The labours of the botanists of Germany and the Netherlands during
the 17th century, which culminated in Kaspar Bauhin, were not without
important influence upon the development of systematic botany which
began with Cesalpino. When Cesalpino wrote the work which forms an
epoch in the science, he was perhaps unacquainted with the natural
classification of de l’Obel (1576); at least there is nothing in his
book which shows that he had seen it; it appears even as though he had
made the discovery independently, that there is an actual connection of
relationship among plants expressed in their organisation as a whole;
it is at any rate certain that this fact assumed from the first an
entirely different expression in his system from that which it received
at the hands of de l’Obel and Bauhin, inasmuch as he was not guided
by an indistinct feeling for resemblances, but believed that he could
establish on predetermined grounds a system of marks, by which the
objective relationship must be recognised. If Cesalpino was thus in
advance of the German botanists, since he endeavoured to express with
clearness and on principle that which they only felt indistinctly,
he was at the same time treading a dangerous path, and one which led
succeeding botanists astray till the time of Linnaeus,—the path which
must always lead to artificial classifications, since the natural
system can never be laid down upon _a priori_ principles of division.
Through this labyrinth, in which botanists down to Linnaeus wandered
fruitlessly hither and thither, there remained one guide consistently
pointing to the goal to be attained, namely, the feeling for natural
affinity first vividly apprehended by the German botanists, and
expressed by them to some extent in their classifications. And when at
last Linnaeus and Bernard de Jussieu made the first feeble attempts
at a natural arrangement, it was the same indistinct perception which
asserted itself in them as in de l’Obel and Bauhin, and enabled them to
see that the path hitherto trodden could only lead astray.
The period in the development of descriptive botany which begins with
Cesalpino and reaches to Linnaeus may accordingly be perhaps best
characterised by saying, that botanists sought to do justice to natural
affinities by means of artificial classifications, till at length
Linnaeus clearly perceived the contradiction involved in this method
of proceeding. But inasmuch as Linnaeus left it to the future to work
out the natural system, and arranged the plants which he described in
a confessedly artificial manner, he so far marks rather the close of a
previous condition of the science than the beginning of modern botany.
These introductory observations will have supplied the reader with the
thread which will guide him through the following account of the more
prominent points in the history of botanical science from Cesalpino to
Linnaeus.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account