Classification and Nominclature. 45 



CHAPTER VI. 



CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATURE OF FERNS. 



The education of a naturalist now consists chieily in learning how to compare, 



^Agassiz. 



84. Nomenclature. — Before the time of Linnaeus, the method 

 of naming plants and animals was a subject of much embarrass- 

 ment to science and gave rise to endless confusion. This great 

 author, justly called the " Father of Botany," introduced a new 

 system of nomenclature that gave a new impetus to the study of 

 nature. His system has since been in constant use and has made 

 possible the greater accuracy and definiteness in the scientific de- 

 scriptions of subsequent naturalists. He also introduced a system 

 of classification which, though artificial and since abandoned, 

 paved the way to the more natural system since adopted. He 

 arranged the various plants and animals known to him in a few 

 groups according to some particular plan of structure, divided 

 these into still smaller groups and so on to the lowest divisions, 

 genera and species. To these divisions special names were as- 

 signed, thus giving to each organism a double name, the first 

 generic which may be likened to our family name, the other spe- 

 cific corresponding to our baptismal name. Thus the common 

 marginal shield-fern bears the appellation Aspidium. marginale 

 given it by the Swedish botanist, Olaf Swartz. The first it bears 

 in common with all the shield-ferns which have a like method of 

 fructification. . The latter is peculiar to this particular species 

 which bears its sori near the margin of the segments. 



85. Generic Names. — These may be derived from some char- 

 acteristic of growth or structure, in honor of some botanist or 

 distinguished patron of science, or occasionally from some mytho- 

 logical or symbolical character. The derivations of the generic 

 names of our native ferns are given in the glossary at the close of 

 this volume. 



86. Specific Names. — These are usually adjective elements 

 either Latin or Latinized and must agree in gender with the gen- 

 eric name according to the rules of Latin syntax. Errors in agree- 

 ment have frequently been made by botanists who were not versed 

 in the classics, and it is unfortunate that errors of this character 

 as well as gross errors in the orthography of generic names have 



