114 WILLIAM BARTRAM 



It is in Bartram's scientific diction that the greatest measure 

 of his originality is to be found. Tracy's statement that "The 

 nature men have not given us nev^ word-sets " but have only 

 " used words in a new way " ^° is eminently true of Bartram. 

 He has the faculty of welding together the most commonplace 

 scientific nomenclature with the most gorgeous poetic imagery, 

 so that ordinary vegetables and weeds and birds and snakes be- 

 come glamorous objects of nature. Analyzed coldly this mixture 

 of botany, ornithology, zoology, and poetry sometimes strikes 

 one as somewhat ludicrous, even pathetic, as when he writes 

 that " the vegetables smile in their blooming decorations and 

 sparkling crystalline dew-drop " (Travels, 387), but read with- 

 out any intent to dismember, Bartram's style soon begins to ex- 

 ert an effect which is far from unpleasant. Scientific term and 

 poetic image merge perfectly, support and mellow each other, 

 and create a mode of expression characteristic of the author- 

 naturalist. Other botanical observers may have catalogued the 

 following trees in a forest: " Fraxinus, Ulmus, Acer rubrum, 

 Laurus Borbonia, Quercus dentata, Ilex aquafolium, Olea Amer- 

 icana, Morus, Gleditsia triacanthus, and ... a species of Sapin- 

 dus," but it is only Bartram who could add that the last species 

 mentioned " spreads his brawny arms " and that the Live Oaks 

 " strive while young to be upon an equality with their neigh- 

 bors . . . but the others at last prevail, and their proud heads 

 are seen at a great distance . . ." (p. 84). The touch of imagi- 

 nation changes a dull catalogue into a vivid reality. Sometimes 

 the artistic transformation is accomplished by the phrase which 

 introduces the catalogue, as when he states that " At this rural 

 retirement were assembled a charming circle of mountain veg- 

 etable beauties. Magnolia auriculata. Rhododendron ferrugi- 

 nium, Kalmia latifolia, . . ." (p. 342). The effect of this style 

 upon the non-scientific reader can perhaps best be studied in the 

 following comment of a modern reviewer of his Travels: 



To a common reader like myself who am a lover of plants and flowers 

 rather than a botanist, the recurring scientific nomenclature of the 

 volume proves at first disconcerting, forbidding. I am shocked and 

 chagrined to find how few of my familiar friends I am able to recognize 



'"' Henry Chester Traq^, op. ch., p. 8. 



