Origin and Development of the Composites. 161 
Cynareae, Anthemideae and Astereae, and in addition he classed 
several of the genera of the Inuleae together. A decade later Gerard 
(33) advanced still further with a suggestion of the Calenduleae as a 
group and the consolidation of the Inuleae in addition to the groups 
of Lobel. 
In the latter half of the century Morison (65) and Ray (72-73) 
again recognised the Composite as a family and agree in retaining 
the Cichorieae and Cynareae while confusing all the other tribes. The 
remaining authorities of the 17th century, such as Christopher Knaut 
(48), Rivini (75), Hermann (39) and Tournefort (84) agree in regarding 
the Composites as a family with the Cichorieae as a distinct section, 
but confuse the other tribes. Knaut seems to be the first to use the 
name Compositae, Ray’s designation is “ Composite flore.” Hermann 
classes the group as “ Gymnomonospermae Compositae.” 
18th Century. 
The dominating systematist of this century, was, of course, Linnd, 
but in his three attempts (59) at the classification of the Compositae 
he made no progress whatever. Indeed, his first arrangement 
included so many external genera, such as Globularia, Protea and 
Leucodendron that he can scarcely be said to have recognised the 
family at all. His “ Syngenesia ” in the Sexual System include 
Lobelia, Viola and 1mpatiens ! The Ambrosia group are separated 
for the first time in his Natural System. 
Linne was preceded by a group of systematists whose ideas on 
the Compositae varied very much. Boerhaave (12) gives the 
character “ staminibus propriis coalitis in tubum ” for the first 
time and has one section “ semine aculeis donato ” which fore¬ 
shadows the Heliantheae. Christian Knaut (49), Ruppius (76), 
Magnol (62), Ludwig (61), Allionius (2) and Necker (66) made 
a ttempts somewhat similar to the systems of Tournefort and Rivini; 
in some cases the presence or absence of rays was used as a diagnostic 
character. 
The first botanist to consider the Compositae alone was Vaillantus 
(85) whose system bears a distinct resemblance to that of Boerhaave, 
with an amplification of the Heliantheae. Pontedera (71) gives a 
system very similar to that of his contemporary, Vaillantus, but with 
suggestions in his grouping of the genera of several tribes such as 
the Senecioneae, Calenduleae, Astereae and Helenieae, which were 
not recognised by that systematist. Berkhey (9) and Meese (64) also 
published dissertations on the Compositae but these show little or no 
originality. 
