52 
LINNiEUS 
had hardly come into the question. He then began 
to doubt whether Tournefort’s method was sufficient, 
so that he set himself to describing accurately all 
flowers, referring them to new classes, and reforming 
their names and genera in a new fashion. This work 
occupied all his time during the summer. These 
systematic speculations were combined with another 
competitive subject, to which also he earnestly devoted 
himself. In his demonstrations in the botanic garden, 
he had been asked to compile a catalogue of the 
plants, so that his hearers could avail themselves of 
it when plants were named, and thus spare themselves 
the inconvenience of copying all the names quickly 
in the open air of the garden, which might result in 
mistakes in names or citations. On the ground of 
this modest request, Linnaeus quickly drew up a 
“ Hortus Uplandicus,” which he revised and 
enlarged time after time after he had visited many 
gardens. At the beginning, he made use of Tourne¬ 
fort’s system, but as early as 29th July, 1730, the 
plants were taken in “ methodo propria in classes 
distributae ” [arranged in classes according to his own 
plan]. 
Concerning this attempt, his German pupil J. C. 
D. Schreber remarks, “ that it was only a rough sketch 
consisting of twenty-one classes, and as to names, it 
was very different from his later efforts/' This judg¬ 
ment is hardly sound, for even a hasty glance shows 
that the guiding principles upon which the classifica¬ 
tion rested, are the same as those printed later. Small 
improvements and changes of names meanwhile were 
made in the various versions which succeeded, lead¬ 
ing to his “ Systema Naturae ” in 1735. Still more so 
is the case with his “ Adonis Uplandicus ” which 
Professor Rudbeck in the author’s presence presented 
to the Royal Society of Science on the nth May, 
1731. This paper was greeted by the members with 
unstinted applause. Concerning this, Linnaeus wrote 
to Stobaeus, “ The Society at first thought I was mad, 
