398 SYSTEMATIC BOTANY. 



systems, and can only Le remedied as our knowledge of plants 

 extends ; even a system, devised as perfectly as possible one day, 

 may be deficient the next, in conseqiience of new plants being 

 discovered which might force us to alter our views ; for at 

 present the Floras of many regions of the globe are almost 

 unknown. Sufficient, however, is known of plants at present 

 for us to establish certain great divisions according to a natural 

 method, and which after discoveries are not likely to affect to 

 any important extent. The present imperfections of the Natural 

 System are, accordingly, comparatively unimportant, and will 

 no doubt disappear as our knowledge of the Flora of the globe 

 becomes extended. 



Having now described the general characters upon which the 

 artificial and natural systems depend, and the particular merits 

 and disadvantages of the two classes of systems respectively, we 

 proceed in the next place to describe more particularly the 

 principles upon which such systems are founded, commencing 

 with those of an artificial character. 



Section 1. — Artificial Systems of Classification. 



The first artificial system of any importance, of which we have 

 any particular record, is that of Csesalpinus in 1583. Only 1520 

 plants were then known, which were distributed into fifteen 

 classes, the characters of which were chiefiy derived from the 

 fruit. The next systematic arrangement of an artificial cha- 

 racter was that of Morison, about the year 1670, He divided 

 plants into eighteen classes, which were constructed according 

 to the nature of the flower and fruit, and the external appear- 

 ance of the plant. The systems of Hermann and others, were 

 also constructed upon somewhat similar principles, while that of 

 Camellus was framed from the characters presented by the 

 valves of the pericarp, and their number. In the system of 

 Kivinus, which was promulgated in the year 1690, plants were 

 divided into eighteen classes, which were founded entirely upon 

 the corolla — its regularity or irregularity, and the number of its 

 parts being taken into consideration. The system of Christian 

 Knaut was but a slight alteration of that of Eivinus. That of 

 Tournefort, which was promulgated about the year 1695, was 

 for a considerable time the favourite system of all bo^anists; 

 but it was ultimately superseded by that of Linnseus. About 

 8000 species of plants were then known to botanists ; these 

 were distributed by Tournefort into twenty-two classes. He 

 first arranged plants in two divisions, one of which comprised 

 herbs and imder-shruhs, and the other trees and shrubs ; each of 

 these divisions was then divided into classes, which were chiefly 



