ARRANGEMENT OF PLANTS. 313 



dwelling on this point, it is worth notice that the 

 person to whom we owe this classification, Andreas 

 Csesalpinus of Arezzo, was one of the most philo- 

 sophical men of his time, profoundly skilled in the 

 Aristotelian lore which was then esteemed, yet 

 gifted with courage and sagacity which enabled him 

 to weigh the value of the Peripatetic doctrines, to 

 reject what seemed errour, and to look onwards to 

 a better philosophy. " How are we to understand," 

 he inquires, "that we must proceed from universals 

 to particulars (as Aristotle directs), when particulars 

 are better known 6 ?" Yet he treats the Master 

 with deference, and, as has been observed 7 , we see 

 in his great botanical work deep traces of the best 

 features of the Aristotelian school, logic and method; 

 and, indeed, in his work he frequently refers to his 

 Qucestiones Peripateticoe. His book, entitled De 

 Plantis, libri xvi. appeared at Florence in 1583. 

 The aspect under which his task presented itself 

 to his mind appears to me to possess so much 

 interest, that I will transcribe a few of his reflec- 

 tions. After speaking of the splendid multiplicity 

 of the productions of nature, the confusion which 

 has hitherto prevailed among writers on plants, the 

 growing treasures of the botanical world; he adds 8 , 

 "In this immense multitude of plants, I see that 

 want which is most felt in any other unordered 

 crowd : if such an assemblage be not arranged into 



c Qucestiones Pcripaleticce, (1569,) lib. i. quaest. 1 . 

 7 Cuvier, p. 198. ' Dedicatio. a 2. 



