LANDMARKS OF BOTANICAL HISTORY GREENE 213 



Thus a cruciferous plant, common in German vineyards and hedge- 

 rows, is made congeneric with wormwood because it has similar 

 foliage, and also is thought to answer to Seriphium in several other 

 particulars. It is a good example of futile effort to identify with 

 the Seriphium of Dioscorides a very different plant of central 

 Europe which Dioscorides never saw, and which, by the way, if he 

 had seen it, he would never have thought of as a kind of worm- 

 wood; for, as we have seen, the Greek did not quite disregard floral 

 structures, but could distinguish genera by anthologic marks. 1 



But Fuchsius' disregard of flowers in these generic groupings 

 is manifest again close by Absinthium, in his Anthemis. The 

 name of the genus and those of all three species are taken up from 

 Dioscorides, as he says, and the following is his identification of 

 them, the names at the right being those now in use. 



Fuchsian Recent 



Anthemis leucanthemon Matricaria chamomilla. 



Anthemis chrysanthemon Anthemis tinctoria. 



Anthemis eranthemon Delphinium Consolida. 



Judged by the modern and improved standards, the locating of a 

 larkspur as congeneric with chamomile is the worst of conceivable 

 taxonomy; and it is impossible that in this Fuchsius interpreted 

 Dioscorides otherwise than erroneously and even almost stupidly. 

 The Greek had habitually looked at the flowers of things, and had 

 shown clearly a tendency to regard the forms of flowers as taxono- 

 mically significant. Concerning Anthemis in particular he declares 

 that the flowers in the three species differ only as to the color of the 

 little leaves that encircle the centers of the flowers, which central 

 part he says is yellow in them all. 2 Now concerning the identity of 

 the white-rayed and the yellow-rayed Anthemis species of Dioscor- 

 ides there never had been any doubt; therefore as to these two 

 Fuchsius was but reiterating the expression of a common opinion. 

 The third member, however, that is, the purple-rayed anthemis, 

 was problematic ; for there is not known in those regions where the 

 ancients botanized a purple-rayed composite having the foliage 

 of an anthemis. But there need not be; for any ranunculus- 

 flowered or anemone-flowered branching herb, if it had the foliage 

 of anthemis might have been relegated to that genus. It is only 

 to the trained eye of the modern botanist that the rayed head of a 



1 See page 180 preceding. 



2 Dioscorides, Book iii, ch. 130. 



