CHAPTEE X 



CLASSIFICATION OF MONOCOTYLEDONS 



A satisfactory classification of Angiosperms still remains 

 an impossible task. The immense number of species and their 

 entanglement of relationships, as well as our merely superficial 

 knowledge of the great majority of forms, have made progress 

 toward a natural classification very slow. Since the time of 

 John Kay (1703) steps in this progress have been taken by 

 De Jussieu (1789), De Candolle (1819), Endlicher (1836- 

 1840), Brongniart (1843), Braun (1864), Bentham and 

 Hooker (1862-1883), Eichler (1883), Engler (1892), and 

 others. Naturally, the increasing knowledge of morphology 

 and the changed conception of species have gradually broken 

 up artificial assemblages, but much of classification is still arti- 

 ficial. It does not lie within the purpose of this book to trace 

 the historical development of classification, nor to present an- 

 other scheme for consideration. We merely adopt the classi- 

 fication of Eichler as modified by Engler, and elaborated in 

 Engler and Prantl's Die Naturlichen Pflanzenfamilien, as the 

 best expression of our present knowledge of morphology as 

 applied tn the whole of Angiosperms. The special student of 

 morphology must have enough knowledge of general relation- 

 ships to enable him to select critical forms for investigation and 

 to appreciate the bearings of his results. The purpose of the 

 following presentation,- therefore, is to trace in a general way 

 the evolution of Angiosperms and to point out the greatest gaps 

 in knowledge, using the classification mentioned as the best 

 available basis. ISTo attempt is made to use the varying termi- 

 nology of the larger groups of classification, but coordinate 

 groups are indicated by common endings. 



According to Engler, the general tendency among Monocot- 



227 



