82 Oermany. 



His ignorance is characterized by his reference to the 

 "sulphurous and nitric elements of the soil" as cause 

 of spontaneous forest fires. 



Opinionated and one-sided, like many so-called prac- 

 tical men, he came into polemic controversies with other 

 practitioners, not less opinionated, among them J. G. 

 Beckmann, who worked in another part of Saxony, 

 where, having to deal with coniferous woods, he had 

 gathered different experiences from those of Doebel. 

 Although he was himself poorly educated, especially in 

 natural sciences, he complained of the ignorance of the 

 foresters, and in his book (Anweisung zu einer pfleg- 

 lichen Forstwirthschaft, 1759), used for the first time 

 the word Forstwissenschaft (forest science), and insisted 

 upon the necessity of studying nature. 



He may be credited with having really advanced for- 

 est organization by devising the first good volume 

 division method and silviculture by advocating the 

 method of clearing with sowing. 



The first practical forester with a university education 

 was J. J. Biichting, who worked in the Harz mountains. 

 His main interest lay in the direction of survey, division 

 and orderly utilization. He did not, however, make any 

 striking advance, except that he gave equal standing to 

 both planting and sowing. 



The two most eminent practitioners of the period, 

 however, active during the middle of the century, 

 were Johann Oeorg von Lang en and his pupil, Hans 

 Dietrich von Zanthier, both of noble family, and better 

 educated than most of their contemporaries and both en- 

 gaged in the organization and management of Harz 

 mountain forests, namely, those of the Duke of Bruns- 

 wick and of the Count of Stolberg-Wemigerode. 



