70 HISTORY OF PHYTOPATHOLOGY 



earnestness that in twenty-five years has placed this 

 country in the forefront of phytopathologic thought, 

 research, and teaching. 



In Europe the opening of this period found a consider- 

 able number of men, young but well trained, and already 

 enlisted in the scientific work of phytopathology. As we 

 have seen, some of these, like Hartig, Frank, and Sorauer, 

 had during the last years of the Kuhnian period made 

 their first contributions to the science in monographs, 

 manuals, and text-books. They brought to the new 

 period minds trained and experienced in the field in which 

 the problems were to be solved. They also brought with 

 them the points of view and the prejudices of the pre- 

 vious period. They could not, from the very nature of 

 the conditions under which they were trained and under 

 which they worked, bring to their problems the enthusi- 

 asm and unbiased judgment of their American contem- 

 poraries. They were the direct inheritors of all the 

 learning, the discoveries, and the dogmas in this field. 

 Prior to 1880 plant pathology had been wholly European, 

 one might almost say German. This inheritance was 

 their handicap. Free from prejudice and dogma, un- 

 hampered by text and training, with all the problems be- 

 fore him new and untouched, the young pathologist of 

 America delved with the energy and delight, and often, it 

 must be admitted, with the recklessness and ill-prepared- 

 ness of the pioneer. Much that was done was super- 

 ficial, some of it was worthless. Yet so much of thor- 

 oughtly substantial and creditable research was ac- 

 complished as to force from some of our European con- 

 temporaries the not too ready or hearty acknowledgment 

 of American leadership. 



