b THE STUDY OF PLANTS IN ANCIENT AXIJ MODERN TIMES. 



{terminus). With the liolp «f the hotaiiical terminology thus formulated it l;)ecame 

 possible not only to abridge the specific descriptions, but also to recognize species 

 from such descriptions, and to determine what name had Vieen given them by 

 botanists, and to what group they belonged. 



Linmeus selected as a basis of classification in the "system" established by him 

 the characteristics of the various parts of the flower. In this system the number, 

 relative length, cohesion, and disposition of the stamens formed the ground of 

 division into "classes." Within each class, "ordei-s" were then differentiated 

 according to the nature of the pistil, especially the number of styles; and each 

 order was again subdivided into more narrowly defined groups, which received 

 the name of "genera." To the 23 classes of Flowering Plants (Phanerogamia) 

 Linnajus added as a 24th class Flowerless Plants (Cryptogamia), which were 

 divided into several groups (Ferns, Mosses, Algas, and Fungi) iu respect of their 

 general appearance and mode of occurrence. 



This system took immediate possession of the civilized world. Englishmen, 

 Germans, and Italians now worked in unison as faithful disciples of Liunajus. 

 Even laymen studied the Linnsean botany with enthusiasm; and it was recommended, 

 especially to ladies, as a harmless pastime, not overtaxing to the mind. In France 

 Rousseau delivered lectures on botany to a circle of educated ladies; whilst even 

 Goethe experienced a strong attraction to the " loveliest of the sciences," as botanj- 

 was called in that day. Linnaeus had introduced for the first time the name 

 " flora" to signify a catalogue of the plants of a more or less circumscribed district. 

 He had himself written a flora of Lapland and Sweden, and bj- doing so had 

 stimulated others to undertake the compilation of similar catalogues; so that bj' 

 the end of the 18th century floras of England, Piedmont, Carniola, Austria, &c., 

 had been produced. By this means a certain perfection was attained iu that field 

 of botany which has only in view the examination of the fullj'-developed external 

 forms of plants, together with the distinguishing, describing, naming, and grouping 

 them, and the enumeration of species indigenous to particular regions. Later on, 

 unfortunately, botanists lost themselves in a maze of dull systematizing. Thej' 

 either contented themselves with collecting, preparing, and arranging herbaria, or 

 else devoted their energies to endless debates over such questions, for instance, as 

 whether a plant, that some author had distinguished from othera and described, 

 deserved to rank as a species, or should be reckoned as a variety dependent on its 

 habitat or on local conditions of temperature, light, and moisture. Thej^ took delight 

 iu now including a group of forms as varieties of a single species, now di\iding 

 some species as described by a particular author into several other species. For 

 this purpose they did not rely upon the only sure method, the determination by 

 cultural experiment of the fact of the constancj- or variabilitj- of the form in 

 question; nor did they, in general, adhere to anj' consistent principle to guide them 

 ill this amusement. 



Aberrations of this kind constituted, however, no serious bari-ier to progress. 

 On the coutraiy, the passion for collecting continued to extend its range. The 



