THE MISSION OF PHARMACOGNOSY. 5 
Accordingly, the aim and position of pharmacognosy appear 
definitely outlined when, beside the questions which it has 
to answer, the boundaries are also drawn beyond which it 
should not pass. It is thus to be understood, when on page 
3, with a less exact expression, mention was made of a “ certain 
degree” of completeness. 
In the fostering of pharmacognosy, botanists and physicians in 
former times have rendered service, aided, indeed, occasionally 
by apothecaries." The most brilliant of such services on the 
part of physicians was brought to a close by the publication in 
London, 1839 and 1840, of ‘The Elements of Materia Medica 
and Therapeutics” by Jonathan Pereira; for, in the mean time, 
the separate and more thorough treatment of pharmacognosy in 
the previously explained direction had been taken in hand by 
pharmacists, and at the earliest period, and with by far the 
greatest success, by Guibourt, the former teacher of this branch 
of science at the Ecole de Pharmacie in Paris.? Similar, though 
less prominent results were accomplished in Germany by 
Johann Bartholomaeus Trommsdorff, of Erfurt, through his 
‘Handbuch der pharmaceutischen Waarenkunde,” Gotha, 1822, 
and particularly, also, by Theodor Wilhelm Christian Martius. 
In his ‘‘Grundriss der Pharmakognosie des Pflanzenreiches,” 
Erlangen, 1822, Martius says that pharmacognosy is to be re- 
garded as ‘‘a part of general materia medica, or that science which 
relates to the examination of the medicinal substances derived 
from the three kingdoms of nature with a view to ascertain 
their source and quality, to test them for their purity, and to 
‘Examples in Flickiger’s ‘“‘ Pharmakognosie,” 2d edition, p. 1,013 
(Pires); p. 992 (Morgan); p. 209 (Bansa). 
* As precursors of Guibourt may be mentioned Nicholas Lémery, 
author of the ‘‘ Traité universel des Drogues et Simples,” 1697, and 
Etienne Francois Geoffroy, whose ‘‘ Tractatus de Materia Medica” ap- 
peared in 1741. These two Parisian apothecaries were, however, more 
properly recognized as physicians. The “ Histoire générale des 
Drogues,” 1694, which is likewise to some extent worthy of considera~ 
tion, has as its author the druggist Pierre Pomet. The three above- 
named publications demonstrate how much pharmacognosy was at that ae 
time indebted to Paris. _ Ce ee 
