BOTANY. 



f 



Gcfiicr, in particular, llie grcateft nnturalid vhom tlie 

 world liad fccn fincc the day* of Avillotlc", cultivated both 

 zoolopv and boMiiy, with a zeal wliich has never been 

 fiirpalfcd i with a difccrnmciit and godd fcnfe which till 

 then had never been known. He lias the jjlnry ()f having 

 fird difcovcrcd the expedience of dividinc; plants into clafTes, 

 genera, and fpecics, and the nccenity of taking the dillin- 

 jrnilhing chart<'>ers of each divilion from the flower and fruit. 

 \e died of the phgiie iii i,/'.1. at tht early age of 



dftv. 



Chirmi, who was his contemporary, and many years his 

 fur\ivor, en;;aged in the llii<ly of plants with cqnal ardour, 

 but not witli cqnal talents for jull arrangement. He <iillri- 

 huted them chiclly according to their fizc, their g<.ncral 

 habit, and their otlur fcnfdile qualities. 



At this time alfo flouriflied Dr. William Turner, who 

 may be accoiuitcd the father of En;;lil}i botany. It was lie 

 who firll gave names to many Englidi plants; and much 

 praife is indifpntably due to him for his diligence in cx- 

 aminiiig, and judgment in difcriminating, dilkrtnt fpecics : 

 but 'with refpecl to arrangement, he was far inferior even 

 to Clulius; for he has difpofed his plants in the alphabetical 

 order of their Latin names. Tiie fiifl part of his Herbal was 

 printed at London in i-;5l ; the fecund at Cologn, 1362 ; 

 anj the third, dated Welles, in 1564. It is in the black 

 letter ; and contains figures of moll of the plants. 



In the fame period lived Dodonxus, or Dodocns, who 

 began to publifh in 155: ; and in 1583 collcAed all his 

 works into one vol'.inie, which he quaintly called, " Stir- 

 pium hiftorix" fex Pcmptades," becaufe each larger divifion 

 conljds of five books. 



This work is the foundation of Gerard's Herbal, fo well 

 known in England, and fo long regarded as a llanJard book 

 by the merely Englifli botanical lludent. It was publilhed 

 in 1 597, and comprizes the whole vegetable kingdom in 

 three books. The firft contains the gralTes, grain, rufhes, 

 reeds, flags, and bulbous-rooted plants ; and exhibits a re- 

 markable approximation to the arrangement of a very mo- 

 dern fvrtem, founded on natural alBnities. It was fuggefted, 

 however, by a regard not to the nionocotyledinous charafter 

 of the feeds, but to the (implicity and general form of the 

 leaves. The fecond includes all herbs ufed for food, for 

 medicine, or for their beauty and elegance. The third is a 

 motley afTemblage of trees, (hrubs, fruit-bearing plants, 

 rcfins, gums, rofes, heaths, molTes, mulhrooms, and fea-plants. 



It was left to the judgment of Ca-falpin to begin to 

 cxeaite what the penetrating mind of Gefner had firlt con- 

 ceived ; the arrangement of the whole vegetable creation in 

 3 regular fyftcm. His dillinflive charatlers are taken from 

 the different appearances of the fruit, fometimes modified by 

 the confidcration of other parts ; and though it cannot 

 boad of being the belt in theory, or the mod eafy in 

 praAice, it poffeffes great merit as the fird effay in a dif- 

 ficult and important undtrtaking. Ca;falpin is particularly 

 worthy of regard, as the firll writer who has dilUnftly men- 

 tioned the true difference of fexes in plants. He died in 



The lad of the writers of this period are the two Bauhins. 

 John, the tided, was the friend of Gefner, and travelled 

 ■with him into Italy ; but, though ardent in his love of plants, 

 he had no turn for fydematic arrangement, and added 

 nothing to botany, con fide red as a fcience. He wrote a 

 general hidory of plants, which was publidied in three 

 f ,lio volumes, but not till 1650, 27 years after his death. 



Gafpard, his brother, was much his junior in years, but 

 far exceeded him in the greatnefs of his conceptions, and the 

 extent of hio fcrvices to their favourite purfuit. The pubU* 



cation of liis " Piuax Theatri Botanici," in id^, makes a 

 new xiTi in botany. Thisimmenfe work, the fruit of forty 

 years' labour, threw over the fubjefl, as it then flood, a 

 clear and confpicuous light, and fliewed at one view the 

 information which had been given by a multitude of fcattered 

 authors. It ail'ordtd a refling-place, a kind of fixed point, 

 from which new excurfions were to be made, and new 

 atchievements vvcie to be attempted. But though he 

 fmoothcd and fiiortened the way for other?, it mud be 

 acknowledged of him, as well as of his brother, that he 

 added little to what had already been done. 



Many acceflions were foon after made to the number of 

 known plants, by the labours of Pona and Zanoni in Italy, 

 of Johnlon and Paikiufou in England, of Hernandez, Pifon, 

 and Marcgrave in fonth America, and above all, of Rheede, 

 who, in his " Hortus malabaricus," brought to light about 

 800 plants, natives of the Eall Indies. But botany, as a 

 fcience, made little progrefs for nearly half a century ; 

 when Morifon, Ray, Rivinus, and Tournefort, all nearly 

 at the fame lime, dirtfted their attention to the clafTificatioii 

 of plants, and invedigated the true principles on which it 

 ought to be formed. Morifon, in a fecond edition of 

 Bruyner's " Hortus regius Blefenfis," publiflied at Paris in 

 1669, gave the rudiments of an arrangement, founded on 

 the fruit ; and alfo afferted, that the characters of the 

 genera diould be taken from the fame part : but in his 

 hiftory of plar.ts, printed at Oxford in 16S0, he did not 

 ilridly adhere to his own principle. His fydem was quickly 

 fucceeded, and its fame nearly ecllpfed, by that of the im- 

 mortal Ray, the outline? of which were fird given, in 1682, 

 in the " Methodus plantaium nova fyaoptice in tabulis 

 exhibita : cim notis generum turn fummorum tnm fubal- 

 ternorum charafterifticis." The principal aim of this great 

 naturalid was to preferve the natural families of plants, as 

 they are connefted by a fimilarity of fruftification and 

 general habit, influenced by the latter confideration, he re- 

 tained the ancient divifion of the vegetable kingdom into 

 trees, (hrubs, and herbaceous plants ; making no alteration, 

 except in clafTing with the latter what are generally called 

 fuffrutices or nndcr-fhrubs. This fyllein he afterwards 

 improved and brought nearer to a natural arrangement ; but 

 he dill left the charaders of his genera in a great degree 

 indeterminate, and governed by no fixed principle. The 

 time was not yet come for taking this farther Hep towards 

 the perfection of the fcience. 



The clalTification of Rivinus, derived from the flrufture 

 of the corolla, was fird made known to the world in 1690. 

 It is more eafy in practice than either of the former, but does 

 more violence to the order of nature. It mud, however, be 

 mentioned, to his honour, that he was the firil who per- 

 ceived the propriety of not feparating trees from herbaceous 

 plants. They are accordingly blended together in dif- 

 ferent parts of his fydem. 



As Morifon foon yielded in celebrity to Ray, fo Rivinus 

 gave way to Tournefort, the glory of France, and equalled 

 only by Ray, the glory of England. His elements of 

 botany, in which the primary divifions are taken from the 

 corolla, and the fecondary ones from the fruit, were pub- 

 lifhed in 1694. His arrangement, indeed, is not unexcep- 

 tionable in all its parts, but its imperfedlions arife from the 

 defefts of his principle ; and though he did not define his 

 genera in plain and appropriate terms, it is evident that he 

 had formed jull ideas of them in his own mind. 



The fame of thefe two great men, who had done fo 

 much in promoting the progrefs of true fcientific botany, 

 obdrufted, for a confiderable time, its farther advancement. 

 It was vain for botanills to contend, either in England or 



France, 



