CHAPTER IIl (Part 5)

under the name of ‘Phytobasanos,’ which embodies a quaint conceit after the fashion of the time. The title is a compound Greek word meaning ‘plant torture,’ and was apparently employed by Colonna to explain that he had subjected the plants to ordeal by torture, in order to wrest from them the secret of their identity. But it must be confessed that Colonna himself is by no means free from error, as regards the names which he assigns to them. The great feature of the ‘Phytobasanos,’ however, is the excellence of the descriptions and figures. The latter are famous as being the first etchings on copper used to illustrate a botanical work (Text-figs. 46 and 105). They were an advance on all previous plant drawings, except the work of Gesner and Camerarius, in giving, in many cases, detailed analyses of the flowers and fruit as well as habit drawings. We owe to Colonna also the technical use of the word “petal,” which he suggested as a descriptive term for the coloured floral leaves’. By means of his wide scientific correspondence, Colonna kept in touch with many of the naturalists of his time, notably with de Il’Ecluse and Gaspard Bauhin. A passing reference may be made here to a book which is rather of the nature of a local flora than a herbal, entitled 1 “Ekphrasis,’ 1616, pp. 245 etc. IME IOS FABIO COLONNA (1567—16s0). [Ekphrasis, 1606. ] The Herbal in Italy se ppseme 4 = " woe (C1 @t a <e -< So zs ey aman) reels Yao [Prospero Alpino, De plantis S =) en a Fanon win in eon ae age ~~ Os “i S bo <a . Ss Wy ] = 3 wa i = te Jun) 4b rv, oO go The Botanical Renaissance [CH. ‘Prosperi Alpini de plantis A‘ gypti,’ which was published at Venice in 1592. It contains a number of wood-cuts, which appear to be original. The one reproduced (Text- fig. 47) represents Salicornza, the Glasswort. The author was a doctor who went to Egypt with the Venetian consul, Giorgio Emo, and had opportunities of collecting plants there. He is said to have been the first European writer to mention the Coffee plant, which he saw growing at Cairo. Prospero Alpino eventually became Professor of Botany at Padua, and enriched the botanical garden of that town with Egyptian plants. 4. THE HERBAL IN SWITZERLAND. Among the many scientific men, whose names are associated with Switzerland, one of the most renowned is Konrad Gesner (Plate X), who was born at Zurich in 1516, the son of a poor furrier. His taste for botany was due, in the first instance, to the influence of his uncle, a protestant preacher. Konrad went to France to study medicine, but in Paris, the richness of the libraries, and the delight of associating with learned men, tempted him away from his special subject into a course of omnivorous reading. After an interval of school teaching at Zurich, he betook himself to Basle, where he entered more methodically upon the study of medicine, at the same time attempting to support himself by working at a Latin dictionary. However, after a short period of student life, he found the expense too great, and was obliged to abandon it, and to take a post as teacher of classics in Lausanne. He had received assistance at different times from his native town, which again came to his help at this juncture, and generously allotted to him a ‘“ Reisestipendium,” for the continuance of his medical studies. He indeed owed much to Zurich, for, after taking his doctorate, he was appointed first to the professorship of Philosophy there, and then to that of Natural History, which he held until he died of the plague in his forty-ninth year. Gesner’s most remarkable characteristic was his ver- satility and encyclopedic knowledge; he has been called the Pliny of his time. His work on bibliographical and Iv] The Herbal in Switzerland QI linguistic subjects was of importance, and he also wrote on medicine, mineralogy, zoology and botany. The botanical works published during his life were not of great importance, but, at the time of his death, he had already prepared a large part of the material for a general history of plants, v POPE tee oat aeons ap tend get SG ms oe Cade 13 oS S ODM F459 p20: De alah eect ER ws Text-fig. 48. ‘“Lachryma lob”=Cozx lachryma-Joi L., Job’s Tears [Simler, Vita Conradi Gesneri, 1566]. which was intended as a companion work to his famous ‘Historia Animalium.’ In order to illustrate it, he had collected 1500 drawings of plants, the majority original, though some were founded on previous wood-cuts, especially g2 The Botanical Renaissance [CH. those of Fuchs. The undertaking was so far advanced that some of the figures had been drawn upon the wood, and certain blocks had even been engraved. The whole collec- tion, and the manuscripts, he bequeathed for publication to his friend Caspar Wolf. Wolf seems to have made an honest effort to carry out Gesner’s wishes, and he succeeded in publishing a few of the wood-cuts, as an appendix to Simler’s ‘ Vita Conradi Gesneri’ (e.g. Text-fig. 48). Unfortunately he was hampered by weak health, and the task, as a whole, proved beyond his powers. He sold everything to Joachim Camerarius the younger, with the proviso that the purchaser should make himself responsible for the publication. Camerarius failed to fulfil the spirit of this obligation. It is true that he brought a large number of Gesner’s figures before the public, but he did this only by the indirect method of using them, among his own drawings, to illustrate an edition of Mattioli, and a book of his own. | Finally, about a hundred and fifty years after the death of Camerarius, Gesner’s drawings and blocks came into the possession of the eighteenth-century botanist and _biblio- grapher, Christoph Jacob Trew, who published them, thus giving Gesner his due so far as was possible at that late date. Such blocks as were in good condition were printed directly, and, from the drawings, a number of copper engrav- ings were made, coloured like the originals. The drawings were of unequal merit, some of them being on a very small scale and lacking in clearness. In one point, however, Gesner shows a marked advance on the methods of his contemporaries—namely in giving detailed, analysed studies of flower and fruit structure, as well as a drawing showing the habit of the plant. It must not be forgotten that, even in Trew’s edition, it is impossible to discriminate with certainty between the work of Gesner and that of Camerarius. Unfortunately, we have no knowledge of the text of Gesner’s manuscript, but his letters make it clear that his interest in botany was thoroughly scientific. If his work were extant, he would probably shine as a discoverer of new species, especially among alpines, for his figures indi- cate that he was acquainted with a number of plants which | . ve ate itl Plate X KONRAD GESNER (1516—1565). [Print in the Botany School, Cambridge. | IV] The Herbal in Switzerland 93 de l’Ecluse, Gaspard Bauhin and others were the first to describe. Among Gesner’s numerous scientific correspondents was Jean Bauhin, a brilliant young man, twenty-five years his junior. Their acquaintance began when Bauhin was only eighteen, but, in spite of his friend’s youth, Gesner consulted him in botanical difficulties, describing him as “eruditissimus et ornatissimus juvenis.” Jean Bauhin was the son of a French doctor, a native of Amiens, who had been converted to protestantism by reading the Latin translation of the New Testament prepared by Erasmus. In consequence of his change of faith, he was subjected to religious persecution, which he avoided by retreating to Switzerland, where his sons Jean and Gaspard were born. The medical tradition seems to have been remarkably strong in the family. Both Jean and Gaspard became doctors—Gaspard, whose sons also entered the profession, being, in fact, the second of six generations of physicians. For two hundred years, an unbroken succession of members of the family were medical men. After Jean Bauhin had studied for a time at the University of Basle, he went to Tiibingen, where he learned botany from Leonhard Fuchs. From Tiibingen he proceeded to Zurich, and accompanied Gesner on some journeys in the Alps. After further travel on his own account, and a period at the University of Montpelier, he reached Lyons, where he came in contact with d’Aléchamps, who engaged him to assist with the ‘ Histoire des plantes.’ Bauhin began to occupy himself with this work, but his protestantism proved a stumbling-block to his life there, and he was obliged to quit France. Jean Bauhin’s chief botanical work, the ‘ Histoire universelle des plantes, was a most ambitious undertaking, which he did not live to see published. However, his son-in-law Cherler, a physician of Basle, who had helped him in preparing it, brought out a preliminary sketch of it in 1619, and, in 1650 and 1651, the magnum opus itself was published, under the name of ‘Historia plantarum universalis, This book is a compilation from all sources, and includes descriptions of 5000 plants. The figures, of One The Botanical Renaissance [CH. which there are more than 3500, are small and badly executed. A large proportion of them are ultimately derived from those of Fuchs. Jean Bauhin’s more famous brother, Gaspard [ or Caspar | (Plate XI), was born in 1560, and was thus the younger by nineteen years. Gaspard studied at Basle, Padua, Montpelier, Paris and Tiibingen. He also travelled in Italy, making observations upon the flora, and becoming acquainted with scientific men. Unfortunately he missed being a pupil of Leonhard Fuchs, since his sojourn at Tiibingen took place some years after the death of the famous herbalist, who had been his brother’s teacher. The illness and death of his father in 1582 made it necessary for him to settle in Basle, where he became Professor of Botany and Anatomy, and eventually of Medicine. Inspired by the example of his brother, he conceived the plan of collecting, in a single work, all that had been previously written upon plants, and, especially, of drawing up a concordance of all the names given by different authors to the same species. His extensive early travels served as a good preparation for this task, since he had not only observed and collected widely, but had established relations with the best botanists in Europe. He formed a herbarium of about 4000 plants, including specimens from correspondents in many countries, even Egypt and the East Indies. Besides study bearing directly on his great project, he accomplished a considerable amount of critical and editorial work, which also had its value in relation to his main plan. He produced new editions of Mattioli’s Commentaries, and of the herbal of Tabernzemon- tanus, and published a criticism of d’Aléchamps’ ‘ Historia plantarum.’ There is a marked parallelism between the careers of the Bauhin brothers, for Gaspard’s great work underwent much the same vicissitudes as that of Jean. The main part of Gaspard’s chief work never saw the light at all, although his son brought out one instalment of it, many years after his father’s death. Gaspard was however more fortunate than Jean, in that he lived to see the publication of three important preliminary volumes, as the result of his researches, and it is on these that his reputation rests. fo - Plate XI Va 3! S oe GASPARD BAUHIN (1560—1624). [Theatrum Anatomicum, 1605. ] a IV] The Herbal in Switzerland 95 The ‘Prodromos theatri botanici’ of 1620 consisted of descriptions of 600 species, which the author regarded as new, although several had, as a matter of fact, been already described by de l’Ecluse. Figures of about 140 species Text-fig. 49. ‘Solanum tuberosum esculentum” = Potato [Bauhin, Prodromos, 1620]. are given, two of which are here reproduced (Text-figs. 49 and 62). One of these, the Potato (Text-fig. 49), still retains the name of Solanum tuberosum which Bauhin gave to it. He had previously published a description 96 The Botanical Renaissance [cH. of this plant in an earlier work, the ‘ Phytopinax’ of 1596. In 1623, Gaspard Bauhin brought out his most im- portant botanical book, the ‘ Pinax’ theatri botanici.’ By. this date, owing to the number of different names bestowed upon the same plant by different authors, and the varying identifications of those described by the ancients, the subject of plant nomenclature had been reduced to a condition of woeful confusion. Bauhin’s ‘ Pinax’ converted chaos into order, since it contained the first complete and methodical concordance of the names of plants, and was so authoritative as to earn for the author the title of “législateur en botani- que.” The work, which dealt with about 6000 plants, was recognised as pre-eminent for many years. Morison criticised the scheme of arrangement on which it was based, but adopted its nomenclature, as also did Ray. Tournefort also retained, as far as possible, the names of the genera and species used in the ‘Pinax.’ As Sachs long ago pointed out, this work is ‘‘the first and for that time a completely exhaustive book of synonyms, and is still indispensable for the history of individual species—no small praise to be given to a work that is more than 250 years old.” Gaspard Bauhin deserves great honour as the first who introduced some degree of order into the chaotic muddle of nomenclature and synonymy. The special merits of his work, more especially his power of concise and _ lucid description, and his faculty for systematic arrangement, may perhaps be attributed to his French blood, since such qualities are markedly characteristic of French scientific writing. It is much to be regretted that the two brothers Bauhin should have carried on their work independently and separately, considering that they had in view practically identical objects—objects in which each only achieved a partial success. It seems as if a work of much greater value might have resulted if they had joined forces. 1 rivaé=a chart or register. oe ee ee ee Iv] The Herbal in France 97 2 8 QA Bate eee ge ygqngede’ ter Po eae ORE e ce eg eal a gate e oe e Addideris vocem , fuerit Dalechampius ipfe Exprefla ad viuum, cuius imago fuit. Text-fig. 50. Jacques d’Aléchamps, 1513—1588 [Enlarged from wood-cut, _ Circa 1600, Department of Prints and Drawings, British Museum]. 98 Lhe Botanical Renatssance [CH. 5. THe Herat In FRANCE. France (excluding the French Netherlands) does not seem, at first sight, to have contributed a great deal towards the development of the Herbal in the sixteenth and seven- teenth centuries, but it must be remembered that Jean and Gaspard Bauhin, and the publisher, Christophe Plantin, were French by extraction, though Switzerland and Holland were their countries by adoption. Most of the important herbals published in other languages were translated into French quite early in their history, some- times in a modified form, so that France in the sixteenth century was probably by no means backward in botanical knowledge. One such adaptation was ‘L’Histoire des Plantes, by Geofroy Linocier, which was founded, in part, on the works of Fuchs and Mattioli. A well-known name among the earlier French writers is that of Jean Ruel, or Joannes Ruellius, as he is commonly called (1474—1537). He was a physician, and a professor in the University of Paris, and chiefly devoted himself to the emending and explaining of Dioscorides. He also wrote a general botanical treatise, ‘De Natura Stirpium,’ which first appeared in Paris in 1536. This work, which is without illustrations, is intended mainly to elucidate the ancient writers. The most famous of the French herbalists was Jacques d’Aléchamps (Text-fig. 50), whose magnum opus, which appeared in 1586, formed a compendium of much of the material which had been contributed by the different nations. He was born at Caen in 1513, and after studying medicine at Montpelier, entered upon the practice of it at Lyons, where he remained until his death in 1588. D’Aléchamps’ great work is generally called the ‘Historia plantarum Lugdunensis.’ Curiously enough, the authors name is not mentioned on the title-page. From the preface one would gather that Johannes Molinaus (or Desmoulins) was the chief author. However, judging by the way in which the book was quoted by contemporary writers, there appears to be little doubt that d’Aléchamps ee oe ed te be een eT eee eee ee ~~ “ IV] The Herbal in France 99 was really responsible for it, though assisted at different times by Jean Bauhin and Desmoulins. The ‘ Historia plantarum’ had numerous faults, but it was, at the time, the most complete universal flora that Text-fig. 51. “Ornithogalum magnum” [d’Aléchamps, Historia generalis plantarum, 1586]. existed. It contained about 2700 figures (two of which are reproduced in Text-figs. 51 and 101), but, both in drawing and wood-cutting, they show marked inferiority to much of the earlier work. : 100 The Botanical Renaissance (cH. 6. THE HERBAL IN ENGLAND. The greatest name among British herbalists of the Renaissance period is that of William Turner, physician and divine, the “Father of British Botany.” He was a north-countryman, a native of Morpeth in Northumberland, where he was born probably between 1510 and 1515. He received his education at what is now Pembroke College, Cambridge. Pembroke deserves to be especially held in honour by botanists, for a hundred years later, Nehemiah Grew, who was as pre-eminent among British botanists of the seventeenth century as Turner was among those of the sixteenth, also became a student at this college. Like so many of the early botanists, William Turner was Closely associated with the Reformation. He embraced the views of his friends and instructors at Cambridge, Nicholas Ridley and Hugh Latimer, and fought for the reformed faith throughout his life, both with pen and by word of mouth. His caustic wit was also used, with almost equal vehemence, to attack