1010 The American Naturalist. [November, 
BOTANY. 
Kuntze’s Revisio Generum Plantarum, Etc. III.—Professor 
MacMillan was perhaps right in saying that the present upheaval in 
botanical nomenclature was signalized rather than caused by the 
appearance of the first two parts of Dr. Kuntze’s work in 1891. That 
is, it was the chaotic state of nomenclature which caused Dr. Kuntze 
to write his book, not Dr. Kuntze nor his book which caused the chaotic 
state of nomenclature. But while this is undoubtedly true, it cannot 
be denied that Dr. Kuntze’s work has so thoroughly exposed the con- 
dition of things and thereby caused such extraordinary activity in 
nomenclature, that whatever good results from the present movement 
must be attributed almost wholly to the influence of his work. For, 
while the present upheaval, to use Professor MacMillan’s apt term, 
was probably inevitable, and the state of nomenclature was such as to 
make it only a matter of time, yet Dr. Kuntze and the years of 
patient research culminating in his work must be recognized as the 
immediate cause. 
But Dr. Kuntze has not been content to rest here with the move- 
ment fairly started. With admirable zeal he has followed up his first 
advantage, and in the third part of his work—or rather the first division 
of it—which appeared in August, he has shown that unlike most 
reformers, he can not only start a revolution but can guide it as well. 
In the Botanische Centralblatt for June, 1893, appeared a prelimin- 
ary sketch of what is set out more fully in the first sections of the third 
part of his work. He gave a list of all the reviews of the first two 
parts, and all the works dealing with nomenclature, and all proposi- 
tions for reform from the appearance of his work to May 1893, 
together with brief criticisms of each. Now he brings together all 
the eritiques of his book, quoting them in full, all the propositions for 
reform, and the material parts of all articles, etc., dealing with nomen- 
clature, and appends a critical commentary. The critiques number 
about forty, and with the other articles, etc. commented upon make a 
list of fifty seven. It may be doubted if such a symposium has before 
been brought together on such a subject. Not only is it valuable of 
itself, but it must convince the most skeptical of the extent and signifi- 
cance of the movement Dr. Kuntze has set on foot. 
In one respect Dr. Kuntze has a great advantage over his reviewers 
He has devoted more time to the subject and knows more about it in 
