THE CROSSING OF FLOWERS. 287 



days, and in some instances for weeks. If, however, the stigmas of these same 

 plants be artificially pollinated, a quick collapse of their showy perianths is 

 observed. If the view that the gaily-coloured corollas act primarily as allure- 

 ments to insects which visit flowers and transfer pollen require strengthening 

 these results are certainly found to be in accordance. As soon as the end is 

 gained, i.e. as soon as the stigma is pollinated, the further allurement of insects 

 is unnecessary; the petals therefore immediately cease working, fall off or 

 wither, and are no longer divergent — in a word, they have ceased to act as an 

 allurement to insects. This phenomenon can only be explained by supposing that 

 the changes produced in the tissues of the stigma by the developing pollen-grains 

 take effect in ever-widening circles which at length reach the petals, and that 

 by what we may term the stimuli, transmitted from the stigmatic tissue and the 

 ovary to the corolla, a sudden separation between the petals and the rest of the 

 flower and an equally sudden alteration in the turgidity of the petals are brought 

 about. 



It only remains to be mentioned that the early withering and fall of the 

 petals of those flowers which are pollinated soon after opening has a counterpart 

 in the phenomenon of the long duration of double flowers. Double flowers, in 

 particular those whose stamens and carpels have been transformed into petals, 

 remain fresh two, three, even eight days longer than the normal single flowers 

 of the same kind, as may be seen, for example, in Pelargoniums, Tulips, Pinks 

 and Stocks. 



THE CROSSING OF FLOAVERS. 



While Goethe was staying at Carlsbad a young gardener every day brought 

 him a bunch of flowering plants from the visitors assembled at the waters and 

 undergoing the cure. Both men and women were greatly interested in ascertaining 

 the names of these plants with the assistance of the writings of the Swedish 

 botanist Linneeus, whose fame had at that time spread far and wide. This 

 searching for names was called the "naming" or "determining" of plants, and 

 it was prosecuted with great zeal by dilettanti as a sort of puzzle-game and as 

 a pleasant, stimulating pastime. Even in professional circles Linnaeus found a 

 recognition which has rarely been accorded to a contemporary. His method 

 had taken the whole world by storm, and his " system " was everywhere in the 

 ascendant. Of course individual voices were raised against the new teaching, 

 chiefly indeed from the dilettanti. Goethe relates that many of the Carlsbad 

 visitors designated the pursuit of the knowledge of the Vegetable Kingdom 

 according to the Swedish botanist as senseless play which satisfled neither the 

 understanding nor the imaginative faculty, and could relieve no one of ennui. 

 Evidently Goethe also had perceived the weakness of the Linnean method. 

 Besides, he was not concerned with counting or numbers nor the distinction of 

 forms founded on insigniflcant points; he was not interested in the differences 

 of plants, but rather in what they had in common and in what bound the 



