16 



THE HISTORY OF ECOLOGY 



lasting end product, even in afiFairs of the 

 intellect, does not necessarily trace back to 

 the work of one brilliant man. 



Certain rule-of-thumb ecological knowl- 

 edge was evidently widespread among the 

 Hebrews of 2000 years ago, though they 

 were not notably a scientific people. The 

 "parable of the sower," for example, shows 

 that the relation between habitat and yield 

 was well understood, though not in these 

 words. 



The Romans used widely distributed folk 

 knowledge in creating the science of agri- 

 culture. In their hands, this grew primarily 

 from hunting and fishing, enriched by early 

 experience with plant and animal hus- 

 bandry. Roman agriculture was fertilized by 

 the writings of the Greeks and put into 

 practice with their own common sense. It 

 was based on empirical ecological observa- 

 tions and was frankly economic in outlook. 



Pliny the Elder (A.D. 23-79), one of the 

 best of the Roman writers of the period, 

 owes his reputation to his Natural History, 

 which was the starting point of modern 

 faunal study. Pliny's account tends to be a 

 confused jumble of compiled notes without 

 logical organization. Nordenskiold (p. 53) 

 defends Pliny against overharsh critics who 

 accuse him of being a soulless compiler, be- 

 cause, "more honest than Aristotle, he 

 quotes his sources." Like Aristotle, Phny 

 used an ecological system of classification. 

 Among his categories we find the recogni- 

 tion of terrestrial, aquatic, and flying 

 animals. 



Ramaley (1940) also recognizes the good 

 in Pliny's work. He quotes with approval 

 the following: "A soil that is adorned by 

 tall and graceful trees is not always a 

 favorable one except of course for those 

 trees. What tree is taller than the fir? Yet 

 what other plant could exist in the same 

 spot? Nor are verdant pastures so many 

 proofs of richness of soil. What is there that 

 enjoys greater renown than the pastures of 

 Germany? But they are a mere thin layer 

 of earth with sand underneath." Here we 

 have a suggestion, not only of plant indica- 

 tors, but also of some of the pitfalls in their 

 use. 



After the Roman spark of interest there 

 were few signs of activity in what we now 

 call ecology. The foundation sciences of 

 geography and climatology were unde- 

 veloped. Even chemistry and physics could 

 not yet lay the groundwork for physiology. 



so that ecology had to wait. For a thou- 

 sand years there was stagnation. When 

 Greek writings again became popular, they 

 were all too slavishly accepted as ultimate 

 authority. 



The Greek spirit of inquiiy was redis- 

 covered in the Renaissance. AJbertus Mag- 

 nus (1193±-1280) wrote, like Theophras- 

 tus, of plants of streamsides and marshes 

 and of the relation between the habitat of 

 a tree and the quaUty of its wood. While 

 there were some signs of scholarly growth 

 from within Europe, yet the development 

 of ecology, as of other phases of biology, 

 stood still or even regressed until the geo- 

 graphic experiences of Marco Polo and of 

 the Portuguese and the catalyzing discovery 

 of America forced biologists to turn from 

 authority to the study of the thing itself. 

 The interest in new animals and plants, 

 their habits, and their possible usefulness, 

 thus helped to bring on the reawakening 

 of science, especially as regards the fore- 

 runners of ecology. 



The writings of Gesner (1516-1565) and 

 Aldrovandi (1522-1605) mark the begin- 

 ning of this movement, which was forced 

 by the accumulation of greater knowledge 

 of local and exotic animals. Greene (1909) 

 writes with high appreciation of the Ger- 

 man herbahst, Cordus, who lived briefly 

 about this time (1515-1544). Concerning 

 the bearing of his work on ecology, Greene 

 says (p. 310) : "We have already been 

 learning that even from most primitive 

 times every botanist was an ecologist; at 

 least to the extent of observing and record- 

 ing the special environment which every 

 kind of wild plant ajffects, and sometimes 

 to the mentioning of some of its associate 

 species. Valerius Cordus, being well-skilled 

 in both chemistry and mineralogy, goes be- 

 yond all his predecessors in that he names 

 the petrography of a plant's habitat or 

 otherwise indicates the constituency of the 

 soil in which it is to be looked for." 



Robert Boyle (1627-1691) is sometimes 

 referred to as the first of the modern 

 chemists. His biological observations were 

 incidental. In 1670 he published the earhest 

 experiments upon the effect of low atmos- 

 pheric pressures on animals. The forms 

 tested comprised mice and young kittens, 

 various birds, including a duck and a 

 duckling, snakes, frogs, and different 

 invertebrates, among them several kinds of 

 insects. The point of view from which he 



