CHAPTERS IN THE EARLY HISTORY OF HEPATICOLOGY. 65 
especially as the word was understood and applied by 
Platearius, Brunfels, Tragus, Lobel, and C. Bauhin, with no 
reference to the plants of Columna. They observe that 
Lobel and Tabernemontanus give three figures but fail to 
show in what respect these forms differ. They make an 
advance in being inclined to reduce these three forms to a 
single species, without, however, giving any definite reason 
for so duing. A single figure of a fruiting Marchantia, 
resembling that of Fuchsius is appended. Why the Lichens 
of Columna are passed over in silence in a “ Historia Uni- 
versalis” is not clear. The authors could not have been 
ignorant of the work of Columna, for his hepatics or 
“lichens,” as we have seen, find a place in the Pinax of 
©. Bauhin, which they quote. 
In the years intervening between the brothers Bauhin and 
John Ray, there appeared three scientific works of varying 
degrees of importance, to each of which Lindberg traces the 
first description of a single hepatic. I have not had access 
to these three works and am thus indebted to Lindberg for 
my knowledge of their treatment of the Hepatice. The 
first of these was the “ Pinax Rerum Naturalium Brittani- 
carum ” of Chr. Merritt (London, 1667) in which is described 
a Lichen capillaceus identified by Lindberg as Anthoceros 
punctatus. In the historically well-known “ Anatome Plan- 
tarum ”? of Malpighi are figures and description of Lunularia 
vulgaris, and, according to Lindberg, there may be found 
also in the second volume of Sibbald’s “Scotia Illustrata” 
(Edinburgh, 1684) a figure and short diagnosis of Plagio- 
chila asplenoides. 
During this century the compound microscope had come 
into use, and we have now entered upon an era of more 
exact knowledge of the structure and affinities of the lower 
plants. This advance becomes very evident in the works of 
that botanist and philosopher, John Ray. Book third of 
the first volume of his “ Historia Plantarum ”® is “about 
herbs with very minute seeds, flower either none or imper- 
7TLondon; vol. IT, 1679. 
8London; vol. I, 1686. 
