THE BASIS OF PLANT CLASSIFICATION 



43 



first clearly grasped the idea of a Genus, 

 and he invented the principle of bi- 

 nomial nomenclature, which, however, 

 he did not apply universally. His best- 

 known work, the " Pinax Theatri 

 Botanici," is one which is still a 

 valuable authority on the early history 

 of nomenclature. 



With the seventeenth century we 

 enter a period in which classification 

 was definitely sought by all botanical 

 authors as the primary necessity of the 

 science. Unfortunately the idea of 

 natural affinities was overlaid by the 

 desire to form a symmetrical and 

 logical classification which would appeal 

 to the mathematical spirit of the age. 

 Hence we now group all these earlier 

 efforts together as " artificial classifica- 

 tions " because all the weight was laid 

 upon one character, which was deemed 

 by the author to be the most important 

 and was rigidly utilized, in violation very 



[Cour/esy of the Royal Horticultural Society 



Fig. 25. — Portrait of Professor John Lindley. 



Fig. 24. — Portrait of Carl von Linne. 



often of clear natural associations. 

 This period lasted from 

 Bauhin to Linnaeus, that is, for 

 about a century, during which 

 several treatises of great learning 

 were produced, still valuable in 

 detail, although their systematic 

 basis was ineffective. We may 

 mention Tournefort (1650- 1708) 

 and Rivinus (1652-1725), who 

 based their classifications on the 

 corolla ; and especially John 

 Ray (1628-1705) (Fig. 23) and 

 Robert Morison (1620-83) in 

 England, who used the fruit as 

 a distinguishing mark. Of these 

 Ray was the greatest naturalist. 

 He had clearly the idea of a 

 natural system in his mind but 

 was unable to produce it him- 

 self. Indeed it was an impos- 

 sibility at the time for lack of 

 information. 



These men paved the way for 



