146 
B. DAYDON JACKSON-ADDRESS : 
produced, at first in selections, afterwards in full. The carefully- 
written manuscripts which supplied the copy for the early printers 
were in many cases adorned with pen drawings of the objects 
described, and in this way the compilers of the first commentaries 
on medicine followed the lead of their predecessors the copyists, 
and the drawings were copied on wood and inserted in the text. 
They were crude and rough, as might he expected from their 
history, owing to their having been copied in succession one after 
another, so that in many cases the object has become wholly 
unrecognizable. The first lantern-slide (PI. I, fig. 1) is taken from 
an edition of a work termed, from the first word in its title, 
‘ Herbarius,’ of 1484, which was printed in that year at Mainz : 
it represents the spurge-laurel, Daphne laureola , hut, as you see, 
it might well serve for many plants. The second slide is drawn 
from the same volume and is entitled “ Cucumer,” a gourd. Another 
work of similar character was the ‘ Ortus sanitatis, ’ which had an 
extraordinary vogue, and, besides being reprinted in its original 
Latin many times, was also translated into most of the European 
languages. I have here two cuts selected from an undated edition, 
issued in all probability about the same date as the last hook 
I mentioned: here you see the beech-tree (PI. I, fig. 2) as repre¬ 
sented by a mediaeval scribe, and next a saxifrage, which is 
certainly Asplenium Ceterach , Willd. 
But these compilations from old authors did not long content the 
readers of those early times. Men began to examine plants in the 
field, and to compare them with the records in the hooks they 
possessed : a critical spirit began to stir, and the new wine could 
no longer he contained in the old bottles. One of the first of the 
new school was Otto Brunfels, from whose ‘ Herbarium vivae 
eicones’ in 1530 I show you the next slide,—henbane (PI. I, fig. 3), 
which, as you see, is not only easy to recognize, but is in a dis¬ 
tinctly better style of art. In 1542 appeared a book which has 
always been a favourite of mine, the ‘Be historia stirpium corn- 
men tarii imagines,’ published at Basel, with admirable whole-page 
cuts, such as that of Salvia here shown (PI. I, fig. 4). Another 
fact about the author of this work, Leonard Euchs, after whom 
the genus Fuchsia is named, is his evident desire to give due credit 
to the draughtsmen and engraver of his hook, for at the end he not 
only gives their names, but also their portraits, an amiable trait 
of his character which is difficult to parallel, not merely amongst 
contemporary authors, but for some ages later. The next example 
I have to show, Clematis (PL II, fig. 1), is taken from the herbal 
of Eembert Dodoens, of Mechlin, issued in 1583, and used in many 
