253 
NOTICES OF BOOKS. 
Nanna oder über das Seelenleben Pflanzen, von Gustav THEODOR 
FECHNER (Nanna, or on the Soul-life of Plants). Leipzig, 1848. 8vo. 
e confine ourselves in our notice of this little volume to a 
translation of the few remarks on it in Botanische Zeitung for 26th 
January last (no. 4) to the reswmé which is there given, and to one or 
two other extracts, leaving it to our reader to form his own judgment 
whether or not to consult the book itself. 
“ This is an attractive book for all who delight in plants and flowers, 
: its aim being to demonstrate that the vegetable kingdom is endowed 
with a soul, though, of course, of its own kind. Even those who 
cannot arrive at the same conclusions with its ingenious and clever 
author, will not regret perusing the book, and may, perhaps, be re- 
minded of some notions of their own not altogether different from those 
here propounded. The title Nanna, has reference to the wife of 
Baldur, the blossom, or the empire of flowers. The contents are 
——— in 18 sections, of which we here give the 17th, containing 
the resumé. 
ske Ehe poeta opinion of mankind concerning nature, and the 
characteristic and esthetic impressions which plants make on us, plead 
much louder in favour of their having a soul, than the predominant popu- 
lar view speaks against its existence. 
* 9. Although plants are more unlike us than animals are, they never- 
theless agree with us and them, as to the principal features of life, 
in such a wise, that, granting that their animation must be different 
from ours, yet are we not warranted to adopt in their case, the funda- 
mental difference between animation and non-animation. Generally, 
there exists that relative completeness in both creations, that the soul- 
life of plants supplies those very blanks, which are left in that of man 
and brutes. | 
** 8, The circumstance that plants want the nerves and similar organs 
ofsensation which belong to animals, proves nothing against their 
having perception; because, on the other hand, they are capable of 
performing certain functions, in a modified form, for which animals 
require nerves and peculiar organs, without the presence of any such 
organs. And, generally, the assertion that any particular form of 
