GREEK BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE 



historian of botany would seem to be that the 

 botanical ideas of both master and pupil had 

 not an altogether favorable effect upon the 

 progress made by that science, say, from 

 the sixteenth century onwards. ^^ 



Theophrastus would not have been the pupil 

 of his master had he not been impressed with 

 the luring analogies and even continuities ob- 

 served by Aristotle, between the vegetable and 

 animal kingdoms. In fact these observed — 

 or ill-observed — resemblances or analogies 

 not infrequently led him astray, whatever 

 breadth of view they gave him. 



For example: " The primary and most 

 important parts, which are also common to 

 most [plants], are these, root, stem, branch, 

 twig; these are the parts into which we might 

 divide the plant, regarding them as members, 

 corresponding to the members of animals; for 

 each of these is distinct in character from the 

 rest, and together they make up the whole." ^® 



He saw, however, that " we must not assume 

 that in all respects there is complete cor- 

 respondence between plants and animals. And 

 that is why the number also of parts is inde- 

 terminate; for a plant has the power of growth 

 in all its parts, inasmuch as it has life in all its 



[80] 



