NEW PHYTOIiOGIST. 
Vol. XIII, No. 9 . 
November, 1914 . 
[Published November 30th, 1914.] 
A REVIEW OF LITERATURE CONCERNING THE 
EVOLUTION OF MONOCOTYLEDONS. 
By N. Bancroft. 
[With Four Diagrams in the Text.] 
1. Introduction. 
HAT is the position of Monocotyledons in a natural system 
vv of classification—that is, a system which takes into account 
the probable evolution of the group and its relationship to other 
forms? This is a question of considerable interest, and one which 
has given rise, particularly of late, to various theories of the 
primitive or derived nature of monocotyly, and to many phylo¬ 
genetic schemes. 
II. Older Classifications and Views of the 
Position of the Group. 
John Ray (55), whose “ Historia Plantarum ” was published 
between 1686 and 1704, was the first systematist to base his classi¬ 
fication of flowering plants on the presence of one or two cotyledons 
in the embryo. This character provided a convenient method of 
grouping, and has been used by the majority of writers since Ray’s 
time. It is very possible, that in framing their systems of classifi¬ 
cation, even the earliest botanists had some underlying ideas of 
degree of development (though not necessarily of phylogenetic or 
evolutionary development), and also of relationship between their 
plant-groups; and it is therefore interesting to note that in the 
majority of cases since Ray’s time, Monocotyledons are placed before 
Dicotyledons, or between that group and the flowerless plants. 
