FHANEROGAMIA : FLOWERS. 311 



cation in the perfecting of the parts contained in the bud ; namely, 

 the several foliar organs and internodes. It has been already 

 shown, that only two essential processes of development, and from 

 those only two essential organs, as fundamental organs, can exist 

 in the plant ; namely, the axis and leaf. All the several parts of 

 the flower must, therefore, be referable to these fundamental organs, 

 and be traced back to them. Since Goethe's time, this tracing 

 back has been termed the Metamorphosis of plants. Originally, 

 this mode of considering the flower rested solely on comparative 

 morphology, and the observation of cases in which the interrup- 

 tion of the usual processes of development, in some or all parts of 

 the flower, caused those parts to reassume forms in which it was 

 not difficult to recognise the nature of the fundamental organ from 

 which they had been produced. This latter has been termed re- 

 trogressive metamorphosis ; as examples of it, we may mention the 

 different monstrosities, the doubling of a flower through the transi- 

 tion of the stamens into petals, the transition of the petals and 

 sepals into the common leaves of the plant, &c. This mode of 

 establishing the foundations of the doctrine of metamorphosis has, 

 however, two essential faults : since, in the first place, it seeks to 

 obtain individual facts by means of hypotheses and comparisons ; 

 while, secondly, its progress depends entirely upon favourable cir- 

 cumstances. The only correct and sure ground on which to rest 

 this doctrine, is the history of development, and this, only quite 

 recently recognised, is as yet pursued by few investigators ; hence 

 the doctrine as a whole still exhibits many deficiencies, imperfec- 

 tions, and uncertainties. 



The doctrine of the metamorphosis of plants is still partially treated 

 as a special section of Botany, although it is in fact no other than an 

 isolated fragmentary application of the only really scientific principle 

 AV Inch botany can at present possess; namely, that of progressive de- 

 velopment. By most persons, however, the matter was long, by some 

 even still, regarded as an agreeable fantasy, playing round science ; the 

 blame of this rested partly upon the mariner in which Metamorphosis 

 was introduced into science. 



Even Linnaeus had a presentiment of something of the kind, and in 

 his Prolepsis Plantarum (Amcenit. Academ. vol. vi. p. 324.) carried it 

 out in such a way, that, starting from the consideration of a perennial 

 plant with regular periodicity of vegetation (as in our forest trees), he 

 explained the collective floral parts from the bracts onward, as the col- 

 lective foliar product of a five-year old shoot, which, by anticipation 

 and modification, was developed in one year. This view is, in the first 

 place, taken from the most limited point possible from the examination 

 of a plant of our climate ; and, secondly, imagined and carried out with 

 great want of clearness. Up to the formation of the flower in the axil 

 of the bract, the matter holds, perhaps ; but from thence the explanation 

 is restricted to the laying down of his untenable, and, in the highest 

 degree, superficial anatomical notions as to the connection of the floral 

 parts with the elements of the stem ; and only in a few very indefinite 

 words is it indicated of every floral part, that it (for instance, the stamen) 



x 4 



