ii20 OPPONENTS OF LINNAEUS. 



them with the dust. When the latter published his Genera Plantaruvi 

 in 1737, Heistkr, fired with indignation, wrote thus to Haller: 

 " Lin Nit us rejeds all the characters defined by his predecessors, and 

 " introduces new names to those plants on which the best ones have 

 " already been bestowed 3 will there be many to follow such inno- 

 "vations?" — and Linn^us mentioned in his system: " that all the 

 " botanists considered the fruftification in plants as the basis of good 

 " order, He ister alone accepted, who fixed the genera by the petals." — 

 All this could not be granted ; war was therefore declared. 



He ISTER thought it unworthy of his fame to commence hostilities 

 himself. He left it to a champion, one of his pupils, Do8:or John 

 George Siegesbeck, who at his recommendation was appointed Pro- 

 fessor of Botany at St. Petersburgh ^This man's celebrity turned to 



his shame, and his insignificant name was only kept in remembrance, 

 owing to the greatness of the genius whom he so much strove to lessen. 

 His conduft, as an opponent, was the more impudent, as he was him- 

 self destitute of that knowledge which might have made him a com- 

 petent judge of learning. The celebrated Gmelin, who lived at the 

 same time at Petersburgh, delineates his charafter in these words : 

 " Siegesbeck has scarcely a superficial knowledge of botany, he un- 

 " derstands the writings of others as litde as he knows himself. He is 

 " contented with the bare names of plants suggested to him by his sterile 

 " brain, destitute of all penetration.*" 



LiNN^us had for some time carried on a friendly correspendence 

 with Siegesbeck; but the allurements and examples of Heister, 



* SiEGESBECKius nec primis labris Botanicen degustavit, nec quid seribant alii, nec se 

 ipsum intelligit, contentus soils plantarum denominationibus, quas sterile et doftrinoe orbum 

 Jngenium ipsi siiggerit. Epistol. ad Waller, vol, ii. p. no. 



soon 



