§ 3. This is an interesting question: one, also, which, I fear, we must
solve, so far as yet it can be solved, with little help. Perhaps nothing
is more curious in the history of human mind than the way in which the
science of botany has become oppressed by nomenclature. Here is perhaps
the first question which an intelligent child would think of asking
about a tree: "Mamma, how does it make its trunk?" and you may open one
botanical work after another, and good ones too, and by sensible
men,--you shall not find this child's question fairly put, much less
fairly answered. You will be told gravely that a stem has received many
names, such as _culmus_, _stipes_, and _truncus_; that twigs were once
called _flagella_, but are now called _ramuli_; and that Mr. Link calls
a straight stem, with branches on its sides, a _caulis excurrens_; and a
stem, which at a certain distance above the earth breaks out into
irregular ramifications, a _caulis deliquescens_. All thanks and honor
be to Mr. Link! But at this moment, when we want to know _why_ one stem
breaks "at a certain distance," and the other not at all, we find
no great help in those splendid excurrencies and deliquescencies.
"At a certain distance?" Yes: but why not before? or why then? How
was it that, for many and many a year, the young shoots agreed to
construct a vertical tower, or, at least, the nucleus of one, and then,
one merry day, changed their minds, and built about their metropolis in
all directions, nobody knows where, far into the air in free delight?
How is it that yonder larch-stem grows straight and true, while all its
branches, constructed by the same process as the mother trunk, and under
the mother trunk's careful inspection and direction, nevertheless have
lost all their manners, and go forking and flashing about, more like
cracklings of spitefullest lightning than decent branches of trees that
dip green leaves in dew?
§ 4. We have probably, many of us, missed the point of such questions as
these, because we too readily associated the structure of trees with
that of flowers. The flowering part of a plant shoots out or up, in some
given direction, until, at a stated period, it opens or branches into
perfect form by a law just as fixed, and just as inexplicable, as that
which numbers the joints of an animal's skeleton, and puts the head on
its right joint. In many forms of flowers--foxglove, aloe, hemlock, or
blossom of maize--the structure of the flowering part so far assimilates
itself to that of a tree, that we not unnaturally think of a tree only
as a large flower, or large remnant of flower, run to seed. And we
suppose the time and place of its branching to be just as organically
determined as the height of the stalk of straw, or hemlock pipe, and the
fashion of its branching just as fixed as the shape of petals in a pansy
or cowslip.
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