217 



estal)lishccl the j^roups monocotyledons and dicotyledons as 

 subdixisions of herbs. This important impro\ement was ignored 

 by Toiirnefort and Linnaeus. His final groups (1703) \vere: 



r Flore destitutae 



,,, .^ ( Dicotyledones 

 Heruae< Horiferae{ - , , , 



( Monocetyledones 



f Flore a fructo remote 

 Arbores 1 „, , 



(More tructui contiguo 



Ray's German contemporary and opponent, Rivinus, advo- 

 cated binomial nomenclature. Magnol, of the Paris School of 

 Medicine,Avas the first to use the term " family." "1 think I can 

 percei\-e in plants a certain affinity between them," he writes, 

 "so that they might be ranged in different families, as we class 

 animals. . . . There is a certain affinity, as it were, which does 

 not exist in any of the parts considered separately, but only as a 

 whole." 



Tournefort was professor of botany at the Jardin du Roi, under 

 Louis XIV. His botany was in many respects less satisfactory 

 than that of Ray. He emphasized characters of the corolla. 

 The very clear arrangement, particularly of genera, made his 

 Institutiones Rei Herbariae (1700) very suitable for reference;' 

 it became the standard authority until the time of Linnaeus. 

 His groups are: 



r 



Herbae ' 



Arbores- 



Simplices Monopetali 



Petalodesi Simplices Polypetali 



Compositi 



. Apetali 



,. f Apetali 

 ApetalH , 



( Amentacei 



I Monopetali 

 ( Polypetali 



Eighteenth Century 



Vaillant, pupil of Tournefort, in 171 7 called attention to 

 Grew's views about anthers, and urged that stamens and pistils 

 are the essential parts of flowers. 



