, and after the defeat of his party retired to Paris, where he studied botany under Robin. He was made physician to Charles II and Professor of Botany in 1660, and Professor of the same faculty in Oxford ten years later. See Sprengel, ‘Geschichte der Botanik,’ ii. p. 30.

[22] The wood-engraving of the 16th century had fallen into decay, and engraving on copper-plate had taken its place. A thick volume of figures of plants in the largest folio size engraved on copper, the ‘Hortus EistÄdtensis,’ appeared in the beginning of the 17th century.

[23] John Ray, born at Black Notley in Essex, was also a zoologist of eminence. He studied theology and travelled in England and on the continent, and afterwards devoted himself entirely to science, being supported by a pension from Willoughby. See Carus, ‘Geschichte der Zoologie,’ p. 428.

[24] A. Q. Bachmann (Rivinus) was the third son of Andreas Bachmann, a physician and philologist of Halle. He is said to have spent 80,000 florins on the publication of his works and the providing them with the 500 copper-plates with which they were illustrated. A life of him and just estimate of his work, by Du Petit-Thouars, is to be found in the ‘Biographie universelle ancienne et moderne.’

[25] Tournefort was born at Aix in Provence, and received his early education in a Jesuit college. He was intended for the Church, but after his father’s death, in 1677, he was able to devote himself entirely to botany. After travelling in France and Spain, he became Professor at the Jardin des Plantes in 1683; but while thus engaged he made various journeys in Europe, and in 1700 visited Greece, Asia, and Africa—everywhere diligently collecting the plants which he afterwards described.

[26] In addition to the Autobiography of Linnaeus, various accounts of his life have been written, some of which are mentioned in Pritzel’s ‘Thesaurus Lit. Bot.’ A strange revelation of his character and sentiments is to be found in his treatise on the ‘Nemesis divina,’ which he bequeathed to his son. Of this work Professor Fries has unfortunately published an epitome only, which is noticed in the Regensburg Flora, No. 44 (1851). On Linnaeus’ services to zoology, see Carus, ‘Geschichte der Zoologie,’ MÜnchen, 1872.

[27] Printed in Jessen’s ‘Botanik der Gegenwart and Vorzeit,’ p. 287.

[28] ‘Epistola ad Godofredum Gulielmum Leibnitzium etc. cum Laurentii Heisteri praefatione,’ Helmstadii, 1750.

[29] See the excellent account of the Platonic and Aristotelian philosophies and of scholasticism in Albert Lange’s ‘Geschichte des Materialismus,’ second edition, 1874.

[30] The comparison of the vegetable seed with the egg in animals, which is in itself incorrect, comes, as Aristotle tells us, from Empedocles, and was a favourite one with the systematists.

[31] Linnaeus uses the word ‘herba’ for the older word ‘germen,’ which with him means the ovary.

[32] It would not be difficult to prove that the doctrine of the constancy of species is properly a conclusion from scholasticism, and ultimately from the Platonic doctrine of ideas, and was therefore assumed as self-evident before the time of Linnaeus, who only gave it a more distinct and conscious expression; his arguments from experience are without force. The strength of the dogma lies in its relation to the platonico-scholastic philosophy, which the systematists followed, more or less consciously, up to quite recent times.

[33] The authority for the contents of these dissertations is Wigand’s ‘Kritik und Geschichte der Metamorphose’ (1846).

[34] Bernard de Jussieu, born at Lyons in 1699, and at first a practising physician there, was by Vaillant’s intervention called to Paris, and after Vaillant’s death became Professor and Demonstrator at the Royal Garden. He and Peissonel were among the first who declared against the vegetable nature of the Corals. It is expressly stated in his Éloge (‘Histoire de l’AcadÉmie Royale des Sciences,’ Paris, 1777) that he founded his natural families on the Linnaean fragment. He died in 1777.

[35] A. L. de Jussieu, born at Lyons, came to Paris to his uncle Bernard in 1765. In 1790 he was a member of the Municipality, and till 1792 Superintendent of Hospitals. When the Annales du Museum were founded in 1802, he resumed his botanical pursuits. In 1826 his son Adrien took his place at the Museum. See his life by Brougniart in the ‘Annales des Sciences Naturelles,’ vii (1837).

[36] Joseph GÄrtner was born at Calw in WÜrtemberg in 1732, and died in 1791. He commenced his studies in GÖttingen in 1751, where he was a pupil of Haller. He travelled into Italy, France, Holland, and England in order to make the acquaintance of famous naturalists, and worked also at physics and zoology. In 1760 he was Professor of Anatomy in TÜbingen, and in 1768 became Professor of Botany at St. Petersburg; but finding himself unable to bear the climate, he returned to Calw in 1770, and gave himself up entirely to his book, ‘De fructibus et seminibus plantarum,’ which he had already commenced. Banks and Thunberg, one of whom had returned from a voyage round the world, the other from Japan, handed over to him the collections of fruits which they had made. His persistent study, partly with the microscope, brought him near to blindness. There is an interesting life of GÄrtner by Chaumeton in the ‘Biographie Universelle.’

[37] Augustin Pyrame de Candolle sprang from a ProvenÇal family, which had fled from religious persecution to Geneva, where it was and is still held in great estimation. He associated as a boy with Vaucher, and on his first visit to Paris in 1796 with Desfontaines and Dolomieu, and after his return to Geneva was a friend of Senebier. The elder Saussure, and afterwards Biot, whom he assisted in an investigation in physics, endeavoured to attach him to that study. He spent the years from 1798 to 1808 in Paris, where he lived in close intercourse with the naturalists of that city. Numerous smaller monographs, and the publication of his work on succulent plants and of a new edition of De Lamarck’s ‘Flore FranÇaise,’ occupied this earlier period of his life. From 1808 to 1816 he was Professor of Botany at Montpellier. During this time he made many botanical journeys in all parts of France and the neighbouring countries, and wrote many monographs, his essays on the geography of plants, and his most important work, the ‘ThÉorie ÉlÉmentaire.’ From 1816 till his death in 1841 he resided once more in Geneva, which had freed itself in 1813 from the enforced connection with France established in 1798. Here De Candolle found time to take part in political and social questions, in addition to an almost incredible amount of botanical labour. (Notice sur la vie et les ouvrages de A. P. De Candolle par De la Rive, GenÈve, 1845.)

[38] Robert Brown was the son of a Protestant minister of Montrose, and studied medicine first at Aberdeen and afterwards in Edinburgh; he then became a surgeon in the army, and was at first stationed in the north of Ireland. When the Admiralty despatched a scientific expedition to Australia under Captain Flinders in 1801, he was appointed naturalist to the expedition on the recommendation of Sir Joseph Banks, F. Bauer being associated with him as botanical draughtsman, Good as gardener, Westall as landscape-painter; one of the midshipmen of the vessel was John Franklin. In consequence of the unseaworthiness of the ship Flinders left Australia, intending to return with a better one, but was shipwrecked on the voyage and detained by the French at Port Louis as a prisoner of war till 1810. The naturalists of the expedition remained in Australia till 1805, when Brown returned to England with 4000 for the most part new species of plants. Sir J. Banks appointed him his librarian and keeper of his collections in 1810; he was also Librarian to the Linnaean Society of London. In 1823 he received the bequest of Banks’ library and collections, which were to be transferred after his death to the British Museum; but by his own wish they were deposited there at once, and he himself received the appointment of Custodian of the Museum and remained in that position till his death. At Humboldt’s suggestion Sir Robert Peel’s Ministry granted him a yearly pension of £200. His merits were universally acknowledged, and Humboldt even named him ‘botanicorum facile princeps.’

[39] Stephen Ladislaus Endlicher was born at Pressburg in 1805, and abandoning the study of theology became Scriptor in the Imperial Library at Vienna in 1828, and in 1836 Custos of the botanical department of the Imperial Collection of Natural History. Having graduated at the University in 1840, he became Professor of Botany and Director of the Botanic Garden. His library and herbarium, valued at 24,000 thalers, he presented to the State, and with his private means founded the Annalen des Wiener-Museums, purchased botanical collections and expensive botanical books, and published his own works and works of other writers. His official salary was small, and having exhausted his resources in these various expenses, he put an end to his own life in March 1849. Endlicher was not only one of the most eminent systematists of his day, but a philologist also, and a good linguist. He wrote among other things a Chinese grammar. See ‘Linnaea,’ vol. xxxiii (1864 and 1865), p. 583.

[40] John Lindley, Professor of Botany in the University of London, was born at Chatton near Norwich in 1799, and died in London in 1865.

[41] Auguste de Saint Hilaire was born at Orleans in 1779, and died there in 1853; he was Professor at Paris, and in 1840 published his ‘LeÇons de Botanique comprenant principalement la Morphologie VÉgÉtale,’ etc. This work contains a somewhat diffuse account of P. de Candolle’s doctrine of symmetry, together with Goethe’s theory of metamorphosis and Schimper’s doctrine of phyllotaxis, and his own views also on classification founded on the comparative morphology of the day. It is marked by fewer errors than will be found in Lindley’s theoretical writings, but it is less profound, and touches only incidentally on fundamental questions; at the same time it possesses historical interest as giving a lucid description of the state of morphology before 1840.

[42] See Wigand, ‘Geschichte und Kritik der Metamorphose,’ Leipzig, 1846, p. 38.

[43] See Goethe’s collected works in forty volumes, Cotta, 1858, vol. xxxvi.

[44] See Haeckel, ‘NatÜrliche SchÖpfungsgeschichte,’ ed. 4, 1873, p. 80.

[45] Louis Marie Aubert du Petit-Thouars was born in Anjou in 1758 and collected plants during many years in the Mauritius, Madagascar, and Bourbon. He was afterwards Director of the Botanic Garden at Roule, and became Member of the Academy in 1820. He died in 1831. His articles in the ‘Biographie Universelle’ prove him to have been a writer of ability. Preconceived opinions interfered with the success of his own investigations, especially into the increase in thickness of woody stems, and obstinate adherence to such notions prevented an unbiassed interpretation of what he saw. See Flora, 1845, p. 439.

[46] K. F. Schimper, born in Mannheim in 1803, was at first a student of theology in Heidelberg, but having afterwards travelled as a paid collector of plants in the south of France, he applied himself to the study of medicine. From 1828 to 1842 he was employed as a teacher in the University of Munich, though occasionally engaged in exploring the Alps, Pyrenees, and other districts, in the service of the King of Bavaria. It was during this period of his life that he composed his most important works on phyllotaxis, and essays on the former extension of glaciers, and on the glacial period. He returned to the Palatinate in 1842, and died at Schwetzingen in 1867 in the enjoyment of a pension from the Grand duke of Baden.

[47] See Hofmeister, ‘Allgemeine Morphologie’ (1868), pp. 471, 479, and Sachs, ‘Lehrbuch der Botanik,’ ed. 4 (1874), p. 195.

[48] See NÄgeli, ‘BeitrÄge zur Wissenschaftlichen Botanik’ (1858), I, pp. 40, 49.

[49] A comparison of the two theories and a refutation of Schleiden’s assertion, that that of the brothers Bravais expresses better ‘the simplicity of the law,’ will be found in ‘Flora,’ 1847, No. 13, from the pen of Sendtner, and in Braun’s ‘VerjÜngung,’ p. 126.

[50] This is not at all true of modern inductive science, which merely forms a different idea of the connection, and has regard to the relation between the percipient subject and the phenomena.

[51] See A. Bayer, ‘Leben und Wirken F. Unger’s,’ Gratz (1872), p. 52.

[52] See Darwin’s repudiation of this statement on p. 421 of Ed. 6 of the ‘Origin of Species.’

[53] Casimir Christoph Schmidel was born in 1718 and died in 1792; he was Professor of Medicine in Erlangen, and was the first who described the sexual organs in various Liverworts.

[54] Lantzius Beninga, born in East Friesland in 1815, was a professor in GÖttingen, and died in 1871.

[55] Gottlieb Wilhelm Bischoff was born at DÜrkheim on the Hardt in 1797, and died as Professor of Botany at Heidelberg in 1854. He wrote various manuals and text-books which are careful and industrious compilations, but being entirely conceived in the spirit of the times preceding Schleiden they are now obsolete; his investigations however into the Hepaticae, Characeae, and Vascular Cryptogams, illustrated by very beautiful drawings from his own hand, are still of value; and the same may be said of his ‘Handbuch der botanischen Terminologie und Systemkunde’ on account of its numerous figures.

[56] Karl Adolf Agardh (1785-1859) was until 1835 Professor in Lund, afterwards Bishop of Wermland and Dalsland. Jacob Georg Agardh, born in 1813, was Professor in Lund. William Henry Harvey (1811-1866) was Professor of Botany in Dublin. Friedrich Traugott KÜtzing, born in 1807, was Professor in the Polytechnic School of Nordhausen.

[57] C. G. Nees von Esenbeck published his ‘System der Pilze und SchwÄmme’ in 1816; Th. F. L. Nees von Esenbeck, in conjunction with A. Henty, a ‘System der Pilze’ in 1837. The first (1776-1858) was for a long time President of the Leopoldina, Professor of Botany in Breslau, and one of the chief representatives of the nature-philosophy. Elias Fries, born in 1794, became Professor of Botany in Upsala in 1835; he died in 1878. LÉveillÉ (1796-1870) was a physician in Paris. August Joseph Corda was born at Reichenberg in Bohemia in 1809, and became custodian of the National Museum in Prague in 1835; he undertook a journey to Texas in 1848, from which he never returned, having probably perished by shipwreck in 1849. Weitenweber, in the ‘Abhandlungen der BÖhmischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaft,’ Bd. 7, Prag, 1852, gives a full account of this eminent mycologist. Corda was the first who thoroughly applied the microscope to copying and describing every form of Fungus that was known to him, and especially the minuter ones. His ‘Icones Fungorum hucusque cognitorum’ (1837-1854) are still an indispensable manual in the study of the subject.

[58] Jean Pierre Étienne Vaucher, the instructor and friend of P. de Candolle, was a minister and professor in Geneva.

[59] Trentepohl’s communication is to be found in the ‘Botanische Bermerkungen und Berichtigungen’ of A. W. Roth, Leipsic, 1807.

[60] Pier’ Antonio Micheli, born at Florence in 1679, was Director of the Botanic Garden there, and died in 1737. Johann Jacob Dillen (Dillenius), born in Darmstadt in 1687, was Professor of Botany in Oxford, and died in 1747. These two botanists were the first who submitted the Mosses and the lower Cryptogams to scientific examination, and endeavoured to prove the presence of sexual organs in these plants.

[61] Jacob Christian Schaeffer, born in 1718, was Superintendent in Regensburg; he died in 1790.

[62] See Sachs, ‘Lehrbuch der Botanik,’ ed. 4 (1874), p. 245.

[63] Fr. Wilh. Wallroth, born in the Harz in 1792, was district physician at Nordhausen. He died in 1857. See ‘Flora’ for 1857, p. 336.

[64] Robert Hooke, born in 1635 at Freshwater in the Isle of Wight, was a man of marvellous industry and varied acquirement in spite of a delicate constitution. He became a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1662, and was afterwards its Secretary and Professor of Geometry in Gresham College. He died in 1703. There is a good account of him by de l’Aulnaye in the ‘Biographie Universelle.’

[65] Marcello Malpighi, born at Crevalcuore near Bologna in 1628, became Doctor of Medicine in 1653, and after 1656 was Professor in Bologna, Pisa, Messina, and a second time in Bologna; in 1691 he was named Physician to Innocent XII. He died in 1694. On his services to comparative anatomy, and the anatomy of the human body, see the ‘Biographie Universelle’ and Carus, ‘Geschichte der Zoologie,’ p. 395.

[66] We read at p. 3: ‘Componuntur expositae fistulae (spirales) zona tenui et pellucida, velut argentei coloris, lamina parum lata, quae spiraliter locata et extremis lateribus unita tubum interius et exterius aliquantulum asperum efficit; quin et avulsa zona capites seu extremo trachearum tum plantarum tum insectorum non in tot disparatos annulos resolvitur, ut in perfectorum trachea accidit; sed unica zona in longum soluta et extensa extrahitur.’

[67] Nehemiah Grew, the son of a clergyman in Coventry, appears to have been born in 1628. Having taken a Doctor’s degree in a foreign University, he practised as a physician in his native town, and pursued at the same time his phytotomical researches. He became Secretary to the Royal Society in 1677, and published his ‘Cosmographia Sacra’ in 1701. He died in 1711. See the ‘Biographie Universelle.’

[68] Leeuwenhoek’s observations in animal anatomy were perhaps more important than those which he made in botany. Carus (‘Geschichte der Zoologie,’ p. 399) says of him: ‘While Malpighi used the microscope with system and in accordance with the requirements of a series of investigations, the instrument in the hands of the other famous microscopist of the 17th century was more or less a means of gratifying the curiosity excited in susceptible minds by the wonders of a world which had hitherto been invisible. Still the discoveries, which were the fruit of an assiduous use of the microscope continued during fifty years, embraced many subjects and were important and influential. Anton von Leeuwenhoek was born in Delft in 1632. Being intended for trade, he had not the advantage of a learned education and is said even to have been ignorant of Latin; his favourite occupation was the preparing superior lenses, with which he incessantly examined new objects without being guided at any time by a scientific plan. The Royal Society of London, to whom he communicated his observations, made him a member of their body. He died in his native town in 1723, being ninety years of age.

[69] This subject will be noticed again in the history of the sexual theory.

[70] C. F. Wolff was born at Berlin in 1733. He studied anatomy under Meckel and botany under Gleditsch, in the Collegium Medico-chirurgicum in that city. He afterwards resorted to the University of Halle, and there made acquaintance with the philosophy of Leibnitz and Wolff, which predominates too much in his dissertation, ‘Theoria Generationis’ (1759). Haller, the representative of the theory of evolution against which this work was directed, replied to it in a kindly spirit and entered into a correspondence with its youthful author. After lecturing on medicine in Breslau, he was admitted to teach physiology and other subjects in the Collegium Medico-chirurgicum in Berlin, but was twice passed over in the appointment to professorships in that institution. He received an appointment in the Academy of St. Petersburg from the Empress Catherine II in 1766, and died in that city in 1794. See Alf. Kirchhoff, ‘Idee der Pflanzenmetamorphose,’ Berlin, 1867.

[71] Johannes Hedwig, the founder of the scientific knowledge of the Mosses, was born at Kronstadt in SiebenbÜrgen in 1730. Having completed his studies at Leipsic, he returned to his native town, but was not permitted to practice there as a physician because he had not taken a degree in Austria. He consequently went back to Saxony and settled first at Chemnitz, and in 1781 in Leipsic. Here he was appointed in 1784 to the Military Hospital, and became Professor extraordinary of Medicine in 1786 and ordinary Professor of Botany in 1789. He died 1799. He commenced his botanical studies as a student at the University, and continued them in Chemnitz under trying circumstances, till as Professor he was free to devote himself entirely to them.

[72] See P. Harting, ‘Das Mikroskop,’ §§ 433 and 434.

[73] Johann Jakob Bernhardi, born in 1774, was Professor of Botany in Erfurt, and died there in 1850.

[74] Karl Asmus Rudolphi, born at Stockholm in 1771, was Professor of Anatomy and Physiology in Berlin, and died there in 1832.

[75] Heinrich Friedrich Link was born at Hildesheim in 1767, and became Doctor of Medicine of GÖttingen in 1788. In 1792 he became Professor of Zoology, Botany, and Chemistry in Rostock, Professor of Botany in 1811 in Breslau, and in 1815 in Berlin, where he died in 1851. He was a clever man of very varied accomplishment, but not a very accurate observer of details, and was held in estimation by many chiefly as a good teacher and philosophic author of popular works on natural science. He was one of the few German botanists in the early part of the present century who aimed at a general knowledge of plants, and combined anatomical and physiological enquiries with solid researches in systematic botany. Of his many treatises on all branches of botanical science, zoology, physics, chemistry, and other subjects, his GÖttingen prize essay must be considered to have contributed most to the advancement of science. Von Martius somewhat overrates his scientific importance in his ‘Denkrede auf H. F. Link’ in the ‘Gelehrte Anzeigen,’ MÜnchen (1851), 58-69.

[76] Ludolf Christian Treviranus, born at Bremen in 1779, became Doctor of Medicine of Jena in 1801, and practised at first in his native town, where he became a teacher at the Lyceum in 1807. In 1812 he accepted the professorship in Rostock vacated by Link, and was again his successor in Breslau. In 1830 he exchanged posts with C. G. Nees von Esenbeck, who was a professor in Bonn; he died in that town in 1864. In the first part of his life he occupied himself chiefly with vegetable anatomy and physiology, afterwards with the determination and correction of species. His first works, which are noticed in the text, and the treatises on sexuality and the embryology of the Phanerogams, published between 1815 and 1828, are the most important in a historical point of view. His ‘Physiologie der GewÄchse’ in two volumes (1835-1838) is still of value for its accurate information on the literature of the subject; but it can scarcely be said to have contributed to the advance of physiology, for its author adhered in it to the old views, and especially to the notion of the vital force, at a time when new ideas were already asserting themselves. The ‘Botanische Zeitung’ for 1864, p. 176, contains a notice of his life.

[77] Charles FranÇois Mirbel (Brisseau-Mirbel) was born at Paris in 1776, and died in 1854. He began life as a painter, but having been introduced by Desfontaines to the study of botany, he became Member of the Institute in 1808, and soon after Professor in the University of Paris. From 1816 to 1825 the cares of administration withdrew him from his botanical studies, but he resumed them and became in 1829 Professeur des cultures in the Museum of Natural History. Mirbel was the founder of microscopic vegetable anatomy in France. All that had been accomplished there before his time was still more unimportant than the work done in Germany. His writings involved him in many controversies, and he made enemies by refusing in his capacity of teacher to allow the importance at that time attributed to systematic botany, but directed his pupils to the study of structure and the phenomena of life in plants. We are told by Milne-Edwards that he suffered much from the fierce attacks which were made upon him; he sank at last into a weak and apathetic state, and was for some time before his death unable to continue his studies or official duties (‘Botanische Zeitung’ for 1855, p. 343).

[78] Johann Jakob Paul Moldenhawer was Professor of Botany in Kiel; he was born at Hamburg in 1766, and died in 1827.

[79] On the doubts which were entertained till after 1812 on the subject of stomata, see Mohl’s ‘Ranken und Schlingpflanzen’ (1827), p. 9.

[80] Franz Julius Ferdinand Meyen was born at Tilsit in 1804, and died as Professor in Berlin in 1840. He applied himself at first to pharmacy and afterwards to medicine, and having taken a degree in 1826 he practised for some years as a physician. In 1830 he set out on a voyage round the world under instructions from A. von Humboldt, and returned in 1832 with large collections. He was made Professor in Berlin in 1834. There is a notice of his life in ‘Flora’ of 1845, p. 618.

[81] Hugo Mohl (afterwards von Mohl) was born at Stuttgart in 1805, and died as Professor of Botany in TÜbingen in 1872. His father held an important civil office under the Government of WÜrtemberg. Robert Mohl, also in the service of the Government, Julius Mohl, the Oriental scholar, and Moritz Mohl, the political economist, were his brothers. The instruction at the Gymnasium at Stuttgart, which he attended for twelve years, was confined to the study of the ancient languages; but Mohl early evinced a preference for natural history, physics, and mechanics, and devoted himself in private to these subjects. He became a student of medicine in TÜbingen in 1823, and took his degree in 1828. He then spent several years in Munich in intercourse with Schrank, Martius, Zuccharini and Steinheil and obtained abundant material for his researches into Palms, Ferns, and Cycads. He became Professor of Physiology in Berne in 1832, and Professor of Botany in TÜbingen after SchÜbler’s death in 1835, and there he remained till his death, refusing various invitations to other spheres of work. He was never married, and his somewhat solitary life of devotion to his science was of the simplest and most uneventful kind. He was intimately acquainted with all parts of botanical science, and possessed a thorough knowledge of many other subjects; he was in fact a true and accomplished investigator of nature. A very pleasing sketch of his life from the pen of De Bary is to be found in the ‘Botanische Zeitung’ of 1872, No. 31.

[82] But von Mohl expressed some doubts on this point in 1844 (‘Botanische Zeitung,’ p. 340).

[83] This tertiary layer was at first supposed by Theodor Hartig to be of general occurrence; von Mohl in 1844 considered it to be present only in certain cases.

[84] Anselm Payen (1795-1871) was born at Paris and was Professor of Industrial Chemistry in the École des Arts et MÉtiers in that city. His most important botanical works were his ‘MÉmoire sur l’amidon,’ etc., Paris (1839), and his ‘MÉmoire sur le dÉveloppement des VÉgÉtaux,’ published in the Memoirs of the Academy of Paris.

[85] On this point, see von Mohl’s citation in ‘Flora’ of 1827, p. 13. I have not myself been able to consult the originals.

[86] See Meyen, ‘Neues System,’ ii. 344.

[87] Franz Unger was born in 1800 on the estate of Amthof, near Leutschach in South Steiermark, and was educated up to the age of sixteen in the Benedictine Monastery of Gratz. Having gone through the three years’ course of ‘philosophy,’ he turned his attention, by his father’s wish, to jurisprudence; but he abandoned this study in 1820, and became a student of medicine, first in Vienna, and afterwards in Prague. From the latter place he made a vacation tour in Germany, and formed the acquaintance of Oken, Carus, Rudolphi, and other men of science, and in 1825 of Jacquin and Endlicher, with the latter of whom he maintained an active correspondence on scientific subjects. Having taken his degree in 1827, he practised as a physician in Vienna till the year 1830, and after that date was medical official at KitzbÜhl in the Tyrol. During these years he continued the botanical studies which he had commenced as a youth, and at KitzbÜhl directed special attention to the diseases of plants, to palaeontological researches, and to enquiries into the influence of soil on the distribution of plants. At the end of 1835 he became Professor of Botany at the Johanneum in Gratz, and devoting himself there especially to the study of palaeontology, he soon became the most eminent authority on that subject. Having been made Professor of Vegetable Physiology in Vienna in 1849, he applied himself more to physiology and phytotomy. He retired from this position in 1866, and from that time forward lived as a private individual in Gratz, promoting scientific knowledge by the publication of popular treatises and the delivery of lectures. He died in 1870. Information respecting his personal character and his varied and copious labours in many departments of botanical science is given by Leitgeb in the ‘Botanische Zeitung’ of 1870, No. 16, and by Reyer, ‘Leben und Wirken des Naturhistoriker Unger,’ Gratz, 1871.

[88] Hermann Schacht was born at Ochsenwerder in 1824, and died in 1864 in Bonn, where he had been Professor of Botany since 1859.

[89] See Sachs, ‘Lehrbuch der Botanik,’ ed. 4 (1874), p. 129 (p. 128 of 2nd English edition).

[90] See Ernst Meyer, ‘Geschichte der Botanik,’ I. p. 98, &c.

[91] The edition here used is that of Gottlob Schneider, ‘Theophrasti Eresii quÆ supersunt opera,’ Leipzig, 1818. See in addition to the passages noticed in the text the ‘De Causis,’ l. I. c. 13. 4, and l. IV. c. 4, and the ‘Historia Plantarum,’ l. II. c. 8.

[92] It should be understood that neither Theophrastus nor the botanists of the 16th and 17th centuries considered the rudiments of the fruit to be part of the flower; this, which was pointed out in the history of systematic botany, seems to have been overlooked by Meyer, ‘Geschichte,’ I. p. 164.

[93] The passage is quoted in full in De Candolle’s ‘Physiologie vÉgÉtale,’ 1835, ii. p. 44. It is said there of the pollen, ‘Ipso et pulvere etiam feminas maritare.’

[94] See De Candolle, ‘Physiologie vÉgÉtale,’ p. 47.

[95] His ‘Methodus Herbaria’ is said to have been published in 1592. The remarks in the text are made in reliance on a long quotation from it in Roeper’s translation of De Candolle’s ‘Physiologie,’ ii. p. 49, who had before him an edition of 1604.

[96] In the ‘Compositae,’ however, Grew called the single flowers the florid attire, see p. 37.

[97] We may compare with this, pp. 38 and 39 of the first part of the work which appeared in 1671, where Grew ascribed no sexual significance to the stamens.

[98] Rudolph Jacob Camerarius was born at TÜbingen in 1665 and died there in 1721. Having completed the course of study in philosophy and medicine, he travelled from 1685 to 1687 in Germany, Holland, England, France, and Italy. In 1688 he became Professor Extraordinary and Director of the Botanic Garden in TÜbingen; in 1689 Professor of Natural Philosophy; and finally, in 1695, First Professor of the University, in succession to his father, Elias Rudolph Camerarius. He was afterwards succeeded by his son Alexander, one of ten children. There is an article on Camerarius in the ‘Biographie Universelle,’ from the pen of Du Petit-Thouars. His works on other subjects, as well as those on the question of sexuality in plants, are distinguished by ingenious conception and lucid exposition.

[99] See Patrick Blair’s ‘Botanic Essays,’ in two parts (1720), pp. 242-276. Even the Latin ode is borrowed without acknowledgment.

[100] The account in the text is taken from Koelreuter’s report in his ‘Historie der Versuche Über das Geschlechte der Pflanzen,’ as given at p. 188 of Mikan’s ‘Opuscula Botanici Argumenti.’ Logan’s work, ‘Experimenta et Meletamata de Plantarum Generatione,’ unknown to me, is said by Pritzel to have been published at the Hague in 1739. Koelreuter cites from a London edition of 1747.

[101] Koelreuter’s report in Mikan’s collection is again the authority which is here relied on.

[102] Koelreuter says that he sent pollen of Chamaerops in 1766 to St. Petersburg and to Berlin, where it was successfully employed by Eckleben and Gleditsch. He wished to try how long the pollen retains its efficacy.

[103] See Vol. II. p. 502, of the ‘Physiologie vÉgÉtale.’

[104] See Mikan, ‘Opuscula Botanici Argumenti,’ p. 180.

[105] Joseph Gottlieb Koelreuter was born at Sulz on the Neckar in 1733, and died at Carlsruhe in 1806, where he was Professor of Natural History, and from 1768 to 1786 Director also of the Botanic and Grand-ducal Gardens. On giving up the latter position he continued his experiments in his own small garden till the year 1790. Karl Friedrich GÄrtner in his work ‘Ueber Bastardzeugung’ of 1849, at p. 5 says that after the latter date Koelreuter occupied himself with experiments in alchemy; but this must be a mistake. GÄrtner, loco cit., and the ‘Flora’ of 1839, p. 245, supply all that seems to be known of the life of this distinguished man. The ‘Biographic Universelle’ contains no account of him. It would appear that he was in St. Petersburg before 1766.

[106] See GÄrtner, ‘Ueber Bastardzeugung’ (1849), p. 62. I have unfortunately been unable to meet with the second continuation of Koelreuter’s work.

[107] Christian Konrad Sprengel, born in 1750, was for some time Rector at Spandau. There he began to occupy himself with botany, and devoted so much time to it that he neglected the duties of his office, and even the Sunday’s sermon, and was removed from his post. He afterward lived a solitary life in straitened circumstances in Berlin, being shunned by men of science as a strange, eccentric person. He supported himself by giving instruction in languages and in botany, using his Sundays for excursions, which any one who chose could join on payment of two or three groschen. He met with so little support and encouragement that he never brought out the second part of his famous work; his publisher did not even give him a copy of the first part. Natural disgust at the neglect with which his work was treated made him forsake botany and devote himself to languages. He died in 1816. One of his pupils wrote a very hearty eulogium on him in the ‘Flora’ of 1819, p. 541, which has supplied the above facts.

[108] See Hermann MÜller, ‘Befruchtung der Blumen durch Insecten,’ Leipzig (1873). p. 5.

[109] Lazaro Spallanzani was born at Scandiano in Modena, and died at Pavia in 1799, where he was for a long time Professor of Natural History. He made researches in very various questions of natural science, and especially in animal physiology; but they seem to have been conducted with the same want of care and deliberation which appears in his experiments on sexuality in plants. A long article in the ‘Biographie Universelle’ gives a detailed account of his scientific labours.

[110] August Henschel was a practising physician and a University teacher in Breslau.

[111] Karl Friedrich GÄrtner, son of Joseph GÄrtner, was born at Calw in 1772, and died there in 1850. He attended lectures on natural science at the Carlsacademie at Stuttgart, and then went first to Jena for medical instruction, and in 1795 to GÖttingen, where he was a pupil of Lichtenberg. He took a degree in 1796 and settled as a physician in his native town. Here he occupied himself at first with questions of human physiology, and afterwards worked at the supplement to his father’s ‘Carpologia.’ He collected notices and extracts for a complete work on vegetable physiology. This design was never fulfilled, but it led to his taking up the question of sexuality in plants, to which he devoted twenty-five years (‘Jahresheft des Vereins fÜr vaterl. Naturkunde in WÜrtemberg,’ 1852, vol. viii, p. 16).

[112] See also Sachs, ‘Lehrbuch der Botanik,’ Leipzig, 1874.

[113] The more important works referred to in this section are Robert Brown’s ‘Miscellaneous Writings,’ edited by Bennett, 1866-67; von Mohl on G. Amici, in the ‘Botanische Zeitung,’ 1863, Beilage, p. 7; Schleiden, ‘Ueber die Bildung des Lichens und Entsichung des Embryos,’ in ‘Nova Acta Academiae Leopoldinensis,’ 1839, vol. xi, Abtheilung, 1; Hofmeister, ‘Zur Uebersicht der Geschichte von der Lehre der Pflanzenbefruchtung,’ in ‘Flora’ of 1867, p. 119.

[114] The authorities for these statements are collected by Hofmeister in ‘Flora,’ 1857, p. 120, etc.

[115] W. P. Schimper, in his ‘Recherches anatomiques et morphologiques sur les Mousses’ of 1850, had made some important statements respecting the sterility of female moss-plants growing at a distance from male specimens, and proved that the presence of male plants among females that are otherwise barren renders them fruitful.

[116] See the Fragments of Aristotelian phytology in Meyer’s ‘Geschichte der Botanik,’ i. p. 120.

[117] J. B. van Helmont was born at Brussels in 1577, and died at Villvorde near Brussels in 1644. He was a leading representative of the chemistry of his day. Kopp, in his ‘Geschichte der Chemie,’ 1843, i. p. 117, has given a full account of his life and labours.

[118] J. D. Major, who was born at Breslau in 1639, and died at Stockholm in 1693, is quoted by Christian Wolff, as well as by Reichel (‘De vasis plantarum.’ 1758, p. 4) and others, as the founder of the theory of circulation, which he propounded in 1665 in his ‘Dissertatio Botanica de planta monstrosa Gottorpiensi,’ etc. Kurt Sprengel (‘Geschichte der Botanik, ii. p. 7) classes him also among the defenders of the doctrine of palingenesia, a superstitious belief in the reproduction of plants and animals from their ashes, which was used to prove the resurrection of the dead.

[119] He says, ‘in mediis vasculis reticularibus,’ which when taken in connection with his general histology, must be understood to mean the bast-bundles.

[120] The date of the birth of Edme Mariotte is not known. He was a native of Burgundy, and lived in Dijon at the time of his earliest scientific labours. He was an ecclesiastic and became Prior of St. Martin sous Beaune near Dijon; he was a Member of the Academy of Sciences in Paris from its foundation in 1666, and was one of the first Frenchmen who experimented in physics and applied mathematics to them. He died in Paris in 1684 (‘Biographie Universelle’).

[121] See the Fragments of Aristotelian phytology in Meyer’s ‘Geschichte der Botanik,’ i. pp. 119, 125.

[122] His views are known to me only from Magnol’s paper in the ‘Histoire de l’AcadÉmie Royale des Sciences,’ 1709, and Sprengel’s ‘Geschichte der Botanik,’ ii. 20. Perrault’s treatise is according to Pritzel’s ‘Thesaurus’ of the date of 1680, but is published in the ‘Œuvres divers de Perrault’ of 1721.

[123] Especially in pages 1165, 1201, 2067, 2119.

[124] Stephen Hales was born in the county of Kent in 1677 and was educated at home without showing any special ability. At the age of nineteen he became a member of Christ’s College in Cambridge, and there showed his taste for physics, mathematics, chemistry, and natural history. Nevertheless he took orders and held Church preferment in different counties. He became a Member of the Royal Society in 1718, and read before it his ‘Statical Essays.’ His ‘HÆmostatics’ appeared in 1733. He made and published other investigations and discoveries of very various kinds before his death in 1761. He was buried in his church at Riddington, which he had rebuilt at his own cost, and the Princess of Wales caused an inscription to his memory to be placed in Westminster Abbey. See his Éloge in ‘Histoire de l’AcadÉmie Royale des Sciences,’ 1762.

[125] See Sprengel, ‘Geschichte der Botanik,’ i. 229, and Reichel’s and Bonnet’s works mentioned below.

[126] Georg Christian Reichel was born in 1727 and died in 1771. He was Professor in the University of Leipsic.

[127] Charles Bonnet, born at Geneva in 1720, sprang from a wealthy family, and was intended for the profession of the law, but gave himself up from an early age to scientific pursuits, and especially to zoology. He was afterwards a member of the great council of Geneva, and wrote various treatises on scientific subjects, psychology, and theology. He died on his properly at Genthod near Geneva in 1793. See the ‘Biographie Universelle’ and Carus, ‘Geschichte der Zoologie,’ p. 526.

[128] See p. 35 of the German translation by Arnold, 1762.

[129] Henri Louis du Hamel du Monceau was born at Paris in 1700 and died in 1781. He had an estate in the Gatinais, and turned his studies in physics, chemistry, zoology, and botany to account in the composition of a number of treatises on agriculture, the management of woods and forests, naval affairs, and fisheries. He was made Member of the Academy in 1728 on presenting to it an essay on a disease then raging in the saffron-plantations, and caused by the growth of a fungus (‘Biographie Universelle’).

[130] See Kopp, ‘Geschichte der Chemie’ (1843), i. p. 306, and ‘Entwicklung der Chemie in der neucrenzeit’ (1873), p. 138.

[131] Still less was gained from an observation made by Bonnet, that leaves exposed to sun-light in water containing air show bubbles of gas on their upper surface. Bonnet expressly denied the active participation of the leaves in the phenomenon, since the same thing happens with dead leaves in water containing air.

[132] Jan Ingen-Houss, physician to the Emperor of Austria, practised first in Breda, and afterwards in London. He was born at Breda in Holland in 1730, and died near London in 1799.

[133] Jean Senebier, born at Geneva in 1742, was the son of a tradesman, and after 1765 pastor of the Evangelical Church. On his return from a visit to Paris he published his ‘Moral Tales,’ and at the suggestion of his friend Bonnet competed for a prize offered at Haarlem for an essay on the Art of Observation. He was awarded the second place in this competition. In 1769 he became pastor at Chancy, and in 1773 librarian of Geneva. At this time, among other literary labours, he translated Spallanzani’s more important writings; he also studied chemistry under Tingry, and carried out his researches into the influence of light. In 1791 he wrote an article for the ‘Encyclopaedie mÉthodique’ on vegetable physiology. The revolution in Geneva drove him into the Canton Vaud, and there he composed his ‘Physiologie vÉgÉtale,’ in five volumes. He returned to Geneva in 1799 and took part in a new translation of the Bible. He died in that city in 1809 (‘Biographie Universelle’).

[134] Nicolas ThÉodore de Saussure was born at Geneva in 1767, and died there in 1845. He was the son of the famous explorer of the Alps, and assisted his father in his observations on Mont Blanc and the Col du GÉant. In 1797 he wrote his treatise on carbonic acid in its relation to vegetation, a prelude to his ‘Recherches chimiques’; the latter work received great attention from the scientific world, and he was made a corresponding member of the French Institute. He was a man of literary tastes, and took part also in public affairs, being repeatedly elected to the Council of Geneva. His preference for a secluded life is said to have been the reason why he never undertook the duties of a professorship. See the supplement to the ‘Biographie Universelle’ and Poggendorf’s ‘Biographisch-litterarisches HandwÖrterbuch.’

[135] Henri Joachim Dutrochet, born in 1776, was a member of a noble family which belonged to the department of the Indre and lost its property during the revolution; he therefore adopted medicine as a profession, and took his degree at the Faculty of Paris in 1806. He was attached to the armies in Spain as military surgeon in 1808 and 1809; but he retired as soon as possible from practice and devoted himself in great seclusion to his physiological pursuits, living for some years in Touraine. He was made corresponding member of the Academy in 1819, and communicated his discoveries to that body. Becoming an ordinary member in 1831, he spent the winter months from that time forward in Paris. He died in 1847 after two years’ suffering from an injury to the head. Dutrochet was one of the most successful champions, in animal as well as vegetable physiology, of the modern ideas which displaced the old vitalistic school of thought after 1820. See the ‘Allgemeine Zeitung’ for 1847, p. 780.

[136] See above on page 513.

[137] Thomas Andrew Knight, President of the Horticultural Society, was born at Wormsley Grange, near Hereford, in 1758, and died in London in 1838.

[138] See ‘Arbeiten des botanischen Institutes in WÜrzburg,’ vol. i. p. 99.