77 



as to the prineiple of natnral classification for wluch I could find no support 

 in DARwm, Haeckel, Exglee, Hallier or othei-s. In the following pages, it 

 is my desire to explain Goethe's " Metainorphose der Pflanzen," and to refer 

 to the principle of natural classification found, as I believe, in his work. To 

 understand his " Metamorphosenlelure " we must have a just and adequate idea 

 of liis Blatt which is as it were the hero of his work. Tlie interpretation 

 of this Blatt is the principal subject of tliis paper. 



The " Metamorphose der Pflanzen," that celebrated work of the gi"eat poet, 

 when looked at fi-om the point of view of modern scientific knowledge, certainly 

 contains many mistakes in minute details ; but the principal idea in it, viz., 

 that, although there are many kinds of vegetable organs, they are after all 

 modifications of one and the same organ - Blatt which becomes, according to 

 different circumstances, a fohage leaf, or a sepal, or something else, i.e. "die 

 GoETHEsche Lehre von der Einheit aller Pflanzengestaltung " is generally 

 oonsidered to be on the whole a quasi-indisputable theor}-. Now, what is 

 that one and the same organ - Blatt proposed by Goethe ? To this questiou, 

 many authors have giveu varying answers. Green^ says in liis History of 

 Botany tliat " his (Gcethe's) idea were not put before liis readers very clearly, 

 and left them sometimes uncertain whether he considered all leaves modifications 

 of some ideal or theoretical form, or whether he held that a structure com- 

 mencing its development in some particular direction might be actually diverted 

 into another, and become something quite different from what it would have 

 become, liad its development not been interfered with." This is an interesting 

 problem, the sohition of which will on the one hand lead us to see directly the 

 mutual relations of vegetable orgaus, and on the other will make us understand 

 iudirectly the relationship between the species themselves. It is, therefore, not only 

 a question of morphology, but also an important problem of s;ystematic botany. 



As far as my investigation into Goethe's studies extends, his methods are 

 generally not inductive, but often deductive, as can be seen by the following 

 quotation***. 



♦ Gbekk, J. R.— A History of Botany (1860-1900) 1909, p. 66. 

 ** CoHN, F.— Die Pflanzen (1896) p. 114. 

 *** BiELscHowsKY, A. — Goetlie, sein Leben uncl seine Werke, IL p. 89. 



