"great advance ; for none f them went. beyond a more or less is 
careful Hesenpton of different plants. | 
Cesalpinius (0d. 1603) was the first to devote himself t to- oe 
a systematic classification of plants. He derived his prin-° 
ciples mainly from the characters of the fruit and from the 
position of the perianth in reference to the pistil; but his 
_ primary division of the vegetable kingdom was into woody 
and herbaceous plants. His example was followed by others, 
_ and the science received an ever-increasing impetus, directed 
by such men as Taberneemontanus (0d. 1590), Alpinus (00. 
1616), and Camerarius (0d. 1721), an impetus which was 
greatly assisted by the great store of botanical material de- 
en a 4 Structural and Phystological esc: pemetey) . « 
, 
rived from travels in the East and in America. But there 
were no means of comparing these fresh discoveries with one 
another, in consequence of a want of correspondence in the 
names given to the same plant by different investigators. The 
brothers John and Caspar Bauhin (0d. 1613 and 1624) were 
the first to endeavour to overcome this difficulty. From — 
this time the number of botanists increased so greatly that 
we can mention only those who introduced new and in-— 
fluential ideas. | 
The originator of the Latin botanical nomenclature was 
Jung (0b. 1657), rector of the gymnasium at Hamburgh. 
Soon afterwards, in 1700, Tournefort (04. 1708) propounded 
a new system, and was the first to classify plants into strictly — 
defined genera. A year before his death, the great reformer — 
of botany, the Swede Carl von Linné (Linneeus, 0d. 1778), 
was born. It was he who first raised botany to the rank 
which it should have attained long before, of an edifice 
resting on a firm foundation ; for to him we owe the first 
system of nomenclature and description of a truly scientific 
character. But this was not all; for Linnzus propounded 
the celebrated system that bears his name, which has indeed ete 
since been replaced by others of a much more natural — 
character, but which is unequalled in practical value if the _ 
purpose is simply to name any given plant, or to assignits 
