EARLY PLANT NAMES 3 



which may be found. The number of plants which botanists 

 now have to deal with is estimated at about one hundred 

 and seventy-five thousand. Only a small proportion of 

 these plants ha\'e names in English, German, French, Italian, 

 or other modern tongue: and even if they had, it would be 

 an intolerable burden for students who need to consult the 

 writings of foreign botanists to learn as many names for each 

 plant as there are modern languages. Fortunately it has 

 been agreed among botanists that each kind of plant shall 

 have one botanical name, and only one, in all countries.' 

 This name is Latin or of Latin form for the reason that the 

 earlier botanical writings were in that language; and as 

 educated people of whatever nationality are supposed to 

 have some acciuaintance with Latin, nothing could be more 

 convenient for botanical purposes. For popular use, however, 

 popular names are required and will l)e used chiefly, there- 

 fore, throughout the coarse print of the following pages. 



6. Early plant names. The e.xaet form of the name by which 

 each kind of plant sliould be known was not decided until the middle 

 of the eighteenth century. Then certain practical reforms were 

 brought about mainly through the writings of the great naturahst 

 LinniBus who is revered as the Father of Botany. Before this time 

 many of the names which botanists used were exceedingly cumber- 

 some. The difficulties under which students then labored are well 

 illustrated by the following passage which occurs in a letter to 

 Linnseus from his friend Dillenius : 



"In your last letter of all, I find a plant gathered in Charles 

 Island, on the coast of Gothland, which you judge to be Polygonum 

 eredum angustifoUiim,floribus candidis of ]Mentzehus and Caryophyl- 

 lum saxatilis, foliis gratrdneis, umbellatis corymbis. C. Bauhin; nor 

 do I object. But it is by no means Tournefort's Lychnis alpina 

 UnifoUa multiflora, perampla radice, whose flowers are more scat- 

 tered and leaves broader in the middle, though narrower at the end." 



The plant which this learned man had so much trouble in naming 

 was afterwards called by Linnieus simply Gypsophila fastigiota — 

 the name now recognized by botanists. 



' Such, at least, is the botanical ideal. It is not always reahzed in 

 practice. But mistakes and differences of opinion are surely to be ex- 

 pected in the naming of such a vast number of objects. Yet after all 

 the actual confusion produced is comparatively slight, while the ideal 

 pursued has advanced the science wonderfully. 



