98 The Botanical Renaissance [ch. 



5. The Herbal in France. 



France (excluding the French Netherlands) does not 

 seem, at first sight, to have contributed a great deal towards 

 the development of the Herbal in the sixteenth and seven- 

 teenth centuries, but it must be remembered that Jean and 

 Gaspard Bauhin, and the publisher, Christophe Plantin, 

 were French by extraction, though Switzerland and 

 Holland were their countries by adoption. Most of the 

 important herbals published in other languages were 

 translated into French quite early in their history, some- 

 times in a modified form, so that France in the sixteenth 

 century was probably by no means backward in botanical 

 knowledge. One such adaptation was ' L'Histoire des 

 Plantes,' by Geofroy Linocier, which was founded, in part, 

 on the works of Fuchs and Mattioli. 



A well-known name among the earlier French writers 

 is that of Jean Ruel, or Joannes Ruellius, as he is commonly 

 called (1474 — J 537)- He was a physician, and a professor 

 in the University of Paris, and chiefly devoted himself to 

 the emending and explaining of Dioscorides. He also 

 wrote a general botanical treatise, ' De Natura Stirpium,' 

 which first appeared in Paris in 1536. This work, which is 

 without illustrations, is intended mainly to elucidate the 

 ancient writers. 



The most famous of the French herbalists was Jacques 

 d'Alechamps (Text-fig. 50), whose magnum opus, which 

 appeared in 1586, formed a compendium of much of the 

 material which had been contributed by the different 

 nations. He was born at Caen in 15 13, and after studying 

 medicine at Montpelier, entered upon the practice of it at 

 Lyons, where he remained until his death in 1588. 



D'Alechamps' great work is generally called the 

 ' Historia plantarum Lugdunensis.' Curiously enough, 

 the author's name is not mentioned on the title-page. 

 From the preface one would gather that Johannes Molinaus 

 (or Desmoulins) was the chief author. However, judging 

 by the way in which the book was quoted by contemporary 

 writers, there appears to be little doubt that d'Alechamps 



