784 A TEXTBOOK OF THEORETICAL BOTANY 



The eighteenth century was almost barren in studies of plant anatomy, 

 except for Kaspar Friedrich Wolff (1733-94), who studied meristems and 

 tried to formulate a theory of apical development, and Sir John Hill (1716- 

 75), who published in 1770 a book on the structure of timber, following 

 in Grew's footsteps. 



The nineteenth century saw a revival of interest, with the publication in 

 1802 of a theory of plant organization by C. F. Brisseau-Mirbel (1776-1854), 

 and a work on vessels by J. J. Bernhardi (1774- 1850). Their views were 

 opposed by Kurt Sprengel (1766- 1833), and the controversy led to the 

 offer, in 1804, by the Royal Society of Gottingen of a prize for an essay on 

 plant anatomy. Three treatises were submitted by the following : K. A. 

 Rudolphi (1771-1832), H. F. Link (1767-1851) and L. C. Treviranus (1779- 

 1864). The two former divided the prize, though posterity has judged the 

 last to have been the best. All three, however, as well as the work of J. J. P. 

 Moldenhawer (1766-1827), have only an historical interest, and it is not till 

 we come to the work of Hugo von Mohl (1805-72) and Carl von Naegeli 

 (18 1 7-91) that we find a recognizably modern outlook founded on a clear 

 perception of cellular structure, based upon the Cellular Theory of organiz- 

 tion, as it was elaborated by Schleiden and Schwann. 



From this time onwards the study of Angiosperm anatomy became 

 widespread. Some work, notably that of the French school, has been 

 influenced only by a spirit of pure anatomical inquiry, but in the great 

 majority of cases the work done has been inspired by other motives, the 

 two principal aims being either physiological or systematic, that is to say 

 that the plant has been viewed either as a functioning mechanism or else 

 as a member of a group of forms related in the evolutionary sense. Relatively 

 little, until recently, has been inspired by the desire for morphological 

 interpretation, and a truly comprehensive survey of Angiosperm anatomy 

 from this standpoint has not yet been achieved. 



