their collecting trips. We shall mention only a few of these botanists, 

 especially those who were active in the various provinces of Germany 

 and Austria, as well as in other countries of continental Europe. They 

 were Mathiolus, 1 Caesalpinus, 2 Camerarius, 3 C. Bauhin, 4 Clusius 5 and 

 J. Bauhin. 6 These and various other authors discovered and de- 

 scribed in all about twenty-eight kinds of lichens : mostly species 

 belonging to the genera Usnea, Sticta, Cetraria and Cladonia. The 

 descriptions and attempts at illustration were indeed very defective, so 

 that later authors were often at a loss to know what species was really 

 meant. 



Up to this epoch lichens had been given no definite position in the 

 vegetable kingdom. They were variously classified with algae, 

 fungi, liverworts and mosses. About this time also we find the first 

 record of observations made on the development and reproduction of 

 Lichens. Porta 7 gave some very crude explanations of the origin 

 and growth of Lichens. Malpighi 8 was the first author to demon- 

 strate the presence of soredia. He also observed that these struc- 

 tures were propagative organs and for that reason considered them as 

 true seeds. One of the most active lichenologists of this period was 

 the Scotch botanist Morison." He described fifty-six species in all, 

 of which ten were new ; he also gave fairly good illustrations of 

 about twenty-one species. This observer paid little attention, how- 

 ever, to the development of these plants, as is evident from his belief 

 that lichens were excrementitious matter produced by the earth, 

 rocks and trees. 



This brief retrospect gives some idea of how little was known of 

 lichens at the close of this period. Only such forms as were re- 

 markable for their size, color or use in medicine received any at- 

 tention. The use of Rocella tinctoria in the processes of dyeing 



1 Mathiolus, P. A. Commentarii in libros VI Dioscorides de Materia Medica. 

 Venice. 1565 and 1583. 



2 Caesalpinus, A. De Plantis Libri XVI. Florence. 1583. 



3 Camerarius, J. De Plantis Epitome Utilissima, P. A. Mathioli Senensis. Frank- 

 fort-on-the-Main. 1^86. 



4 Bauhin, C. Phytopinax sen Enumeratio Plantarum Nostro Saeculo Descrip- 

 tarum. Basel. 1596. 



5 Clusius, C. Historia Plantarum Rariorum cum Appendice et Auctoria et Fig. 

 urisii35. Antwerp. 1601. 



6 Bauhin, J. Historia Generalis Plantarum Novae et Absolutae Prodromus. 1619. 



7 Porta, J. B. Phytognomonica VIII Libris Contenta. Frankfort. 1591- 



s Malpighi, M. Opera Omnia. London. 1686. 



9 Morison, R. Historia Plantarum Universalis Oxoniensis. 1680. 1699, 1715- 



