[38] Hooke figured a thin section of dry cork in his _Micrographia_ (1665), remarking that it was divided into "little boxes or cells." The word _cell_ was suggested by the resemblance of the tissue to a honeycomb; since 1838 it has been thoughtlessly extended from the skeleton to the particle of living matter enclosed within it. Robert Brown (1831) showed that a nucleus is usual in plant-cells; it had been figured by Fontana and others long before. Down to 1838 no results of biological interest followed from the discovery. [39] Parkinson (1629) speaks of a stove or hothouse, "such as are used in Germany." [40] The graceful practice of naming genera of plants after benefactors to botany or horticulture was introduced by Father Plumier (1646-1704), who gave the names of L'Obel and Fuchs to the Lobelia and Fuchsia, and whose own name is appropriately borne by the frangipane (Plumeria). [41] See the account of Cartagena in the _Personal Narrative_. [42] See particularly his _Essai sur la géographie des plantes_ (1805). [43] Baer's expressions are so guarded that his real opinions in 1828 can only be surmised. He never accepted a consistent theory of organic evolution. PERIOD V. (1859 AND LATER) Period V. We do not attempt to characterise our last period, nor to describe its biological achievement. It seems better to devote the whole of our scanty space to the scientific careers of Darwin and Pasteur, in which so much past effort culminated, and from which so much progress was to spring. Darwin on the Origin of Species. Setting aside as superfluous and we might say impossible, under our conditions of space, all attempt to restate the evidence on which Darwin based his great argument, we shall here try to show that the _Origin of Species_ shed a new light upon many biological facts, combined many partial truths into one consistent theory, and gave a great stimulus to further inquiry.