VI] Bauhin and Zaluziansky 151 



how much difference of opinion exists among systematic 

 botanists, even to-day, upon the subject of the relations of 

 the orders to one another. 



Like de I'Obel, Bauhin seems to have believed in the 

 general principle of a progression from the simpler to the 

 more_ highly developed forms. His application of this 

 principle led him to begin with the Grasses and to conclude 

 with the Trees. The question as to which groups among 

 the Flowering Plants [Angiosperms] are to be considered 

 as relatively primitive, is still, at the present day, an open 

 one, but it would be generally conceded that Bauhin's 

 arrangement cannot be accepted. There is little doubt, 

 from the standpoint of modern botany, that the Grasses 

 are a highly specialised group, while the "tree habit" has 

 been adopted independently by many plants belonging to 

 entirely different cycles of affinity, and thus, except in rare 

 cases, it cannot be used as a criterion of relationship. 



On the subject of the relations of the Cryptogams 

 (flowerless plants) to the Phanerogams (flowering plants), 

 Bauhin had evidently no clear ideas, but such could hardly 

 be hoped for in the state of knowledge of that time. We 

 find, for instance, the Ferns, Mosses, Corals (!), Fungi, Algae, 

 the Sundew, etc., sandwiched between some Leguminosee, 

 and a section consisting chiefly of Thistles. 



The classification put forward by the Bohemian botanist, 

 Zaluziansky, in 1592, although in its general features no 

 better than that of Dodoens, or of d'Alechamps, and certainly 

 less satisfactory than that of de I'Obel or the later scheme 

 of Bauhin, is an improvement on all of these in one 

 particular, namely, that he begins with the Fungi and deals 

 next with Mosses. After the Mosses he describes the 

 Grasses, and his classification concludes with the Trees. 

 He was thus evidently attempting to pass from the simpler 

 to the more complex, and his arrangement indicates that, 

 unlike certain other botanists of his time, he looked upon 

 the Lower Cryptogams as comparatively simple and primi- 

 tive plants. He was not so clear-sighted, however, on the 

 subject of the Ferns, for he placed them with the Umbelli- 

 ferse and some Compositae, no doubt because he was 

 influenced by the form of the leaf. 



It is curious that Cesalpino, who, as we have pointed 



