[]HISTORICAL AND BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES OF THE PROGRESS OF BOTANY, IN ENGLAND.

PRIMAEVAL BOTANY.

THE origin of Botany, conſidered in the moſt extenſive view, muſt have been coeval with man. Before the inven⯑tion of arts, the diſcovery of metals, and the uſe of implements and arms, by which animals were more immediately ſubjected [2] to their power, it muſt be ſuppoſed that the human race derived, from the vegetable creation, the chief part of their ſuſtenance, and the primary conveniences of life. Roots, fruits, and herbs, muſt then have conſti⯑tuted the food of man. Trials, and experi⯑ence, would teach him all that choice and va⯑riety, which his different ſituations allowed. The ſame faithful directors would inſenſibly inform him of the various qualities, and the different effects of them on his body. As the ſphere of his obſervations and experi⯑ence enlarged, he would derive the know⯑ledge, and diſtinction, of ſuch as were of eaſy, or of difficult digeſtion. He would diſcover the ſlatulent kinds, and ſuch as corrected ſlatulency: which opened, or which conſtipated, the body; which was moſt nutritive, and probably, by fatal acci⯑cidents, which were poiſonous. Hence the rudiments of medical ſcience.

This various knowledge would be handed down traditionally, from one generation to another, and with it, the names of ſuch as were happily the firſt diſcoverers of new aliments, or medicinal properties, would [3] deſcend with increaſing reverence, until, in⯑volved in obſcurity by length of time, ſu⯑perſtition raiſed them to the rank of gods. Thus, in the early ages of mankind, as now among the ſtill unlettered and uncultivated nations of the earth, the adminiſtration of ſimples, for the cure of wounds and diſeaſes, was almoſt ever accompanied with ſuper⯑ſtitious ceremonies and incantations. Hence too, in proceſs of time, the character of the prieſt and the phyſician was united; and the ſick reſorted to the temples of the gods for relief: and, although inveſtigation and rational ſcience made ſlow progreſs, yet, in every nation, from the moſt cultivated to the moſt barbarous, the number of ſimples uſed for medicinal purpoſes, became by degrees very conſiderable. Thus, when at length, phyſic aſſumed a more regular form, and was taught in the ſchools of Greece, the writings of HIPPOCRATES enumerate three hundred vegetables uſed in phyſic. Four centuries afterwards they were augmented by DIOSCORIDES to near ſeven hundred; and to theſe the Arabians added no inconſiderable number of valuable [4] articles. There is room to believe, that the antient Gymnoſophiſts of the Eaſt, pur⯑ſued the ſtudy of plants, with a ſucceſs equal to that of the Greeks; and the mo⯑dern nations of the Eaſt, the Japoneſe, the Chineſe, and the Brachmans of India, incon⯑teſtibly excel the enlightened nations of Greece and Rome, in their knowledge of Botany: witneſs the "Garden of Mala⯑bar," which comprehends near eight hun⯑dred plants; all which are deſcribed, and the virtues recorded, with an accuracy and preciſion, unexampled in the antient au⯑thors of Greece and Rome. But to approach nearer home: the Druids of Gaul, and of Britain, cultivated the knowledge of herbs, with no inconſiderable diligence. Whether theſe antient Magi of the Weſt, who were both prieſts and phyſicians, ſprung from thoſe of the Eaſt, and thus derived their knowledge from a common ſource, a point which has hitherto divided the learned, or, whether their ſcience was the reſult of their own inveſtigation, I muſt leave to the cri⯑tical antiquary to determine.

DRUIDICAL BOTANY.

In the mean time, in tracing the origin and progreſs of botanical ſcience in Britain, a ſurvey of its ſtate in the druidical times, ought to claim the firſt attention; but in fact, the little information tranſmitted to us from the antients, relating to this extraordi⯑nary ſect, being almoſt wholly confined to Caeſar and Pliny, precludes any enlarged view reſpecting my particular object. It is from Pliny we learn, that to the miſſeltoe, the vervain, the ſelago, and the ſamolus, theſe antient fathers of druidiſm attributed efficacies almoſt divine; and ordained the collection, and adminiſtration of them, with rites and ceremonies, not ſhort of re⯑ligious ſtrictneſs, and ſuch as countenan⯑ced the groſſeſt ſuperſtition.

The miſſeltoe, for inſtance, muſt be cut only with a golden knife; muſt be gather⯑ed when the moon was ſix days old; the prieſt cloathed in white; the plant received on a white napkin; and laſtly, two white bulls were to be ſacrificed; and thus con⯑ſecrated, [6] miſſeltoe was an antidote to poiſon and prevented ſterility^*.

The miſſeltoe perhaps, is, of theſe plants, the only one fully aſcertained at this time. Its paraſitical growth, the preference which the Druids gave to that which grew on the oak, aſſiſted by the deſcriptions the antients have left of it, will ſufficiently juſ⯑tify the application to the viſcum of the moderns. May I not add, that probably, amidſt the manifold virtues antiently aſ⯑cribed to this plant, its power of curing the falling-ſickneſs, which has accompa⯑nied it almoſt to the preſent time, is the remnant of druidical uſe and tradition?

The vervain, after previous libations of honey, was to be gathered at the riſing of the dog-ſtar; when neither ſun nor moon ſhone; with the left hand only; after de⯑ſcribing a circle round the plant, &c.; and thus prepared, it vanquiſhed fevers, and other diſtempers; was an antidote to the bite of ſerpents, and a charm to conciliate friendſhip^†.

[7] With reſpect to this herb, the hierobotane, the ſacra herba of DIOSCORIDES, although the modern botaniſts have now agreed to confine the term to the verbena, which PLINY has deſcribed, as having narrower and ſmaller leaves than the oak, it may be remarked, that there has been a diverſity of opinions among the commentators, re⯑lating to the plant; and it is acknowledged that verbena or verbenacea, was alſo applied, as a general term for all plants uſed about the altar in ſacrifices. To this day the Tuſcans apply the word vervena to ſlips, ſhoots, ſuckers, or bundles of plants of any kind.

The ſelago was not to be cut with iron; nor touched with the naked hand, but with the ſagum; the Druid cloathed in white, and his feet naked, with other magic ceremo⯑nies. Thus collected, and conſecrated, it became a remedy for diſeaſed eyes, and a charm againſt misfortunes^*.

It is, nevertheleſs, equally difficult to determine the ſelago of the Druids; PLINY [8] having only deſcribed it as like the ſavin; a deſcription which will accord with a va⯑riety of plants of Europe. Moſt authors, nevertheleſs, have agreed, from this reſem⯑blance, to conſider it as a ſpecies of wolfs⯑claw moſs, which is now called lycopodium ſelago. CAESALPINUS, however, thinks it was a ſedum; and GUILANDINUS, an erica, or heath, and probably with more reaſon.

Various, but equally ſuperſtitious, were the rites attendant on the ſamolus, which was given to preſerve oxen and ſwine from diſeaſes.

This is a plant of which ſtill greater doubts remain, PLINY having ſaid nothing further of it, than that it grew in moiſt places. Hence the name is applied to a plant called round-leav d brooklime; but, as forming a ſeparate genus in modern arrangements, it has acquired the name given as above, from Pliny. Others have thought it a ſpecies of pulſatilla, or paſque-flower; ſince one of that kind retains, among the Bologneſe, the name of ſamiglo.

The ſame uncertainty attends all diſqui⯑ſitions relating to the herba Britannica, of [9] DIOSCORIDES and PLINY, famed for hav⯑ing cured the ſoldiers of Julius Caeſar, on the Rhine, of the Scelotyrbe, or the diſeaſe ſuppoſed to be our ſea ſcurvy. The uſes of this herb were thought to have been derived from the Britons; the name ſuggeſted this notion; but later etymologiſts have found a different derivation: i. e. Brit. conſo⯑lidare; Tan. Deus, Ica ſ. Hica, ejectio; unde, Britannica dicitur herba, quae fir⯑met et conſolidat dentes vacillantes ^*. The commentators have applied the deſcrip⯑tion given by thoſe two antients, to a variety of ſimples. By ſome, it has been thought to be the polygonum perſicaria, or ſpotted arſmart: by others, the primula auricula, or wild auricula: by our own firſt herbaliſt, TURNER, who obſerved it plenti⯑fully in Frieſland, the ſcene of Pliny's obſer⯑vations on its effects, the polygonum biſtor⯑ta, or biſtort: at length, Abraham MUNT⯑ING, a Dutch phyſician, publiſhed a treatiſe in 1681, profeſſedly to prove, that the Bri⯑tannica was the hydrolapathum magnum, (ru⯑mex [10] aquaticus) or great water dock. In this opinion RAY, and others, have acquieſced.

I ſhould not have dwelt ſo long on theſe circumſtances, but to ſhew the mortifying uncertainty attending the application of the names of plants from the antients, ariſing from their vague and indeciſive deſcriptions. I add, that Mr. LIGHTFOOT thinks, there are ſufficient traces in the highlands, of the high eſteem in which the Druids held the quicken-tree, or mountain aſh; ſorbus au⯑cuparia. It is, more frequently than any other tree, found planted in the neighbour⯑hood of druidical circles of ſtones, ſo often ſeen in Scotland. Poſſibly this fact may be more equivocal than the ſuperſtitious uſes to which it is ſtill applied. It is believed, that a ſmall part of this tree carried about them, is a charm againſt witchcraft and enchant⯑ment. The dairy-maid drives the cattle with a ſwitch of the roan-tree, for ſo it is called in the highlands, as a ſecurity againſt the ſame direful evils; and in one part of Scotland, the ſheep and lambs are, on the firſt of May, ever made to paſs through a hoop of roan-wood.

[11] Short, and imperfect, as this view of Drui⯑dical Botany may be, as delivered to us by PLINY, yet there can be no doubt that the Britons, like all other rude nations, drew their medicinal ſources from the ſim⯑ples growing around them, and were there⯑fore well acquainted with common plants. And, although there are not, as far as I know, any herbals extant in the antient Britiſh language, or in any tranſlation from it, by which the degree and extent of their knowledge may be preciſely aſcertained; yet, as far as reſpects the nomenclature merely, ſome reaſonable eſtimate may, I apprehend, be formed from the liſt of Welch names of plants, preſerved by GERARD, as communicated to him by Mr. Davies of Guiſſaney, in Flintſhire: from the Iriſh names, as we find them in Mr. HEATON's catalogue, printed in THRELKELD's Synop⯑ſis; to which I may add, the Erſe names communicated by the Rev. Mr. Stuart, to the late excellent and much-lamented botaniſt, the Rev. Mr. LIGHTFOOT. Theſe liſts might, without doubt, be greatly am⯑plified, by the aſſiduity of ſkilful botaniſts [12] well verſed in the reſpective languages, THRELKELD's liſt, which is the moſt co⯑pious, comprehends near four hundred names; and the analogy perceivable be⯑tween theſe and the Erſe names, ſuf⯑ficiently marks a common origin. I am tempted to produce a few inſtances^*.

SAXON BOTANY.

The hiſtory of Saxon Botany muſt be very ſhort. No nations, however rude, have yet been diſcovered, who were ſo re⯑gardleſs of health, as not to have a know⯑ledge of, and ſome dependence upon, the virtues of certain ſimples. There is ſuffi⯑cient evidence, that our Saxon anceſtors did [14] not wholly diſregard this ſtudy; ſince, al⯑though rare, there are manuſcript Saxon herbals extant in ſeveral public libraries. The two following occur in the Bodleian:

• 4123. HERBARIUM. Saxonice.
• 5169. LIBER MEDICINALIS, conti⯑nens virtutes herbarum. Sax⯑onice.

I am unable to determine whether the above are the ſame with the two following, which Dr. Ducarel notices from the Har⯑leian collection:

• 5066. Entitled, HERBARIUM. Sax⯑onice.
• 585. Tractatus, qui ab Anglo-Saxoni⯑bus dicebatur LIBER MEDI⯑CINALIS.

The laſt is ſaid to be an Anglo-Saxon verſion of APULEIUS, whom I ſhall have occaſion to mention hereafter. The date of this tranſlation is of the tenth century. The Saxons having been converted to Chriſtianity at the latter end of the ſixth century, the communication between Bri⯑tain and Rome became by degrees very fre⯑quent, [15] and learning was then firſt intro⯑duced into theſe realms.

The golden age, if I may be allowed that expreſſion, of the Anglo-Saxon learn⯑ing, was the reign of ALFRED the Great. That munificent prince not only himſelf tranſlated Latin authors, but, as hiſtorians in⯑form us, encouraged in every way, the tranſ⯑fuſion of all the knowledge of the times into the common language of the kingdom. To this aera, therefore, may reaſonably be refer⯑red the Saxon verſion of APULEIUS; whoſe book ſeems to have preſerved popularity through all the middle ages, and was found in common uſe at the aera of printing.

As no publication of any Saxon herbal has ever taken place, we are unable to de⯑fine the extent of the knowledge of that time: at preſent, therefore, as in the in⯑ſtance of antient Britiſh Botany, we can only recur to the nomenclature of the in⯑digenous names, by which ſome of them are yet known; although many others have given way to Greek and Latin terms, and ſome to other revolutions, occaſioned by the [16] gradual progreſs of reformation throughout the ſcience in general.

A liſt of the Anglo-Saxon names would be recoverable, in a great degree, by recur⯑ring to the old herbals, to SKINNER's Lexi⯑con, and other authorities of that kind. It would, I am perſuaded, be more extenſive than a ſuperficial view might ſuggeſt, and would do credit to our Saxon anceſtors. I cannot help remarking, that many miſ⯑takes have probably ariſen from the neglect of our firſt reformers of Botany in England, after they had formed ſcientific names, in not preſerving alſo the old and provincial terms; and that, on the whole, this ne⯑glect has retarded the progreſs of knowledge on this ſubject.

MIDDLE AGES.

LEARNING and ſcience follow the fate of empires. On the decline of thoſe of Greece and Rome, and during that period in which the Saxons were eſtabliſh⯑ing themſelves in Britain, medical know⯑ledge paſſed into the hands of the trium⯑phant Saracens. Bagdat, under the Eaſtern Caliphs, became the ſeat of learning. Much of the Greek phyſic and philoſophy was corruptly tranſlated by the command of Muſſelmen; among whom at length it [18] received due reception and encouragement. Schools were eſtabliſhed, in which ARIS⯑TOTLE, GALEN, DIOSCORIDES, and other writers, were ſtudied; and their doctrines at length pervaded the whole dominion of the Saracens, and finally flouriſhed in the univerſities of Spain.

DIOSCORIDES, though in a corrupt and mutilated ſtate, formed the baſis of know⯑ledge in the Botany and Materia Medica of the Arabians. The ſituation of Bagdat, and its connection with India, allowed them ſcope to introduce into phyſic feveral uſe⯑ful ſimples. Among others, we owe to theſe Orientals the milder purges of the preſent day; ſuch as ſenna, caſſia fiſtula, manna, tamarinds, rhubarb, and ſeveral drugs of other qualities, of which ſome retain a place in the preſent reformed ſtate of the Materia Medica. AVICENNA, we are told, had coloured drawings for the inſtruction of his pupils in Botany; and Proſper AL⯑PINUS aſſures us, he ſaw at Cairo a volume of paintings of the plants of Aegypt, Ara⯑bia, and Ethiopia, which had been done for the uſe of a Sultan.

[19] It is not eaſy, however, to judge, with preciſion, of the extent of Arabian know⯑ledge on the ſubject of our work; ſince, probably, the beſt book of the Arabian ſchool has yet remained unpubliſhed, that of Ebn BEITHAR. It is extant in the Pa⯑riſian, the Eſcurial, and other libraries. This learned Arab was particularly attached to the botanical branch of phyſic. He was born in Spain; and after viſiting Africa, travelled into the Levant, Aſia, and even as far as the Indies, to improve his know⯑ledge. In his return he was patroniſed by Saladin, at Cairo, and died in 1248.

HERBELOT informs us, that from the ſuperiority of his learning in this branch, he was ſtyled Aſchard, or The Botaniſt. He wrote "A General Hiſtory of Simples, or of Plants, ranged in alphabetical order;" in which he gives the Greek, Arabic, and vernacular names; with the deſcriptions of each; and particularly, in a more detailed manner, thoſe not deſcribed by DIOSCORI⯑DES and PLINY.

There is, notwithſtanding, but little room to believe, that more original knowledge [20] could be derived from the Arabian monu⯑ments of ſcience in this, than in the other departments of phyſic. In their beſt au⯑thors, even the Greek names of plants are ſo groſsly perverted, that they are ſcarcely to be known.

The Grecian authors having been inac⯑curately tranſlated at firſt, and the language neglected afterwards, phyſic loſt much un⯑der the dominion of the Arabians. It was, in the end, a corrupt Galenic theory, with an admixture of aſtrology and ſuperſtition. In this ſtate the learned of Europe found it, in the celebrated Mooriſh univerſities of Spain. In the weſtern parts of Chriſten⯑dom, eſpecially after the lapſe of the Latin tongue in Italy, it was ſcarcely leſs obſcured by the ignorance of the Monks, by whom, almoſt ſolely, the practice of it was en⯑groſſed.

Even the firſt univerſity in Chriſtendom, the renowned ſchool of Salernum, founded by Charlemagne in the beginning of the ninth century, received its dictates from the cor⯑rupt ſources of the Arabians; whoſe works are ſaid to have been at length tranſlated [21] into Latin by Conſtantine the African. The famous precepts de Conſervanda Valetudine, iſſued from that ſchool for the uſe of Ro⯑bert duke of Normandy, were, without doubt, well known in England, and proba⯑bly excited attention to the ſtudy of Vege⯑tables; concerning which, numerous rules and cautions occur in that remnant of the learning of thoſe days.

During all theſe ages, the original ſources in the Greek authors were almoſt wholly forgotten, and the productions of that long night of ſcience were equally rare and un⯑improving.

I ſhall, nevertheleſs, enumerate briefly a few of thoſe Engliſh authors, who were moſt conſpicuous for any attention to the ſimples uſed in medicine, which alone bounded the botanical knowledge of thoſe times.

One of our earlieſt writers, after the Conqueſt, was the hiſtorian HENRY Arch⯑deacon of Huntingdon, in the time of king Stephen and Henry the IId. Biſhop TAN⯑NER informs us, that he left a MS. in [22] eight Books, De HERBIS, de Aromatibus, et de Gemmis. Bib. Bodley. 6353.

Of nearly the ſame age are ſaid to be, ſome manuſcripts preſerved in Bibl. Regia Lond. under the following titles, De Na⯑tura Pecudum, ARBORUM, et Lapidum: and one De Naturis Herbarum. Biſhop Tan⯑ner mentions an Engliſhman of the name of Henry ARVIEL, who had travelled much, and reſided ſome time at Bologna, about the year 1280. He left a manuſcript De Bota⯑nica, ſive Stirpium Varia Hiſtoria.

The ſame author notices a manuſcript, in the Sloanean collection, of John BRAY, who lived in the time of Richard the IId. He ſtudied Botany and Phyſic, and received an annual penſion from the king, for his knowledge and ſkill in theſe ſciences. It is entitled, Synonyma de nominibus Herba⯑rum. It contains the names, in Latin, French, and Engliſh.

Beſides the Compendium Medicinae of GILBERTUS LEGLE, or GILBERTUS AN⯑GLICUS, who alſo flouriſhed in the thir⯑teenth century, a manuſcript is recorded of [23] that author, under the title of De re Herbaria, lib. 1. and others, De Viribus et Medicinis Herbarum, Arborum et Speci⯑erum: et de Virtutibus Herbarum, lib. 1.

The famous Engliſh ſurgeon John AR⯑DERN of Newark, extolled by Dr. Friend, as the reviver of ſurgery in England, who flouriſhed ſoon after John of GADDESDEN, in the middle of the fourteenth century, left a manuſcript, which is in the Sloanean library, under the title of De re Herbaria, Phyſica, et Chirurgica.

Henry DANIEL, a Dominican friar, ſaid to be well ſkilled in the natural philoſophy and phyſic of his time, left a manuſcript inſcribed Aaron Danielis. He therein treats De re Herbaria, de Arboribus, Fructicibus, &c. He flouriſhed about the year 1379.

Appertaining to my ſubject I alſo men⯑tion, a treatiſe, written, as is ſuppoſed, in the time of Edward the IIId. by WALTER de HENLEY, entitled, De Yconomia five Houſbrandia; in which, Biſhop Tanner ſays, he has treated his ſubject well, according to the uſage of the time.

NICOLAS BOLLAR, educated at Oxford, [24] whom TANNER repreſents as eminent for his knowledge in natural philoſophy, wrote De Arborum Plantatione, lib. 3. De Gene⯑ratione Arborum et modo Generandi et Plan⯑tandi, lib. 2. and other tracts now in ma⯑nuſcript.

There is a manuſcript ſaid to be preſerved in Baliol college, written by JOHANNES de S. PAULO, De Virtutibus Simplicium Medi⯑cinarum. The age of theſe two laſt is not ſufficiently aſcertained; neither is that of a manuſcript in Caius and Gonville college, Cant. entitled Cinomia (Synonymia) Her⯑barum.

The following authors, who wrote, at leaſt prior to the introduction of printing into England, are enumerated, by Biſhop Tanner, and others.

Henricus CALCOENSIS, a prior of the Benedictine order, is ſaid, by Dempſter, to have travelled into France, Germany, and Italy, ſolely to enjoy the converſation of the learned. He wrote Synopſis Herba⯑ria, Lib. 1. and tranſlated PALLADIUS de re Ruſtica, into the Scottiſh tongue, about the year 1493.

[25] William HORMAN, a native of Saliſbury, was educated at Wincheſter ſchool, and be⯑came a perpetual fellow of New College in 1477. In 1485 he was choſen ſchool⯑maſter and fellow of Eton, and at length elected vice-provoſt of the ſame college. He was a man of extenſive and various eru⯑dition. Among numerous productions, he left a book under the title of Herbarum Synonyma. He wrote indexes to the an⯑tient authors De re Ruſtica: to Cato, Var⯑ro, Columella, and Palladius. After ſeveral years of retirement, he died in 1535, and was buried in the chapel of the college.

The writers, and the age, of the two fol⯑lowing manuſcripts, are unknown.

Liber de Herbis, in the library of Corpus Chriſti.

Nomenclatura Vocabulorum in Medicina receptorum, praeſertim etiam Herbarum; in the library of Magdalen college.

The underwritten, without any author's names, are in the Aſhmolean library, with the annexed dates.

Diverſe phyſical receipts with an Herbal, 1438, N^o 7704.

[26]An HERBAL, Alphabeticum, 1443, N^o 7709.

An HERBAL, in old Engliſh, 1447, N^o 7713.

Phyſical Plants, Engliſh, 1481, N^o7724.

Alſo,

A deſcription of ſome ſimples—In the Bod⯑leian library, N^o 2073.

Exluſive of many others, more ſtrictly medical, the under-written^* anonymous manuſcripts, though the dates have not been preciſely determined, are, with good reaſon, ſuppoſed to have been written, if not prior to the invention of printing, at leaſt before the introduction of that art into England.

[27] This liſt, perhaps already too long, might have been conſiderably extended, but that it would have unneceſſarily ſwelled this article. As none of theſe manuſcripts, however, have been publiſhed, the exact ſtate and progreſs of the ſcience cannot be aſcertained; yet enough is ſeen to convince us, that, although its advancemnet was ſlow and inconſiderable, it was not wholly loſt in the darkneſs of that night, which, for ſo many ages, obſcured the ſources of knowledge. It is highly probable, that [28] very few of the manuſcripts before enume⯑rated, exhibit any conſiderable portion of original matter; but, that they are princi⯑pally extracts and compilations, from pre⯑ceding writers of the lower age; ſuch as, Apuleius, Aemilius Macer, S. Sethus, Iſi⯑dore, Conſtantinus, the Pandects of Mat⯑thew Sylvaticus, Platearius, ſome of the later Arabians, and other writers of that ſtamp. At the renovation of knowledge juſt mentioned, theſe appear to have been the primary ſources from which our an⯑ceſtors of that generation derived aſſiſtance; ſince we find many MSS. of the above au⯑thors [29] were in being, at the origin of print⯑ing, and were early iſſued from the preſs as the manuals of that day, in various parts of Chriſtendom.

It has been obſerved, that the laſt-men⯑tioned Saxon manuſcript, was a tranſlation of Lucius APULEIUS Madaurenſis; whoſe work, from ſeveral other circumſtances, there is room to believe, was, at that time, more diffuſed and popular in England, than any other. This author, who lived in the age of the Antonines, was born at Madura in Africa, at that time a ſeat of learning. He afterwards ſtudied at Car⯑thage, and at Athens, and for ſome time ap⯑plied himſelf at Rome to juriſprudence, but at length quitted it, and devoted himſelf wholly to philoſophy and phyſic. He is well known as the author of the Mileſian Fables, and other works of learning. His book De Herbis, ſive de Nominibus ac Virtutibus Herbarum, alone comes under our cognizance: In this he recites the names of medicinal herbs, in the Greek, Latin, Egyptian, Punic, Celtic, and Da⯑cian, and of ſome in the oriental languages. [30] Theſe names form the bulk of the book, which conſiſts of one hundred and thirty chapters. After each name follows a ſhort deſcription of the plant, the place of growth, and the properties. Then the diſ⯑caſes to which each ſimple is applicable. The work nevertheleſs abounds with groſs errors in the names of plants, and inculcates the moſt abſurd ceremonies and ſuperſti⯑tions in the adminiſtration of remedies; yet it was in much eſteem throughout the dark ages of literature.

It muſt not however be concealed, that ſome of the learned have judged, that this work, at leaſt as it now appears, was not written by the author whoſe name it bears, but at a much later period. JOHNSON, the editor of Gerard, imagined it to be a tranſ⯑lation of a Greek writer of the eighth cen⯑tury; but his conjecture is not thought probable by Fabricius ^*. The remarks of Johnſon prove, that this work was in com⯑mon uſe in the ages I have ſpoken of; and that the copies had been greatly corrupted and mutilated, by ignorant hands.

[31] I will give one inſtance from APULEIUS, of that credulity and ſuperſtition, which, ſanctioned by antiquity, yet prevailed in the adminiſtration of remedies; and exhibits a melancholy proof of the wretched ſtate of phyſic, which, through ſo many ages, had not broke the ſhackles of druidical magic and impoſition. As a cure for a diſeaſe, called by the French Nouè l'Equillette, you are directed to take ſeven ſtalks of the herb lions-foot, ſeparated from the roots; theſe are to be boiled in water in the wane of the moon. The patient is to be waſhed with this water, on the approach of night, ſtand⯑ing before the threſhold, on the outſide of his own houſe, and the perſon who per⯑forms this office for the ſick, is alſo not to fail to waſh himſelf. This done, the ſick perſon is to be fumigated with the ſmoke of the herb Ariſtolochia, and both perſons are then to enter into the houſe together, taking ſtrict care not to look behind them while returning; after which, adds the au⯑thor, the ſick will immediately become well.

A book under the name of MACER's [32] Herbal, ſeems alſo to have been in common uſe in England, before the aera of printing. Authors do not allow it to be the production of Aemilius MACER quoted by OVID, but of much later date, and by ſome it is aſ⯑cribed to ODO, or ODOBONUS, a phyſician of the later times, and probably a French⯑man. This barbarous poem is in leonine verſe, and is entitled De Naturis, Qualita⯑tibus, & Virtutibus Herbarum. Divers manuſcripts of it are extant in the Engliſh libraries; as, at Cambridge, in the Bodleian, Aſhmolean, and Sloanean collections.

It was tranſlated into Engliſh, as Biſhop TANNER informs us, by John LELAMAR, maſter of Hereford ſchool, who lived about the year 1373. His manuſcript is referred to as in Sloane's library. Even LINACRE did not diſdain to employ himſelf on this work. "MACER's HERBAL practyſyd by Doctor Linacro, tranſlated out of Latin into Engliſh, London, 12mo." AMES mentions an edition of it printed in 1542; and Palmer, one without date, printed by Wyre. This jejune performance, which is written wholly on Galenic principles, [33] treats on the virtues of not more than eighty-eight ſimples.

I ſhall not detain the reader by dwelling on other authors of this claſs, whoſe names I have before recited; it will be ſufficient to obſerve, that, fettered as were the theories of this time with aſtrology, and a ſtrange mix⯑ture of the Galenic doctrine of the four ele⯑ments, it extended its influence, not to the human body alone, but to all the inſtru⯑ments of phyſic. Not even a plant of me⯑dicinal uſe, but was placed under the do⯑minion of ſome planet, and muſt neither be gathered, nor applied, but with obſervances that ſavoured of the moſt abſurd ſuperſti⯑tion.

MIDDLE AGES.

AT this time manuſcripts of THEO⯑PHRASTUS, DIOSCORIDES, and PLINY, were not only exceedingly rare throughout Europe, but thoſe of the two former were unnoticed through ignorance of the Greek language; otherwiſe we can⯑not ſuppoſe our anceſtors could have ne⯑glected them, for the crude and barbarous works which have been mentioned. It was not till the opening of the fifteenth cen⯑tury, that opportunity was given to recur to theſe repoſitories of antient lore. The flight of the Greeks into Italy, at the ſubverſion of the Eaſtern Empire, and the ſubſequent [35] invention of printing, by bringing to light, and diſſeminating the purer remains of Greece and Rome, at length broke the chains of barbariſm and ſuperſtition, which, during ſo many ages, had tyrannized over the underſtandings of mankind.

On this happy revolution, Botany, with other ſciences, revived, and preſently re⯑ſumed another appearance. The publica⯑tion of the Patres Botanici raiſed, at once, a ſpirit of emulation to inveſtigate the ſub⯑jects of their works.

PLINY was firſt printed, if not at Verona, in 1468, as is affirmed by ſome, and doubt⯑ed by others, at leaſt in the ſucceeding year, at Venice; and the avidity with which it was received, is manifeſted by the numerous im⯑preſſions of it, before the end of that cen⯑tury.

DIOSCORIDES came forth firſt at Cologn, in a Latin tranſlation, in 1478; and in the original, by Aldus, in 1495. It was after⯑wards publiſhed in Latin by HERMOLAUS BARBARUS and RUELLIUS, in the year 1516; by VERGILIUS, in 1518; and by CORNARUS in 1529. The learned now [36] prefer the edition with a tranſlation by SA⯑RACENUS, printed at Lyons in 1598.

THEOPHRASTUS was firſt printed in Greek at Venice, without date, and by Al⯑dus, in 1495 and 1498. He was tranſlated into Latin by GAZA in 1483, and this ver⯑ſion has been preferred by ſucceeding wri⯑ters.

The reſtoration of theſe ſages of anti⯑quity, immediately raiſed up a numerous ſet of commentators. Every plant was ſought for, and every plant was diſcovered, in the works of antiquity. No drug uſed in medicine was eſteemed true, unleſs found in DIOSCORIDES. Scaliger wrote animad⯑verſions on THEOPHRASTUS in 1566; in which he has corrected the verſion of Gaza in many places. Robert Conſtantine produ⯑ced the parallel places in PLINY; and BO⯑DAEUS à STAPEL, in 1644, aſtoniſhed the world, by a diſplay of erudition on this au⯑thor, in which he exhauſted all farther diſ⯑quiſition, by the profuſion of his remarks, and collations, from all preceding writers.

The commentaries on DIOSCORIDES have been more numerous. The Corollaria [37] of HERMOLAUS BARBARUS was publiſhed in 1492. To Hermolaus ſucceeded BRUNS⯑FELSIUS, Petrus Leydenſis, LACUNA, AMA⯑TUS LUSITANUS, Robert CONSTANTINE, Val. CORDUS, and ſeveral others; and finally MATTHIOLUS, whoſe work has ſu⯑perſeded the reſt. It was firſt printed in 1554, and paſſed through ſeventeen edi⯑tions. If we may believe one of the corre⯑ſpondents of this author, thirty-two thou⯑ſand copies had been ſold before the year 1561^*. The beſt edition, with the ac⯑ceſſions of CASPAR BAUHINE in 1598, ſtill finds a reputable place in modern li⯑braries.

Among the illuſtrators of PLINY, Her⯑molaus Barbarus in 1492 ſtood foremoſt. His Caſtigationes Plinianae, were publiſhed in 1492, in which he ſucceſsfully corrected the text; and LEONICENUS, in the ſame year, was the firſt who employed critical knowledge on this author. The corrup⯑tions of the text afforded great ſcope after⯑wards to GALENIUS, RHENANUS, PIN⯑TIANI, [38] and others. The Exercitationes Plinianae of SALMASIUS, are well known. Thoſe of the laborious and paradoxical HARDUIN, are the principal reſort of mo⯑dern times.

It is a mortifying reflexion in the annals of human knowledge, that the bulk of theſe learned men, after their immenſe labours, miſtook, in numberleſs inſtances, the road to truth, and did but perplex the ſcience they wiſhed to enlighten. The deſcriptions of plants in the antient authors, were, at beſt, ſhort, vague, and inſufficient; and with this inconvenience, the ſtudy of nature herſelf was neglected. In the mean time, there aroſe a genuine ſet of cultivators, who, diſcovering this error of the commen⯑tators, ſtudied plants in the fields, where alone the beſt comments could be made. As the foremoſt of theſe, ſtands BRUNS⯑FELSIUS. He was followed by TRAGUS, FUCHSIUS, Val. CORDUS, GESNER, CAE⯑SALPINUS, and above all CLUSIUS, to whom muſt be added our own countryman TURNER. Still, even among theſe genuine reſtorers of natural knowledge, many did [39] not ſufficiently recollect, that all the plants of DIOSCORIDES, were not thoſe of Europe, but principally thoſe of Aſia; whilſt, in⯑ſtead of traverſing the fields of Greece, Cili⯑cia, and the Eaſt, they were ſtraining all the deſcriptions of this author, to accommo⯑date them to the vegetables of Europe. It is not ſtrange that their endeavours were but little ſucceſsful. Even, after the la⯑bours of RAUWOLF, who traverſed Syria, Meſopotomia, Paleſtine, and Aegypt, in the ſixteenth century, and thoſe of the enlight⯑ened TOURNEFORT in the preſent, it does not appear, that of the ſeven hundred plants in the Materia Medica of DIOSCORIDES, more than four hundred, at the fartheſt, are properly aſcertained at this time.

We learn from PLINY (lib. 25. c. 2.) that there were paintings of plants in his day; but he complains, that, through the inaccuracy of copiers, they were not to be depended on. SALMASIUS tells us, he inſpected a Greek MS. of DIOSCORIDES more than a thouſand years old, in which the plants were figured with ſufficient ele⯑gance indeed, but with little regard to truth [40] and exact reſemblance. There are now exiſting ſeveral manuſcripts of DIOSCO⯑RIDES, with illuminated figures, particu⯑larly the famous one in the imperial library at Vienna, of which LAMBECIUS treats largely.

It was procured by Buſbequius, the em⯑peror's reſident at Conſtantinople, about 1560; and is ſaid to have been copied at the expence of JULIANA ANICIA, daugh⯑ter to the emperor Flavius Anicius Olyber, about the year 492. It has been regretted by ſome of the learned, that this MS. had not been brought earlier into Europe; by which means the commentators might have been ſaved much trouble. Antient, how⯑ever, and ſplendid as this is, it may juſtly be doubted, whether the publication of it would have much conduced to the reſtora⯑tion of ancient Botany, and Materia Medica; ſince, if we are allowed to judge of the figures, from the ſpecimens copied by DO⯑DONAEUS, nothing can exceed the rudeneſs of them, or more ſtrongly juſtify the re⯑mark of Salmaſius. And as ſeveral of theſe are copied into GERARD's Herbal, for the [41] ſatisfaction of the curious, I refer in the note^* to ſome of theſe figures in both au⯑thors.

In juſtice, however, to theſe valuable re⯑mains, it muſt be obſerved, that, from later information, we find, there is, beſides this Conſtantinopolitan MS. which is in folio, an⯑other, ſuppoſed to be more ancient, in 4to. which is diſtinguiſhed by the name of Nea⯑politan: that the figures in both theſe agree extremely well; and, as Haller informs us, are ſufficiently exact to enable the bo⯑tanical traveller, with ſuch drawings in his hands, to diſtinguiſh the plants of DIOS⯑CORIDES in the native places of growth. It is particularly ſpecified, that the pericly⯑menum of theſe manuſcripts evidently ap⯑pears [42] to be the convolvulus major of the mo⯑derns; and the telephium, the cerinthe minor. Finally, that if thoſe enumerated in the note ſo ill expreſs the plants deſigned, it muſt be wholly attributed to the fault of the copier or engraver. This intelligence is attended with regret, when we further learn, that after ſome of theſe icons were lately engraved, with a view to the publi⯑cation of the whole, the deſign has been laid aſide.

I ſhall be thought, perhaps, in the fore⯑going pages, to have digreſſed too much. I have to allege, that a brief view of the general ſtate and progreſs of phyſic, with which my ſubject is inſeparably connected, during the dominion of the Saracens in the Eaſt, and in the ages of ignorance preceding the fourteenth century in the Weſt, ſeemed neceſſary in order to throw light on the introduction of it into this iſland. And as England ſhared the improvement ariſing from the reſtoration of antient knowledge, a ſhort notice of the three principal botanic authors was deemed not leſs proper.

[43] At this diſtance of time, perhaps it may require ſome warmth of imagination, to picture to the mind that ſatisfaction, which ingenuous and learned men muſt have ex⯑perienced, who lived when the veil was re⯑moved, which for ages had obſcured and confined thoſe elegant ſources of intellec⯑tual enjoyments, which the writings of the antients diſplay; when the means of attain⯑ing them were, by the invention of print⯑ing, ſo happily amplified, and the progreſs, not only of thoſe arts and ſciences which embelliſh, but of thoſe which alſo dignify human nature by their utility, was no longer retarded.

HORTUS SANITATIS.

IT was not till ſeveral years after the aera of printing, that any original work, ſtrictly botanical, made its appearance, even on the continent; and ſtill longer before England produced any publication of im⯑portance in that way.

Previous to the firſt dawning of this ſci⯑ence in England, it is almoſt neceſſary to mention ſome of the productions abroad, as they were the baſis of what was here firſt publiſhed, although, in fact, there was no original work before the Herbal of TUR⯑NER.

In the opinion of SEGUIER, the firſt book on plants, with figures, was printed [45] at Augſburgh, ſoon after the invention of wooden cuts, or tables, between the years 1475 and 1478, in the German tongue, with the title of "The Book of Nature." It treats of animals and plants; of the lat⯑ter, a hundred and ſeventy-ſix kinds are no⯑ticed, and many of them figured. The work is made up chiefly from PLINY, Iſidore, and Platearius.

This book ſeems to have been ſoon ſu⯑perſeded by the famous Herbal of Mentz, in 1484, ſtiled ſimply "HERBARIUS;" which gave riſe, the next year, to the well-known work ORTUS SANITATIS, aſcribed to CUBA, a phyſician of Augſburgh, and after⯑wards of Frankfort; who, if not the author, was at leaſt the editor of an enlarged and improved edition. This work, under dif⯑ferent editors, was the baſis of all the Her⯑bals of Europe, for many years.

Its object is the Materia Medica from all nature; but vegetables occupy the greater part. The firſt edition was compriſed in four hundred and thirty-five chapters: in one, printed at Venice in 1511, which is in the black letter, they are extended to a [46] thouſand and ſixty-ſix; of which, one half treat on the vegetable kingdom. The au⯑thor profeſſes to have drawn his reſources from HIPPOCRATES, GALEN, PLINY, AVICENNA, SERAPION, MESUES, DIOS⯑CORIDES, PLATEARIUS, VINCENTIUS, the Pandects, PALLADIUS, CONSTANTIN, ALMANSER, and others. At the head of each chapter ſtands a cut, than which, ſcarcely any thing can be conceived more rude; and, in ſome caſes, nothing is more puerile or ridiculous. The pages, if printed with numbers, would amount to more than ſeven hundred. Many copies of this per⯑formance are remaining, although the Her⯑barius is become very ſcarce.

GRETE HERBAL.

Theſe books were undoubtedly the foun⯑dation of the firſt printed botanical work of any conſequence, or popularity in Eng⯑land; and which appeared under the title of "The GRETE HERBAL, with cuts;" printed for Peter Treveris, as Ames tells us, in 1516. Before the impreſſion of this book in England, ſome editions of the "Herba⯑rius," [47] on the continent, had been aug⯑mented ſo far as to contain five hundred figures of plants. The "Grete Herbal" ſeems to have been well received in Eng⯑land, ſince there are ſubſequent copies, which bear the following dates; 1526, 1529, 1539: and in the Continuation of Ames, an edition is mentioned of the "Great Herbal," about the year 1550, "without the cuts." There is alſo an edition of this book ſo late as the year 1561, which is ten years after the date of TURNER's "Herbal." That of 1526 bears the fol⯑lowing title:

"The GRETE HERBALL whiche geveth parfyt knowledge & underſtandyng of all man⯑ner of Herbes and there gracyous vertues which God hath ordeyned for our proſperous welfare & helth, for they hele and cure all manner of dyſeaſes & ſekeneſſes that fall or miſ⯑fortune to all manner of creatoures of God created, practyſed by many expert and wyſe maſters, as AVICENNA and other &c. And it geveth full parfyte underſtandyng of the book lately prented by me (Peter Treveris) named the noble experiens of the vertuous [48] handwarke of Surgery." Imprynted at Lon⯑don in Southwarke by me Peter Treveris, dwelling in the Sign of the Wodows. 1526. the 27th day of July.

This volume is of the ſmall folio form; and if printed with numbered pages, would make three hundred and fifty, excluſive of the Preface and Index. It includes the animal, vegetable, and mineral ſubſtances, uſed in medicine; and is ſaid in the Intro⯑duction to be ‘"compyled, compoſed, and auctoryſed by divers and many noble Doc⯑tours and expert Mayſters in Medycynes; as Avicenna, Pandecta, Conſtantinus, Wil⯑helmus, Platearius, Rabbi Moyſes, Johan⯑nes Meſue, Haly, Albertus, Bartholomeus, and more other, &c."’

There is no author's name to it; but there are indubitable traces of its being fa⯑bricated from the Hortus Sanitatis, and pro⯑bably from the French tranſlation of that work, printed by Caron, at Paris, in 1499, with ſome alterations and additions.

It abounds with the barbarous and miſ⯑ſpelt names of the middle ages, and is un⯑doubtedly the work which TURNER refers [49] to in the Preface to his "Herbal," where he obſerves, that, ‘"as yet there was no Engliſh Herbal but one, al full of un⯑learned cacographees, and falſely naming of herbs."’

The general order is that of the alpha⯑bet, according to the Latin names, each ſubject forming a chapter, in the whole five hundred and five; of which, more than four hundred reſpect the vegetable productions; and of theſe one hundred and fifty bear the names of plants which are natives of Eng⯑land: but the writer remarks no other diſ⯑tinction, by which they are known from the exotics. The names are given in La⯑tin and Engliſh, but throughout the whole ſcarcely any deſcriptions. The qualities, whether hot or cold, dry or moiſt, accord⯑ing to the Galenic mode of the time, is in⯑variably noticed, followed generally by a prolix account of the diſeaſes to which the plant is applicable, and the method of uſing it.

To each is prefixed a coarſe wooden-cut figure, as in the Hortus Sanitatis, from [50] which, on a ſomewhat ſmaller ſcale, they are evidently copied; conſiſting generally of outlines only. Each block is two inches high, and nearly as wide. Many of theſe figures are fictitious, and many miſplaced. In a variety of inſtances the ſame figure is prefixed to different plants, and in very few are they ſufficiently expreſſive of the habit, to diſcriminate even a well-known ſubject, if the name applied did not ſuggeſt the idea of it. In ſome, theſe icons are whimſically abſurd, eſpecially in the animals and mine⯑rals, being alſo copies of thoſe in the Hortus Sanitatis. Thoſe of the Mandrake, for ex⯑ample, exhibit two perfectly human figures, with the plant growing from the head of each; though, to do the writer juſtice, he acknowledges, that no ſuch thing exiſts in nature. At the end is ſubjoined, "an ex⯑planation of ſome terms;" and "a tract on urines."

ASCHAM.

Anthony ASCHAM, a prieſt, and vicar of Burniſhton in Yorkſhire, to which he was [51] preferred by Edward VI. after a liberal edu⯑cation, which it might have been expected would have ſecured him from ſuch delu⯑ſion, gave himſelf up to the ſtudy of aſtro⯑logy, on which ſubject he publiſhed ſeveral tracts. He wrote alſo "on the Leap Year;" and the following:

"A LYTTEL HERBAL of the proper⯑ties of Herbs, newly amended and correct⯑ed, with certain additions at the end of the boke, declaryng what herbs hath influence of certain ſtarres and conſtellations, where⯑by may be choſen the beſt and moſt lucky times and days of their miniſtration, ac⯑cording to the Moon being in the ſigns of heaven, the which is daily appointed in the Almanack; made and gathered in the year M.D.L. xii Feb. by ANTHONYE ASCHAM, Phyſician." Lond. 1550. 12^o.

COPLAND.

I am not able to aſcertain the exact date of the underwritten, publiſhed by William COPLAND, a London printer.

"A Boke of the Properties of Herbs, called an Herball; whereunto is added the [52] tyme that Herbes, Flowrs, and Seeds ſhould be gathered, to be kept the whole yere, with the Virtue of Herbes when they are ſtilled. Alſo a general Rule of all manner of Herbes, drawn out of the auncient Book of Phyſick by W.C." London, by W^m Copland. 12mo.

BOTANICAL GARDENS.

The revival of Botany, and the conſe⯑quent eſtabliſhment of profeſſorſhips, gave riſe to Botanical gardens; a new ſpecies of luxury in horticulture, of ſingular emolument to ſcience. The hiſtory of antient gardens, hi⯑therto not ſufficiently illuſtrated, merits the inveſtigation of the moſt learned and able writer: of the pen of a RAPIN, a MEURSIUS, a SEGUIER, or a GRONOVIUS. We learn, however, that even Botanical gardens are of antient date. If it may be credited, what is related of ATTALUS, the laſt king of Per⯑gamus, who from his love of phyſic has been ſtiled the phyſician, he collected in his garden hellebore, henbane, aconite, and other poiſonous herbs, to make experiments on criminals with counter-poiſons. Crete, from [53] the earlieſt times renowned for the produc⯑tion of medicinal herbs, was the phyſic-gar⯑den of Rome. The Emperors, we are told, maintained in that iſland, herbariſts, and gardeners, to provide the phyſicians of Rome with ſimples. Caſtor, a Greek, praiſed both by PLINY and GALEN, is ſaid, not only to have written many volumes con⯑cerning plants, but to have had a garden at Rome, in which, PLINY relates, that CAS⯑TOR, at upwards of an hundred years of age, demonſtrated plants, and taught him to diſtinguiſh ſeveral rare and uſeful ſpe⯑cies.

The utility of theſe inſtitutions are ſelf⯑evident. By public gardens, medicinal plants are at the command of the teacher in every leſſon. By private ones, the eye, and the taſte of the opulent and ſcientific owner, is perpetually gratified with the ſucceſſion of curious, ſcarce, and exotic luxuries; in comparing the doubtful ſpecies, and examining them through all the ſtages of growth, with thoſe to which they are allied. Add to which, that all theſe ad⯑vantages are accumulated in a thouſand ob⯑jects [54] at the ſame time. The firſt public inſtitution of this kind, in more modern times, was that of Padua by the Venetians, in the year 1533. LUCAS GHINUS, the firſt public profeſſor of Botany in Europe, was a ſtrenuous promoter of the ſame de⯑ſigns; and by his influence procured the eſtabliſhment of a garden at Bologna, in 1547, where TURNER himſelf imbibed much of that knowledge, which afterwards gave him ſuch pre-eminence in his own country.

Among the earlieſt private gardens of the ſame kind, was that of EURICIUS CORDUS, the diſciple of the venerable LEONICENUS, and of MANARDUS, two of the firſt com⯑mentators who diſplayed true Botanical criticiſm, on the works of the antients. CORDUS ſhewed himſelf afterwards worthy of ſuch maſters. In his Botanologicon, print⯑ed in 1534, he mentions his own garden, and that of NORDECIUS at Caſſel. About the ſame time there were ſeveral opulent pa⯑trons of this ſcience in Italy, Germany, and France, who followed this example. GES⯑NER conſtructed a garden at Zurich in [55] 1560; the firſt of the kind in Switzerland. He not only delineated plants himſelf, but maintained, at his own expence, a draughtſ⯑man and engraver, for the ſame purpoſes. TURNER appears to have had a garden for rare plants, even during his reſidence at Cologn. In England he records the garden of the duke of Somerſet, at Sion Houſe, of which he ſeems to have had the direc⯑tion; and, at a later period, as hath been before obſerved, mentions alſo his own at Wells.

TURNER.

THE hiſtory of Engliſh Botany to this period, from its imperfect, and even barbarous ſtate, may perhaps not unaptly be conſidered as the fabulous age of the ſcience among us. But we are now arrived at the true Era of its birth in England. I cannot call it the reſtoration, ſince this nation, like Italy in the flouriſhing ſtate of Rome, had never been enlightened by the writings of Greece. It was much later be⯑fore the works of thoſe ſages reached this kingdom. Manuſcript copies of the PATRES BOTANICI, as hath been before obſerved, [57] were exceedingly rare; and the language itſelf in which they are written, had made ſmall progreſs in England.

On this head, indeed, my ſources of in⯑formation are very narrow; as far as they reach, I am not able to find, that one ma⯑nuſcript of THEOPHRASTUS exiſted at this period, in any of the public libraries of England. Of DIOSCORIDES, there are two MSS. in the Bodleian, N^o 3637, which bear the title of "De Herbarum Natura et Vir⯑tutibus, cum Iconibus elegantibus." And in the ſame collection, N^o 840, an Arabic verſion of the five books, cum Nominibus à Thoma Hyde adjectis. Of PLINY, there is ſaid to be an entire copy in Baliol library, N^o 279; an imperfect one, of eighteen books only, in the Norfolk collection, N^o 2996; and an epitome, in Trinity-college, Cambridge, N^o 459.

Even of the works of HIPPOCRATES, ſcarcely any were known except his Apho⯑riſms and Prognoſtics; and Linacre firſt made the Engliſh phyſicians acquainted with GALEN. But to return; the true Era of Botany in England, muſt commence [58] with Dr. William TURNER, who was un⯑queſtionably the earlieſt writer among us, that diſcovered learning and critical judg⯑ment in the knowledge of plants; and whoſe "Book of Herbs," as Dr. BUL⯑LEYN obſerves, ‘"will always grow green, and never wither as long as Dioſcorides is held in mind by us mortal wights."’ But, before I turn my attention to TURNER, I will remark, that, in an interval of thirty-four years between the firſt edition of "The Grete Herbal," in 1516, and that of TURNER, in 1550, I have it not in my power to refer to any publication on my ſubject, in the Engliſh tongue. That there were tranſlations of ſeveral of the writers of the middle ages, has been noticed. Among thoſe, on the continent, there were ſeveral by whoſe means Botany made a rapid pro⯑greſs. The principal were BRUNSFELSIUS, EURICIUS CORDUS, RUELLIUS, Valerius CORDUS, FUCHSIUS, and above all GES⯑NER, who, poſſeſſing a genius and induſ⯑try, almoſt unparalleled in theſe ſtudies, com⯑prehended this riſing branch of knowledge, with a more expanded view than any of his [59] predeceſſors, and extended its bounds beyond the limits, which, till that time, Materia Medica alone, had preſcribed to it. But GESNER's talents, though in Botany they were original, were ſtill more conſpicuous in his knowledge of the animal kingdom, in which, his writings will long be valued and eſteemed, by thoſe eſpecially, who, without painful reſearches, would ſee an⯑tient literature in a concentrated view. I ſpeak not of his abilities as a philologiſt and critic, in which characters he held a diſtinguiſhed place. But to proceed,

WILLIAM TURNER was born at Mor⯑peth in Northumberland, and educated at Pembroke college, Cambridge, under the patronage and aſſiſtance of Sir Thomas Wentworth. I find him a ſtudent of that college about the year 1538, where he ac⯑quired great reputation for his learning. He applied himſelf to philoſophy and phyſic, and early diſcovered an inclination to the ſtudy of plants, and a wiſh to be well ac⯑quainted with the Materia Medica of the antients.

He complains of the little aſſiſtance he [60] could receive in theſe purſuits. ‘"Being yet a ſtudent of Pembroke hall, whereas I could learn never one Greke, neither Latin, nor Engliſh name, even amongſt the phyſicians, of any herbe or tree: ſuch was the ignorance at that time; and as yet there was no Engliſh Herbal, but one all full of unlearned cacographies and falſely naming of herbes."’

At Cambridge, TURNER imbibed the principles of the reformers, and afterwards, agreeably to the practice of many others, united, to the character of the phyſician, that of the divine. He became a preacher, tra⯑velling into many parts of England, and propagated, with ſo much zeal, the cauſe of the reformation, that he excited perſe⯑cution from Biſhop Gardiner. He was thrown into priſon, and detained a conſi⯑derable time. On his enlargement, he ſub⯑mitted to voluntary exile, during the re⯑mainder of the reign of Henry VIII.

This baniſhment proved favourable to his advancement in medical and botanical ſtudies; he reſided at Baſil, at Straſburgh, at Bonn; but principally at Cologn, with [61] many other Engliſh refugees. He dwelt for ſome time at Wieſſenburgh; he travelled into Italy, and took the degree of Doctor of Phyſic at Ferrara. As, at this period, the learned were applying with great aſſi⯑duity to the illuſtration of the antients, it was a fortunate circumſtance to Dr. TUR⯑NER, that he had an opportunity of attend⯑ing the lectures of Lucas GHINUS, at Bo⯑logna, of whom he ſpeaks in his "Herbal" with great ſatisfaction; and frequently cites his authority againſt other commentators. GHINUS was the firſt who erected a ſepa⯑rate profeſſorial chair for Botanical ſcience; from whence he gave lectures on DIOSCO⯑RIDES, which he continued for twenty-eight years with great applauſe. He pro⯑cured the phyſic-garden to be founded at Bologna, to demonſtrate the plants he ſpoke of. He was the preceptor of CAESALPI⯑NUS and ANGUILLARA, who became two of the ſoundeſt critics in the knowledge of plants, that the age produced. TURNER reſided a conſiderable time at Baſil, from which place he dates the dedication of his book "On the Baths of England and [62] Germany." During his reſidence in Swit⯑zerland, he contracted a friendſhip with GESNER, and afterwards kept up a corre⯑ſpondence with him.

GESNER had a high opinion of TUR⯑NER, as appears by the following paſſage in his book De Herbis Lunariis, printed in 1555. ‘"Ante annos 15, aut circiter cum Anglicus ex Italia rediens, me ſalutaret (TURNERUS) is ſuerit vir excellentis tum in re medica tum aliis pleriſque diſciplinis doc⯑trinae, aut alius quiſpiam vix ſatis memini, &c."’

At the acceſſion of Edward VI. he re⯑turned to England, was incorporated Doc⯑tor of Phyſic at Oxford, appointed Phyſi⯑cian to Edward Duke of Somerſet, and, as a divine, was rewarded with a Prebend of York, a Canonry of Windſor, and the Deane⯑ry of Wells. He ſpeaks of himſelf in the third part of his Herbal, when treating on the herba Britannica, which he took to be the Biſtort, as having been phyſician to the "Erle of Embden, Lord of Eaſt Frieſ⯑land." In 1551 he publiſhed the firſt part of his hiſtory of plants, which he dedicat⯑ed [63] to the duke, his patron. His zeal in the cauſe of the reformation, which he had amply teſtified by ſeveral religious tracts, induced him to retreat to the continent, during the whole reign of Mary. At her deceaſe, Queen ELIZABETH reinſtated him in all his church preferments. In the de⯑dication of the compleat edition of his "Herbal" to the queen, in 1568, after complimenting her majeſty on account of her ſkill in the Latin language, and the fluency with which ſhe converſed in it, he acknowledges with gratitude, her favours in reſtoring him to his benefices, and in other ways protecting him from troubles; hav⯑ing, at four ſeveral times, granted him the great ſeal for theſe purpoſes. He ſeems to have divided his time between his deanery, where he had a Botanical garden, of which frequent mention is made in his "Her⯑bal," and his houſe in Crutched Friers, London. He alſo ſpeaks of his garden at Kew. From the repeated notices he takes of the plants in Purbeck, and about Port⯑land, I ſhould ſuppoſe he muſt have had ſome intimate connections in Dorſetſhire.

[64] Dr. TURNER died July 7, 1568, a few months after the publication of the laſt part of his "Herbal." He left ſeveral children: his ſon Peter was educated to phyſic, tra⯑velled, and took degrees abroad; was incor⯑porated doctor at Cambridge, and at Oxford; and died aged 72, in 1614; but I do not find that he inherited his father's turn to Botany.

TURNER's firſt work on the ſubject of plants, if BUMALDUS is not miſtaken, was printed at Cologn, under the title of "Hiſtoria de Naturis Herbarum Scholiis et Notis vallata." Colon. apud Gymnicum 1544. 8^o. Bumaldus is the only writer, in whom I find any mention of this book; and I ſuſpect, it was not republiſhed in England. It was followed by a ſmall volume under the title of "NAMES OF HERBES, in Greek, Latin, Engliſh, Dutch, and French." Lond. 12^o. 1548. This nomenclator is, I believe, be⯑come very ſcarce; ſince it has not yet found its way into the copious and magnificent collection of Sir Joſeph BANKS.

Dr. TURNER's knowledge in natural hiſ⯑tory was not confined to Botany; his earlieſt [65] publication appears to have been, a treatiſe on birds, under the following title:

"Avium praecipuarum quarum apud Plini⯑um et Ariſtotelem mentio eſt brevis et ſuccinct a hiſtoria, ex optimis quibuſque ſcriptoribus con⯑texta. Scholio illuſtrata et aucta. Adjectis nominibus Graecis, Germanicis, et Britannicis." Coloniae 1543. 8^o. Not having ſeen this volume, I can only ſay, that TURNER is mentioned by his friend GESNER, in re⯑ſpectful terms, as an ornithologiſt. ‘"Avium quidem nomina et naturas ante nos et pauci et breviter attigerunt ex quibus Gyb. Longolius Germanus, et Gulielmus TURNER Anglus viri doctiſſimi praecipuam merentur laudem." Geſn. Praef. ad Avium Hiſt.’ TURNER alſo contributed to enrich GESNER's muſeum (the firſt collection of that kind,) with na⯑tural curioſities, which he ſent from Eng⯑land. To which I add, that Dr. MERRET gives the following teſtimony to the worth of TURNER, in the Preface to his "Pinax:" ‘"Conſului in quibuſdam TURNERUM noſtra⯑tem inter viros ſuae aetatis exercitatiſſimum qui librum de avibus edidit mole parvum at judicio majorem."’

[66] Prefixed to the third volume of the Frankfort edition of GESNER's Hiſtoria Animalium, in 1620, we find a letter from Dr. TURNER, relating to the Engliſh fiſhes; which ſufficiently proves, that he had no inconſiderable degree of knowledge in that part of zoology. He makes an apology for the imperfections of it, as being written from memory, and at a diſtance from all his notes and obſervations. It conſiſts of three pages, in which he has briefly deſcribed more than fifty ſpecies; and it ſeems to be intended principally to give GESNER information on the Engliſh names, which TURNER has carefully noted, and often added the pro⯑vincial appellations. He takes in both ſea and river fiſh, and includes alſo the ſcal⯑lop and the cockle. This letter was writ⯑ten from Weiſſenburgh, and is dated Nov. 1, 1557. He undoubtedly purſued this branch of zoology much farther; ſince it appears from his dedication to the queen, that he intended ‘"to ſet out a book of the names and natures of the fiſhes of her majeſty's realms."’

But the work which ſecured his reputa⯑tion to poſterity, and entitled him to the [67] character of an original writer on that ſub⯑ject, in England, is his "Hiſtory of Plants," printed at different times, in three parts, in folio, with cuts. The firſt at London, in 1551, under this title, "A NEW HER⯑BALL, wherein are contayned the names of herbes in Greeke, Latin, Engliſh, Duch, Frenche, and in the Potecaries and Herba⯑ries Latin, with the properties, degrees, and natural places of the ſame gathered. For Steven Mierdman." Lond. 1551. The ſecond part at Cologn, 1562, during his exile in the reign of Mary. With this was reprinted the firſt part; and his "Book on the Bathes of England and Germany."

In 1568 theſe were reprinted, with the addition of the third part, which bears the following title: "The third part of W^m TURNER's HERBAL, wherein are contain⯑ed the herbes, rootes, and fruytes, whereof is no mention made of Dioſcorides, Galene, Plinye, and other old authors. Imprinted at Collen, by Arnold Birckman, in the year of our Lord 1566." The dedication, how⯑ever, to the company of ſurgeons, is dated from Wells, June 24, 1564.

[68] Dr. TURNER's "Herbal" is printed in the black letter, agreeably to the general uſage of the times, and is embelliſhed with the figures of moſt of the plants he de⯑ſcribes.

The arrangement is alphabetical, accord⯑ing to the Latin names; and, after the de⯑ſcription, he frequently ſpecifies the places of growth. He is ample in his diſcrimina⯑tion of the ſpecies, as his great object was, to aſcertain the Materia Medica of the an⯑cients, and of DIOSCORIDES in particular, throughout the vegetable kingdom. To this end he beſtows much criticiſm on the com⯑mentaries of FUCHSIUS, TRAGUS, MAT⯑THIOLUS, and other of his contemporaries; and profeſſes to have corrected many of their miſtakes, in the application of the names of DIOSCORIDES. In all this he has ſhewn much judgment, and, I may add, much moderation, in avoiding, more than uſual, the licence taken by many of the commen⯑tators, of applying the names of plants de⯑ſcribed in THEOPHRASTUS, DIOSCORIDES, and PLINY, to thoſe of the weſtern parts of Europe. What he ſays of the virtues of [69] plants, he has drawn from the ancients; but has, in numberleſs inſtances, given his opinion of their qualities, in oppoſition to thoſe ſages, and recorded his own experi⯑ence of the virtues. He no where takes any doubtful plants upon truſt, but appears to have examined them with all the preci⯑ſion uſually exerciſed at a time when me⯑thod, and principles now eſtabliſhed, were unthought of; every where comparing them with the deſcriptions of the antients and moderns. He firſt gave names to many Engliſh plants; and, allowing for the time when ſpecifical diſtinctions were not eſta⯑bliſhed, when almoſt all the ſmall plants were diſregarded, and the Cryptogamia almoſt wholly overlooked, the number he was acquainted with, is much beyond what could eaſily have been imagined, in an ori⯑ginal writer on his ſubject.

The third part of his "Herbal," dated from Welles, June 24, 1564, he dedicates to the company of ſurgeons; and apologizes for its imperfections: ‘"Being ſo much vexed with ſickneſs, and occupied with preaching, and the ſtudy of divinity, and [70] exerciſe of diſcipline, I have had but ſmall leiſure to write Herballes."’

In this part, he profeſſes to treat on the plants not known to DIOSCORIDES and the antients. It conſiſts of near an hundred articles, among which we find introduced many of the exotic ſubjects, which had be⯑fore been but little known; ſuch as caſſia fiſtula, cubebs, guaiacum, nutmegs, myroba⯑lans, nux indica, nux vomica, anacardium, rhubarb, ſarſaparilla, ſenna, and tamarinds. For theſe, many new figures were cut, which are executed in a ſtile ſuperior to the others. The remainder are principally the productions of our own country.

The compleat edition of TURNER's "Her⯑bal," in 1568, was printed at Cologn, un⯑queſtionably to receive the advantage of the figures, probably at that time the property of Birkman the printer. They are the ſame with which the octavo edition of FUCHSIUS was firſt printed in 1545; in all five hun⯑dred and twelve. Of theſe, TURNER has uſed upwards of four hundred; to which he has added about ninety new, making the whole number five hundred and two. [71] There are ſome inſtances of the wrong ap⯑plication of theſe figures; an error that might readily happen, when the author was at ſuch a diſtance, and was common in al⯑moſt all ſimilar works of that time. There are alſo ſeveral figures to which no deſcrip⯑tion of the plants can be found; for in⯑ſtance, the ſix figures of the Geraniums from FUCHSIUS occur, with a ſlight mention of only two ſpecies in the text.

TURNER is the firſt author who has given a figure of the Lucern; which, I ap⯑prehend, he firſt brought into England, and named Horned Clover. He treats largely of its cultivation, from PLINY, PALLA⯑DIUS, and COLUMELLA.

In the dedication to the firſt edition of his "Herbal," in 1551, Dr. TURNER ſpeaks in very reſpectful terms of the bo⯑tanical knowledge of ſeveral of his con⯑temporaries; and apologizes for his under⯑taking ſo arduous a matter, while there were learned Engliſhmen better qualified. He enumerates Dr. CLEMENT, Dr. MERDY, Owen WOOTON, and Maſter FALCONER. [72] The laſt-mentioned is ſeveral times introdu⯑ced in the body of the work. I can ſcarcely doubt that he was John FALCONER, who is recorded as having communicated many Engliſh plants to AMATUS LUSITANUS, who taught phyſic at Ferrara and Ancona, and made himſelf known as a commentator on DIOSCORIDES in 1553. In treating on the Glaux, of which TURNER gives a new figure, he ſays, ‘"He never ſaw it in Eng⯑land, except in Maſter Falconer's book; and that he brought it from Italy."’ From this and other like citations, it may reaſon⯑ably be conjectured, that "Falconer's Book" was an Hortus Siccus; and if ſo, muſt have been among the earlieſt collections of that kind, that is noticed in England.

In appreciating the merit of Dr. TUR⯑NER as a Botaniſt, due regard muſt be had to the time in which he lived; the little aſſiſtance he could derive from his contem⯑poraries, of whom, BRUNSFELSIUS, RUEL⯑LIUS, FUCHSIUS, and TRAGUS, when he publiſhed his firſt part of the "Herbal," were the chief; in which view, he will ap⯑pear [73] to have exhibited uncommon diligence and great erudition, and fully to deſerve the character of an original writer.

Our author paid early attention to mine⯑ral waters. He was probably the firſt who wrote on the baths of Bath, in Somerſet⯑ſhire. He viſited ſeveral of the mineral ſprings in Germany, Switzerland, and Italy; and drew up, whilſt abroad, a ſhort account of ten of thoſe waters; to which he pre⯑fixed a more enlarged hiſtory of the waters of Bath. This was written, as it ſhould ſeem, at Baſil, and is dedicated to his ‘"well⯑beloved neighbours of Bath, Briſtow, Wells, Winſam, and Charde,"’ March 10, 1557. He adjudged the principle of Bath water to be brimſtone, and poſſibly a little copper, from the vicinity of that metal in the neigh⯑bouring mountains. He ſays, he had been inſormed, that, beſides brimſtone, the King's bath held alum, and the Croſs bath ſalt⯑petre; but that he could find neither. He concludes his account of the baths, by a ſet of general rules for all who drink mineral waters; many of which do him no diſcre⯑dit, [74] when compared with the injunctions of modern phyſicians.

Our author alſo wrote "On the Nature of Wines commonly uſed in England," in vindication of the uſe of Rheniſh wines. To this was annexed a tract "On the Na⯑ture and Vertue of Treacle." But, as I never ſaw theſe treatiſes, I can give no ac⯑count of them.

Dr. TURNER was the author of many polemical and religious treatiſes, chiefly written in defence of the Reformation. Of theſe, a liſt is given in the Athenae Oxonien⯑ſes, and a more accurate and enlarged one in Biſhop TANNER's Bibliotheca. Several of his tracts are yet in manuſcript, in vari⯑ous libraries. He collated the tranſlation of the Bible with Hebrew, Greek, and La⯑tin copies, and corrected it in many places.

He procured to be printed at Antwerp, a new and corrected edition of the Hiſtoria Gentis noſtrae, ſ. Angliae, written by William of Newburgh, from a manuſcript he found in the library of Wells; but complains, that the printer not only omitted to inſert cer⯑tain [75] articles ſent by him, but left out the preface he ſent him, ſubſtituting one of his own. Our author alſo tranſlated ſeveral works from the Latin, particularly "The Compariſon of the Old Learning and the New;" written by Urbanus Regius. Southwark. 1537. 8^o; and again 1538 and 1548.

I will not conclude this ſhort memoir of Dr. TURNER, without remarking, that the ſucceeding Herbaliſts, GERARD, JOHN⯑SON, and PARKINSON, ſeem not to have paid due honour to his merit and learn⯑ing, from the ſilence they obſerve rela⯑ting to him in their writings. GERARD, indeed, mentions in his Preface, ‘"that ex⯑cellent work of maſter Dr. TURNER;"’ and, in another place, ſtiles him ‘"that ex⯑cellent, painefull, and diligent phyſition, Mr. Dr. TURNER, of late memorie."’ In juſtice to TURNER, they ſhould have noticed all the plants he has recorded, par⯑ticularly the natives of England.

RAY, at the diſtance of near a century, was ſenſible of his worth, having ſtiled [76] him ‘"a man of ſolid erudition and judg⯑ment^*."’

BULLEYN.

COntemporary with TURNER lived Dr. William BULLEYN. Although this writer does not come ſtrictly within my plan; yet, as he lived at a period bar⯑ren of intereſting materials, and, as we learn from him ſeveral curious anecdotes reſpecting natural hiſtory and the ſtate of gardening in England at that period, he cannot be paſſed over in ſilence.

Biſhop TANNER briefly notices Dr. BUL⯑LEYN, and his writings; but his life is amply written in the Biographia Britannica, to which I muſt principally be indebted for my information.

[78] He was born in the Iſle of Ely, in the early part of Henry the Eighth's reign, and was educated at Cambridge, though, as Wood ſays, he afterwards reſided ſome time at Oxford. It appears that he had travelled over ſeveral parts of Germany; that he viſit⯑ed Scotland, and had taken many tours in his native country; in all which, he ſtudied the natural productions with a zeal and ſucceſs not common in that age. In an early period of his life, he was much con⯑verſant about the city oſ Norwich. In June 1550, he was inſtituted to the rectory of Blaxhall, in Suffolk, where his relations re⯑ſided. This preferment he reſigned in 1554. Where he took the degree of doc⯑tor in phyſic, is not aſcertained; but, from his prior attachment to phyſic, his known oppoſition to the doctrine of Tranſubſtan⯑tiation, and the reſignation of his living in the beginning of Mary's reign, it may be fairly conjectured, that he did not take his degrees in that faculty till after that period, and probably abroad. Aſter this, we find him removed to the city of Durham, where he practiſed phyſic, and became poſſeſſed of [79] property in the ſalt-pans, near Tinmouth Caſtle. On the death of his patron, Sir Thomas Hilton, he removed to London, where he became a member of the college of phyſicians, and acquired reputation as a phyſician, and a man of learning. This event took place about the year 1560. He had the misfortune to loſe great part of his library, with his manuſcript upon "Healthfull Medicines," by ſhipwreck; and after this diſaſter, met with moſt un⯑juſt and malevolent treatment, from a bro⯑ther of Sir Thomas Hilton, by whom he was accuſed of having murdered his late patron, who died, in fact, of a malignant fever. And although his innocence was fully manifeſted, yet his enemy perſiſting further in his perſecution, found means to throw him into priſon, for debt, where he wrote a great part of his medical treatiſes. He died Jan. 7, 1576. He appears to have been much attached to the principles of the reformation. Biſhop TANNER ſays he was a man of acute judgment and true piety.

I am not acquainted with any print of Dr. TURNER. Of Dr. BULLEYN there is [80] a profile with a long beard, before his "Government of Health," and a whole length of him in wood prefixed to the "Bulwarke of Defence;" which book is a collection of moſt of his works. He was an anceſtor of the late Dr. STUKELY, who, in 1722, was at the expence of having a ſmall head of him engraved.

The part of his works, which has the neareſt connection with my ſubject, is in his "Bulwark of Defence," in fol. 1562.

It is entitled, "A Book of Simples, be⯑ing an HERBAL in the form of a dia⯑logue, at the end of which are the cuts of ſome plants in wood." In this piece he obſerves, that tormentil, in paſtures, prevents the rot in ſheep; and adds, that the fact was confirmed by the ſhepherds in ſundry parts of Norfolk. In his enumera⯑tion of the virtues of ſimples, from other authors, he does not fail to record his own experience on the power of ſeveral, in re⯑moving ſevere diſeaſes. Of the effects of Dit⯑tander, calamus aromaticus, the Daiſy, and others, he adduces particular inſtances. It were to be wiſhed, that ſucceeding obſerva⯑tions, [81] had confirmed his repreſentation. His travels, and the great attention he had paid to the native productions of his own country, had given him a comprehenſive view of the natural fertility of the ſoil, and climate of England; which, from the te⯑nour of his writings, ſeems to have been, at that time, by ſome people much depreci⯑ated. He oppoſes this idea with patriotic zeal and concern, and alleges various ex⯑amples, to prove, that we had excellent apples, pears, plums, cherries, and hops, of our own growth, before the impor⯑tation of theſe articles into England by the London and Kentiſh gardeners, but that the culture of them had been greatly ne⯑glected. He endeavours to confirm the na⯑tural fertility of the land, from the memor⯑able inſtance of the ſea peaſe, on the beach, near Orford and Aldborough; by an im⯑menſe crop of which the poor were pre⯑ſerved in a time of dearth, in the year 1555. Of which ſee further accounts in Johnſon's GERARD, p. 1250; PARKINSON's "Thea⯑tre," p. 1060; and LOBEL's Illuſtra⯑tiones, p. 164.

[82] To conclude, Dr. Bulleyn's ſpecific knowledge of Botany ſeems to have been but ſlender. His zeal for the promotion of the uſeful arts of gardening, the general culture of the land, and the commercial in⯑tereſts of the kingdom, deſerved the higheſt praiſe, and for the information he has left of theſe affairs, in his own time, poſterity owe him acknowledgments.

Although the progreſs of gardening does not enter into my plan, yet I am tempted, in this place, to remark, that, notwith⯑ſtanding culinary herbs and roots, and many fruits, are ſaid to have been imported in the reign of HENRY the Eighth, from Holland and France; and that the true aera of im⯑provement in this art, cannot be carried, at the moſt remote time, beyond the ſame reign, yet it may juſtly be doubted, whether it was then in ſo low a ſtate as hath been uſually repreſented. With other arts, in its progreſſion weſtwards, that of Horticul⯑ture muſt be ſuppoſed to have reached the Low Countries and France, before England; and a general, and prior ſuperiority to our neighbours may be granted; and that a [83] faſhion, and a too great fondneſs for ra⯑rities of foreign growth, might influence the London market, of which the ſpirit of commerce would not fail to take advan⯑tage, muſt likewiſe be admitted. But, to the arguments and proofs alledged by Dr. BULLEYN, in defence of the fertility of his native ſoil, and the perfection of our own products; and, as a proof of the ſuc⯑ceſsful cultivation of thoſe times, I add, that from an inſpection of our old Herbals, and particularly of PARKINSON's Paradi⯑ſus, we find the various ſpecies of culinary herbs, roots, and of fruits, multiplied in England to ſuch a variety, as implies a pre⯑ceding courſe of culture carried on for a ſeries of time, inconſiſtent with that po⯑verty of produce which hath been ſur⯑miſed.

PENNY.

Having introduced to the reader, the two firſt reſpectable writers on Botany in Eng⯑land, I cannot but regret my want of ſuf⯑ficient information, to reſcue from an al⯑moſt total obſcurity, the name of Dr. [84] Thomas PENNY, an Engliſhman of the ſame age; who, although not an author himſelf, was indubitably a man of great attainments in the natural hiſtory, and eſpecially in the Botany, of his time. GERARD ſtiles him ‘"A ſecond Dioſcorides, for his ſingular knowledge in plants."’ I cannot aſcertain the date of his birth. It appears that he was a fellow of the royal college of phyſi⯑cians, and that he had travelled into vari⯑ous parts of Europe. He had reſided in Switzerland, and had viſited, if not made ſome ſtay in, the iſland of Majorca. That he had diligently ſearched both the northern and ſouthern parts of England is manifeſt, from the variety of rare plants diſcovered by him, and communicated to LOBEL and GERARD. He was perſonally known to GESNER and CAMERARIUS, and after⯑wards frequently ſupplied them with rare plants, for their reſpective Herbaria and gardens.

During his reſidence in Switzerland, he collected many plants of that country, and from the confines of France. He aſſiſted GESNER, as appears by his obſervations [85] and animadverſions on that author's tables, publiſhed by SCHMIEDEL from the col⯑lections of TREW, in 1753, in which the moſt honourable teſtimony is given to his abilities. I ſuſpect he was in Switzerland, at the time of GESNER's death, and aſſiſt⯑ed WOLF in arranging the plants, and me⯑morials of their deceaſed friend.

There can be no doubt that PENNY and CLUSIUS were alſo perſonally acquainted. They appear to have had a ſtrict intimacy, and the latter was obliged to PENNY for a variety of curious articles inſerted in his Rariores, and in the Exoticae. Dr. PENNY brought from Majorca the hypericum ba⯑learicum, which CLUSIUS named myrto⯑ciſtus PENNAEI after him, as he did a gen⯑tian, now the ſwertia perennis. The ſame of the geranium tuberoſum. The cornus her⯑bacea, that beautiful native of the Cheviot hills, was firſt revealed to the curious by this induſtrious naturaliſt.

Dr. PENNY's acquirements in natural hiſtory extended beyond the knowledge of plants. He is one of the firſt Engliſhmen whom I have met with, who had ſtudied [86] inſects. There are letters witten by him to CAMERARIUS, in the year 1585, preſerved in TREW's collections, which prove his knowledge in entomology, to have been extenſive in that day: and it is ſuppoſed by SCHMIEDEL, that GESNER's drawings of Papilio's, paſſed into the hands of PENNY. This ſuppoſition is rendered more probable, when it is recollected, that the Theatrum Inſectorum of MOUFET, was a work begun by Dr. Edward WOOTON, Conraae GESNER, and Dr. PENNY, and received only the finiſhing hand from MOU⯑FET.

Dr. PENNY died in 1589, and is ſaid by JUNGERMAN to have left his papers to MOUFET and TURNER; but, in this ac⯑count there is ſurely a very ſtriking ana⯑chroniſm, ſince TURNER himſelf died in the year 1568.

MAPLET.

John MAPLET, maſter of arts, of Cam⯑bridge, publiſhed in the year 1567, "A GREEN FOREST; or, Natural Hiſ⯑tory; wherein may be ſeen, the ſove⯑raign [87] vertues of all kinds of ſtones, and metals, herbs, trees, beaſts, fouls, and fiſhes; 112 leaves, 8^o." I have not ſeen Maplet's book; but from the title of ano⯑ther work of his, "The Dial of Deſtinie; or, Influence of the Seven Planets over all Kinds of Creatures here below," pub⯑liſhed in 1581, it may fairly be pre⯑ſumed, that he was deep in the fancies of the aſtrologic ſect.

MORNING.

Between the publication of TURNER's Herbal, and that of LYTE, I find a book, of which, not having ſeen it, or been able to refer to any account, I can only recite the title. "The Treaſure of Euonymus by Peter MORNING; with wooden cuts. Imprinted by John Day." 4^o, 1575.

LYTE.

HENRY LYTE, Eſq of an ancient fa⯑mily, at Lytes-Carey, in Somerſetſhire, was the next after TURNER who publiſhed an Engliſh Herbal. He was born in 1529, and became a ſtudent at Oxford in the lat⯑ter end of Henry VIII. about the year 1546. He afterwards travelled; and at length re⯑tired to his patrimony, where, as Wood ſays, ‘"by the advantage of a good foundation of literature made in the univerſity and abroad, he became a moſt excellent ſcho⯑lar in ſeveral ſorts of learning."’ He was the author of various publications of the hiſtorical kind, which are enumerated in the Athenae Oxonienſes. He died at the age of 78, [89] and was buried at Charlton-Mackerel, in the ſame county. He left a ſon, who drew up a genealogy of James I. for which the king rewarded him with his picture in gold, ſet with diamonds; and the prince, afterwards Charles I. gave him alſo his picture in gold.

Although Mr. LYTE does not rank a⯑mong original writers in Botany, his work nevertheleſs ſeems to have been well re⯑ceived. Even the arrangement alone would inſtantly give it a great advantage over Turner's book. It is profeſſedly a tranſla⯑tion from the French verſion of the Dutch Herbal of DODOENS, written by the au⯑thor in 1553, and tranſlated by Cluſius in 1557; being the firſt of his publications. Of DODOENS, it will be neceſſary to give ſome account; but I ſhall defer it till I ſpeak of GERARD, as the improved editions of DO⯑DOENS's book were the baſis of that au⯑thor's work.

The firſt edition of LYTE's Herbal was publiſhed at Antwerp. It is printed in the black letter, and bears the following title:

"A NIEWE HERBALL, or HISTORIE OF [90] PLANTES, wherein is contayned the whole diſcourſe and perfect deſcription of all ſorts of herbs and plantes; their divers and ſun⯑dry kindes; their ſtraunge figures, faſhions, and ſhapes; their names, natures, and ope⯑rations and vertues: and that not only of thoſe which are here growyng in this our countrie of Englande, but of all others alſo of forayne realmes, commonly uſed in phy⯑ſicke. Firſt ſet forth in the Doutche or Almaigne tongue, by that learned D. Rem⯑bert DODOENS, phyſition to the emperor; and now firſt tranſlated by "Henry LYTE, Eſquyer. At London, by me, Gerard Dewes. 1578."—The Colophon, "imprinted at Antwerpe, by me, Henry Loe, book-printer." pp. 779.

Mr. LYTE dedicates his work to queen Elizabeth; and has prefixed the preface and appendix in Latin, from DODOENS, or DODONAEUS. The latter of theſe is a col⯑lection from DIOSCORIDES and CATO, but chiefly from PLINY, relating to the riſe and progreſs of botanical and agricultural [91] knowledge among the Romans; and in commendation of gardens, with rules for laying them out, and managing them to advantage.

He has followed his original in dividing his ſubjects into ſix books; and, although the general arrangement is confuſed, LYTE has the merit of having introduced a parti⯑cular order in each chapter, or genus, much ſuperior to that of TURNER; having di⯑vided the ſpecies, deſcription, place, time, names, nature, and virtues, under theſe ſe⯑veral titles, into diſtinct ſections. This ar⯑rangement was adopted by GERARD and PARKINSON.

LYTE deſcribes one thouſand and fifty ſpecies, of which eight hundred and ſeventy are figured. The blocks are, I believe, the ſame with which CLUSIUS's own tranſla⯑tion was printed; being, as far as thoſe ex⯑tend, copies from the octavo edition of FUCHSIUS. Moſt of TURNER's figures are found in LYTE. The remainder are ſuch as had been cut for the ſubſequent works of DODOENS, and afterwards embelliſhed the Pemptades of that author, and GERARD's [92] hiſtory. The Engliſh tranſlator added about thirty new ones. Among theſe, ſeveral are in a ſtyle ſuperior to thoſe of CLUSIUS and GERARD; ſuch are particularly, the Salvia Aethiops; the Stratiotes aloides; the Rha, or Centaurea Rhaponticum; and others.

Some are original: I cite only the Erica Tetralix, of which I find no figure prior to Lyte's; that of GERARD (or, which is the ſame, of Cluſius) applied to it by JOHN⯑SON, being certainly intended to repreſent another ſpecies, and is accordingly referred to the Mediterranea by LINNAEUS.

The firſt edition of Lyte is adorned with a finely-cut impreſſion in wood of DODO⯑ENS, in the thirty-fifth year of his age; and a large engraving of Mr. Lyte's coat of arms.

This firſt edition was undoubtedly printed at Antwerp, to receive the advantage of the figures. The ſubſequent editions, there⯑fore, afterwards printed in England, are without figures. It was reprinted, as Ames informs us, in 1586, and in 1595; and, according to Wood, by Ninion Newton, at London, in 1589, in quarto alſo, without [93] cuts. I find editions mentioned, with the dates 1600 and 1619, which, if genuine, and not in the title-page only, is a proof of its popularity; and that it was not ſuper⯑ſeded by the larger work of GERARD in 1597. SEGUIER even quotes one, ſo late as the year 1678.

As in the interval between the publica⯑tion of CLUSIUS's French tranſlation in 1557, and the Engliſh verſion of it by LYTE in 1578, the author had at different times compleated the ſeveral parts of his Hiſtoriae Plantarum, it may be preſumed, that LYTE profited by thoſe works. From ſome of the commendatory verſes prefixed, it ſhould ſeem, that Dodoens himſelf com⯑municated additions to LYTE. As I have not had an opportunity of comparing the French verſion of Cluſius with LYTE, I cannot notice the nature of his alterations, or the extent of his additions. The intro⯑duction of the Engliſh names was a neceſ⯑ſary augmentation.

In the mean time, there ſeems to be no ground for the criticiſm of THRELKELD; who accuſes LYTE of having omitted the [94] Purgantium Hiſtoria of DODONAEUS, of which LYTE appears unqueſtionably to have introduced the moſt material ſubjects.

Engliſh Botany, however, received little or no acceſſion from LYTE himſelf. It is not in more than about twenty inſtances, that he has even pointed out the local ſitu⯑ation of any rare Engliſh plants; and, in theſe inſtances, there is ſcarcely one, which had not been thus ſpecifically recorded by TURNER and LOBEL, before him.

Hence, I am not able to give LYTE the credit, although he lived at ſo early a pe⯑riod, of being the firſt diſcoverer of a ſin⯑gle ſpecies of rare growth. Yet, as it is but juſtice to ſuppoſe him well acquainted with all the common plants, ſo a large number of theſe, which had been unnoticed by TURNER, or are not eaſily aſcertained in his work, will be found firſt announced to the Engliſh Botaniſt in LYTE. I con⯑feſs, however, that it is extremely difficult to determine, in a variety of inſtances, whe⯑ther the general places of growth, as men⯑tioned in this author, are inſerted from his own knowledge, or whether they ſtand as [95] tranſlated by him from CLUSIUS. It is this doubt that has induced me, not unfre⯑quently, to aſcribe to GERARD, or JOHN⯑SON, the firſt knowledge of many common plants certainly aſcertained by them, that occur, nevertheleſs, in LYTE's work.

This author furniſhes very few obſerva⯑tions which tend to illuſtrate the ſtate of the ſcience, between the time of TURNER and his own. Nor does he mention, in more than one or two inſtances, any of his contemporaries. Under the article Verbaſ⯑cum, he ſpeaks of ‘"the pleaſant garden of James Champaigne, the deer friende and lover of plantes:"’ but without any infor⯑mation of his character, or place of abode. And, under that of Sweet Trefoil, ‘"the garden of maiſter Rich."’

LOBEL.

MATTHIAS de LOBEL, though not a native of Britain, contributed ſo largely to the emolument of Engliſh Bo⯑tany, that he juſtly claims attention in the object of this work. LOBEL was of Fle⯑miſh extraction, and was born in 1538 at Liſle, where his father was in the profeſ⯑ſion of the law.

He informs us, that, at the age of ſix⯑teen, he was enamoured with the love of [97] plants; and had an unconquerable deſire to know the names and properties of thoſe uſed in phyſic. He ſtudied at Montpelier, under the famous RONDELETIUS. Dur⯑ing his reſidence there, he travelled over the ſouth of France in ſearch of ſimples.

At Narbone he formed a connection with Peter PENA, who was jointly concerned with him in his firſt work the Adverſaria. On leaving France, he extended his reſearches by travelling over Switzerland, the county of Tyrol, ſome parts of Germany, and Italy; and on his return ſettled as a phyſician at Antwerp, and afterwards at Delft. He was then made phyſician to William Prince of Orange, and to the States of Holland. On what occaſion he removed into Eng⯑land, or at what period of his life, I cannot aſcertain. From the circumſtance how⯑ever of the Adverſaria bearing date at Lon⯑don in 1570, it ſhould ſeem to have been before that time, which opinion is ſome⯑what corroborated, by his informing us, that Dr. TURNER had given him, "long before," the ſeeds of the ſea kale.

In England, he obtained the patronage of [98] Lord Zouch, whom he attended in 1592, in his embaſſy to the court of Denmark. This tour furniſhed him with further means of augmenting his knowledge in Botany; and, through the correſpondence he formed there, of introducing into England ſeveral exotic rarities, before that time un⯑known to this country. He had the ſuperin⯑tendance of a garden at Hackney, which he calls a phyſic-garden, cultivated at the ex⯑pence of his patron. He was afterwards ſtiled Botaniſt to King James, as appears by the imprimatur to the ſecond edition of the Adverſaria; and by his own letter prefixed to GERARD's "Herbal." Whether any emolument was annexed to this title, I am unable to decide. He had a daughter married to a Mr. James COEL, who lived at Highgate, near London; and it is pro⯑bable, from the very frequent mention that LOBEL makes of that place in his laſt work, the Illuſtrationes, that he reſided in the latter years of his life with his ſon-in-law.

He died in 1616, aged 78. There was a print of LOBEL, but it is very ſcarce, I have [99] only ſeen it in the collection of the late Mr. Gulſton.

The firſt of LOBEL's publications, and which more eminently agrees with the de⯑ſign of this work, as it brought a large ac⯑ceſſion to Engliſh Botany, was the Stirpium Adverſaria. The profeſſed intention of this work was to inveſtigate the Botany and materia medica of the antients, and parti⯑cularly of DIOSCORIDES; and LOBEL is judged to have corrected the errors of MATTHIOLUS, upon that author, in many inſtances.

As PENA was jointly concerned with LOBEL in this work, it is become impoſ⯑ſible, at this time, to aſſign to each their ſeparate ſhare. The firſt edition of the Adverſaria, dated at London 1570, was dedicated to the queen. This dedication was omitted in an edition printed at Ant⯑werp in 1576. Editions bearing date 1571, 1572, are recorded, but it may be doubted whether theſe were more than title-page alterations. To that of the whole Adver⯑ſaria, which bears date London 1605, by Purfoot alſo, is prefixed LOBEL's Animad⯑verſiones [100] in Rondeletii methodicam Pharma⯑ceuticam officinam; containing 156 pages. After this, the title, and a dedication to the profeſſors at Montpelier, printed by Pur⯑foot; but the ſucceeding firſt part of the Ad⯑verſaria, is on a much better paper, and in a finer type, and evidently printed by Plantin as far as to page 450; to which ſucceeds one leaf, added in Purfoot's type, contain⯑ing the account of the Plocamos of Port⯑land, and of the Barnacle, the fabulous hiſtory of which he relates, without wholly denying it. Then follows, (the pages being continued,) the ſecond part of the Adver⯑ſaria, now firſt printed by the London printer. To which is annexed, LOBEL's "Tract on the Balſams, Cinnamon, Caſ⯑ſia," and various other matters; with a ſmall treatiſe on the dropſy, and the ele⯑phantiaſis, written by his much reverenced maſter RONDELETIUS.

The ſecond edition bears the following title, "Dilucidae Simplicium Medicamentorum explicationes, et STIRPIUM ADVERSARIA, perfacilis veſtigatio, luculentaque acceſſio ad priſcorum, praeſertim Dioſcoridis et recentiorum [101] Materiae Medicae ſolidam cognitionem. Metho⯑do exquiſitiſſima, a notioribus ſummiſque claſ⯑ſium generibus ad ultimas uſque ſpecies digeſta. Authoribus Petro PENA, et Matthia de LOBEL medicis. Quibus acceſſit ALTERA PARS, cum prioris illuſtrationibus, caſtigationibus, aucta⯑riis, rarioribus Plantis. Selectioribus remediis, ſuccis medicatis et metallicis, medicinae theſau⯑ris, opii opiati antidoti, decantatiſſimique chy⯑miſtarum et germanorum laudani opiati for⯑mulis. Opera et Studio Matthiae de Lobel, Londini 1605. pp. 549.

Acceſſit Matthiae de Lobel, in Rondeletii Methodicam Pharmaceuticam animadverſiones cum Myrei paragraphis. pp. 156."

Reprinted at Frankfort in 1651.

In the execution of this work, there is exhibited, I believe, the firſt ſketch, rude as it is, of a natural method of arrange⯑ment; which, however, extends no far⯑ther than throwing the plants into large tribes, families, or orders, according to the external appearance, or habit of the whole plant or flower; without eſtabliſh⯑ing any definitions or characters. The whole forms forty-four tribes. Some con⯑tain [102] the plants of one, or two modern ge⯑nera: others many; and ſome, it muſt be confeſſed, very incongruous to each other. On the whole, they are much ſuperior to DODOENS's diviſions; and ſufficiently teſ⯑tify, that the author was ſenſible of the want of a better arrangement than the mere alphabetic order, or that formed from the ſuppoſed qualities, and uſes in medicine.

At the head of each tribe, or family, he prefixes a ſynoptical view of all the ſpecies to be deſcribed under it. His method, then, is to give the Greek and Latin name; and, wherever he can, the name of the genus and ſpecies, in German, Dutch, French, and Engliſh. Then the deſcription of the plant, the time of flowering, the country in which it grows ſpontaneouſly; and, in Eng⯑land, he points out the particular ſpot, where ſome of the more rare are found: Mr. RAY, however, has remarked, that in this reſpect LOBEL has been inaccurate, or truſted too much to his memory; ſince many have been ſought for in vain, in the ſituations he ſpecified. Frequent reference is made in the margin to the figures in [103] FUCHSIUS, MATTHIOLUS, DODONAEUS, as far as p. 200; after which, this aſſiſtance is wanting. LOBEL's own figures are ſmall, and inſufficient in many caſes to expreſs the habit of the plant, the delineation of which, was almoſt the extent of the efforts of thoſe days.

LOBEL having carefully ſtudied the an⯑tients, on the Materia Medica; having tra⯑velled much, and ſeen plants in various countries, was enabled to exerciſe critical ſkill, and to detect numerous errors in the diſpenſation of ſimples, which he does not fail to point out. His ſtrong attachment to the ſtudy intereſted him powerfully in the inveſtigation of new plants, and enabled him to make large acceſſions to knowledge. He travelled over various parts of England, and diſcovered many vegetables before unnoticed. He added to the graſſes a number of new ſpecies; and, although his ſtile is univer⯑ſally condemned as harſh and incorrect, and his deſcriptions frequently obſcure and in⯑ſufficient, the Adverſaria has, on the whole, great merit, abounding with much curious intelligence, and ſome new diſcoveries.

[104] The ſecond part of the Adverſaria is but a ſmall part of the whole. It preſents us with a liſt of one hundred and thirty ſpe⯑cies of graſſes, known to the author: this is followed by the figures and deſcriptions of ſome new and rare kinds, of the ſame tribe. A number of new plants of the liliaceous and bulbous-rooted order; a copious ac⯑count, with a figure, of the yucca, lately introduced; concluding with a catalogue from CLUSIUS, of thirty-eight varieties of Anemone—a proof of the flouriſhing ſtate of the Floriſt's art, in the beginning of the laſt century; at which time it is certain, from LOBEL's book, that many people were very aſſiduous in the cultivation of exotics.

In 1576, LOBEL publiſhed a book, well known, and much quoted ſince, by the name of "OBSERVATIONES; ſive Stirpium Hiſtoriae, cui annexum eſt Adverſariorum Vo⯑lumen. In fol. cum Iconibus."

By the aſſiſtance of Plantin, this volume was accompanied with 1486 figures, which had been cut for the works of CLUSIUS, MATTHIOLUS, and DODONAEUS.

In 1581 it was tranſlated into Dutch, to⯑gether [105] with the Adverſaria, and the figures augmented to the number of 2116. The ſame year the icons were ſeparately caſt off, on paper of the oblong form; the figures amounting to 2191. Some of theſe im⯑preſſions were accompanied with an index, in ſeven languages, which rendered it a very popular book for many years. It preſerves ſome value to this day, as being the edi⯑tion that LINNAEUS quotes throughout his works.

LOBEL had meditated a very large work, which was to have borne the title of "IL⯑LUSTRATIONES PLANTARUM;" but he lived not to finiſh it. Some of his papers fell into the hands of PARKINSON, and were incorporated into his Theatrum. A frag⯑ment of the above-mentioned work was publiſhed by Dr. How, in 1655; which contains the deſcriptions of many graſſes, and other plants newly diſcovered, or lately introduced. Of the graſſes, many here re⯑corded were firſt diſcovered by LOBEL. The preface contains ſome ſevere cenſures on GERARD, and reflexions on the treatment LOBEL had received from bookſellers; all [106] written in a ſtile very reprehenſible in a man of letters. He may be juſtly accuſed of uncandid and diſingenuous conduct to⯑wards GERARD, whom, while living, he had treated with the appearance of friend⯑ſhip and eſteem, and of whoſe abilities, and zeal, he had ſpoken in the higheſt terms; as is manifeſt in various parts of the Ad⯑verſaria, in the atteſtation to the catalogue of GERARD's Garden, and by the recom⯑mendatory letter prefixed to his Herbal.

I regret that I am not able to do more than barely enumerate the following per⯑ſons, who were zealous promoters of gar⯑dening, and botanical knowledge, in the time of LOBEL, and liberal in their communi⯑cations to him.

Dr. James CARGIL, of Aberdeen; of whom, however, ſome brief mention will be made hereafter.

Edward SAINTLOO, Eſq of Somerſet⯑ſhire, whom he ſpeaks of as much attached to ſtudies of this kind.

James CO [...]I, of Highgate, ſon-in-law to LOBEL.

[107] J. NASMYTH, ſurgeon to James the Firſt.

John De FRANQUEVILLE, a merchant in London; a celebrated floriſt, and a great lover of all rare plants, as well as flowers; from whoſe care, as Parkinſon ſays, ‘"is ſprung the greateſt ſtore that is now flouriſhing in this kingdom."’

Hugh MORGAN, apothecary to queen Elizabeth; of whoſe garden very frequent mention occurs, in both parts of the Ad⯑verſaria; and alſo in GERARD's Hiſtory afterwards, who ſtiles him ‘"a curious con⯑ſervator of ſimples."’

William COYS, of Stubbers, in the pariſh of North Okington, in Eſſex, poſſeſſed a garden, which both LOBEL^* and GERARD inform us, was richly ſtored with exotics. Under his care, the yucca firſt flowered in England, in the year 1604.

[108] To theſe muſt be added the well-known names of GERARD and PARKINSON.

NEWTON.

There is "an Herbal to the Bible," ſaid to be written by Thomas NEWTON, and printed in 1587. 8^o. This author, after having practiſed phyſic, became a divine and ſchoolmaſter, at Ilford, in Eſſex; where he died in 1607. His book, I believe, is only a tranſlation of "LEVINI LEMNII Expli⯑catia Similitudinum quae in Bibliis ex herbis et arboribus ſumuntur." LEMNIUS, who was a phyſician in the province of Zealand, briefly deſcribes the plants of the holy Scrip⯑tures, and produces a number of curious philological obſervations reſpecting the uſes of plants in ceremonial and ſacred rites. He alſo wrote a memorable work, De Mi⯑raculis occultis Naturae. The ſingular pro⯑perty [109] of madder in colouring red the bones of animals that are fed with it, appears to have been known to Lemnius; but whether he learnt it from Mizaldus, or the latter from him, I know not. His book was among the earlieſt productions in its way, and ſeems to have been well received, as may be judged by its paſſing through twelve or thirteen editions, from its firſt publica⯑tion in 1563 to 1627.

I conceive this Thomas NEWTON to have been the writer of thoſe commendatory lines prefixed to LYTE's Herbal; in which, after complimenting the author for his ju⯑dicious ſelection of uſeful knowledge from former writers, he has verſified, in leſs than two pages, the names of more than two hundred worthies in medical ſcience, from the earlieſt antiquity to his own times.

GERARD.

LOBEL's writings, howſoever eſteem⯑ed by the learned, having never been tranſlated into Engliſh, could not become popular; and, at the concluſion of the ſix⯑teenth century, TURNER's book was, pro⯑bably no leſs obſolete, than LYTE's was imperfect. Theſe circumſtances, conſpiring with the growing taſte of the times for gar⯑dening, it may be preſumed, incited GE⯑RARD to undertake his Herbal: a work which maintained its credit and eſteem for more than a century; and, pleaſing as it is to reflect on the rapid progreſs and im⯑provement of Botany, within the laſt half century, yet there are many now living who [111] can recollect, that when they were young in ſcience, there was no better ſource of Bota⯑nical intelligence, in the Engliſh tongue, than the Herbals of GERARD and PARK⯑INSON.

It has been obſerved, that the early edi⯑tion of DODOENS's book, as tranſlated by CLUSIUS, had been the baſis of LYTE's Herbal; and, as the laſt edition of the ſame author became the foundation of GE⯑RARD's, this circumſtance renders it not unſuitable here to take ſome notice of an author, although a foreigner, to whom he owed ſo much of that credit, which has preſerved his memory to the preſent times.

Rembert DODOENS, or DODONAEUS, was born in 1517, near Mechlin in Flanders. He became conſpicuous for his various eru⯑dition when young; was phyſician for ſome time to the Emperor Maximilian, and his ſon Rodolph II. The importunity of his friends procured his diſmiſſion from the Emperor's ſervice, and he ſettled at Ant⯑werp; was afterwards profeſſor at Leyden, and died in 1586. He wrote on aſtronomy, geography, and phyſic; but is remembered [112] now, principally, by his botanical works. His attachment to this ſtudy, and the op⯑portunities he enjoyed of gratifying it, en⯑abled him to turn it to the moſt advantage⯑ous purpoſes. He began to publiſh in 1552, and continued his acceſſions and improve⯑ments to the year 1583, when he collected all his writings, on this ſubject, into one volume, under the following title, "STIR⯑PIUM HISTORIAE PEMPTADES Sex, ſive Libri XXX. Ant. ex officin. Plant." in folio. cum icon. 1341. pp. 872. Each Pemptade is divided into five books.

The 1ſt comprehends a number of diſ⯑ſimilar plants in alphabetic order.

2. Flower-garden plants; and the um⯑belliferous tribe.

3. Medicinal roots: purgative plants: climbing and poiſonous plants: ferns, moſſes, and fungi.

4. Grain: pulſe: graſſes: water and marſh plants.

5. Edible plants: gourd plants: eſculent roots: oleraceous: thiſtles and ſpinoſe plants.

6. Shrubs and trees.

It was reprinted in 1612 and 1616, with [113] ſome ſmall additions, and being tranſlated alſo into Dutch, with great enlargement, became a popular book in that language.

The judicious ſelection of all that was uſeful, relating to the ſuppoſed plants of the Materia Medica of DIOSCORIDES, and of the Arabians, the introduction of all the new ſpecies from CLUSIUS, and other diſ⯑coveries of the time, added to the inſtruction and embelliſhment derived from the figures, which exceeded in number thoſe of any preceding author, rendered Dodoens's book uſeful to the medical profeſſion throughout the world. It ſtill preſerves ſome value, as being referred to by LINNAEUS, for the illuſtration of the European plants.

As GERARD could not attempt an entire new work, there was then extant no other to which he could give the preference, as a baſis to his deſign; for as ſuch only it muſt be conſidered, ſince the interval of time between the publication of DODO⯑NAEUS's work in 1583, and the printing of his own "Herbal," had given him opportuni⯑ties to interſperſe large additions, both in exotic, and indigenous Botany. In this in⯑terval [114] the ſcience had been augmented, and not leſs enriched, by the writings of CAE⯑SALPINUS, in 1583; by the Epitomé of CAMERARIUS, in 1586; by the Hiſtoria Lugdunenſis of DALECHAMP, in 1587; by the Sylva Harcynia of THALIUS; and eſ⯑pecially by the Hiſtoria and Icones of TA⯑BERNAEMONTANUS, in 1588 and 1590.

To theſe may be added, a number of collateral reſources, which the growing commerce and ſpirit of the times rendered favourable to his purpoſes. I will briefly mention the following: the Materia Me⯑dica had, for a ſeries of years, been per⯑petually augmenting, by a variety of new drugs, which were eagerly ſought after, the origin of which, notwithſtanding, was in many inſtances obſcure, and in others as yet unknown. At length the publication of GARCIAS ab HORTO on the ſimples of the Eaſt Indies, of MONARDES on thoſe of the Weſt, and afterwards of Chriſtopher à COSTA's book, ſatisfied, for a time, the impatience of the public.

Theſe authors were tranſlated into Eng⯑liſh. James FRAMPTON, a merchant of [115] London, who had reſided long at Seville, from whence he returned in 1576, tranſ⯑lated MONARDES into Engliſh the next year, under the title of "Joyful News out of the New Founde World, from the Spa⯑niſh of Monardus," in 4^o. CLUSIUS put GARCIAS ab HORTO into Latin, in 1567; and James GARET had alſo tranſlated from the Spaniſh the work of à COSTA. Theſe books were incentives to curioſity; and the thouſand novelties which were brought into England by our circumnavigators, RA⯑LEIGH and CAVENDISH, in 1580 and 1588, excited a degree of attention, which at this day cannot, without the aid of con⯑ſiderable recollection, be eaſily conceived. RALEIGH himſelf appears to have poſ⯑ſeſſed a larger ſhare of taſte for the curious productions of nature, than was common to the ſeafaring adventurers of that period. And poſterity will rank theſe voyagers among the greateſt benefactors to this kingdom, in having been the means, if tradition may be credited, of introducing the moſt uſeful root that Providence has held forth for the ſer⯑vice of man. A voyage round the globe, how⯑ſoever [116] familiarized in ours, was in that age a moſt intereſting and fruitful occaſion of enquiry.

The return of RALEIGH, and the fame of his manifold diſcoveries and collections, brought over from the continent the cele⯑brated CLUSIUS, then in the 55th year of his age. He, who added more to the ſtock of Botany in his day, than all his contem⯑poraries united, viſited ENGLAND, for the third time, to partake, at this critical junc⯑ture, in the general gratification.

At this eventful period, GERARD was in the vigour of life, and without doubt felt the influence, and reaped the advantage of all the circumſtances I have enumerated.

John GERARD was born at Nantwich, in Cheſhire, in the year 1545, and was edu⯑cated a ſurgeon. He removed to London, where he obtained the patronage of the great Lord Burleigh, who was himſelf a lover of plants, and had the beſt collection in his garden of any nobleman in the king⯑dom. GERARD had the ſuperintendance of this fine garden, and retained his em⯑ployment, as he tells us himſelf, for twenty [117] years. He lived in Holborn, where alſo he had a large phyſic garden of his own; which was probably the firſt of the kind in Eng⯑land, for the number and variety of its pro⯑ductions. It ſhould ſeem, that in his younger days he had taken a voyage into the Baltic, ſince he mentions having ſeen the wild pines growing about Narva.

GERARD appears alſo to have been fa⯑voured by the college of phyſicians, and is highly extolled by Dr. BULLEYN. Both LOBEL, and Dr. BROWNE, phyſician to the queen, wrote, in Latin, commendatory letters to him, on the publication of his Herbal. He attained to ſuch eminence in his profeſſion, as to be choſen maſter of the company. He died about the year 1607.

There is a half ſheet print of GERARD prefixed to his own edition of the "Her⯑bal," done in the 53d year of his age, and a ſmall oval one at the bottom of a full half ſheet frontiſpiece, before JOHNSON's edi⯑tion.

The earlieſt publication of GERARD was the liſt of his own garden in Holborn, [118] under the following title, "Catalogus Ar⯑borum, Fruticum, ac Plantarum, tam indige⯑narum quam exoticarum, in horto JOHANNIS GERARDI, civis ac chirurgi Londinenſis naſ⯑centium. Impenſis J. Norton, 1596." 4^o. and again in 1599.

The firſt edition was dedicated to Lord BURLEIGH; but that nobleman dying be⯑fore the publication of the ſecond, it was inſcribed to his patron, Sir Walter RA⯑LEIGH.

This little piece, from the nature of the publication, is become very ſcarce. I be⯑lieve there is only a manuſcript copy of it in the collection of Sir JOSEPH BANKS.

We are informed, in the life of Dr. BUL⯑LEYN, that GERARD's Garden contained near eleven hundred ſorts of plants, of fo⯑reign and domeſtic growth; from whence, ſays Mr. Oldys, ‘"it may appear, that our ground would produce other fruits be⯑ſides hips and haws, acorns and pignuts;"’ for at this time, ‘"kitchen-garden wares were imported from Holland, and fruits from France."’ There are one thouſand [119] and thirty-three ſpecies in this Catalogue, and the following atteſtation, written by LOBEL, is annexed.

"Herbas, ſtirpes, frutices, ſuffrutices, et ar⯑buſculas hoc catalogo recenſitas, quamplurimas ac fere omnes me vidiſſe Londini in horto Jo⯑hanni GERARDI, chirurgi et botanici per⯑optimi (non enim omnes eodem ſed variis tem⯑poribus anni pullulaſcunt, enaſcuntur et flo⯑rent). Atteſtor Matthias De LOBELL, ipſis calendis Junii 1596."

In 1597, came out his "HERBAL, or GENERAL HISTORY OF PLANTS;" printed by John Norton, in folio; and ſome authors mention another impreſſion in 1599.

That the foundation of this work was a tranſlation of DODOENS's Herbal, a compa⯑riſon of the two aſcertains beyond a doubt. LOBEL, both in his animadverſions on RON⯑DELETIUS, and in his Stirpium Illuſtratio⯑nes, informs us, that Dr. PRIEST, at the expence of Mr. Norton, had been engaged to make a tranſlation of DODONAEUS's Pemp⯑tades; and, dying ſoon after he had finiſhed it, the manuſcript came into GERARD's [120] hands; who has been cenſured for having endeavoured to conceal his poſſeſſing theſe papers, and for aſſuming to himſelf the me⯑rit of the tranſlation, when it is generally agreed, that his knowledge of the Latin language was not equal to ſuch an under⯑taking. LOBEL, indeed, judged the ſame of Dr. PRIEST, and points out inſtances of his inſufficiency. It muſt, however, be al⯑lowed, that GERARD is not backward in confeſſing his want of ſkill in the learned languages. LOBEL farther informs us, that when the work was in the preſs, and that part of the firſt book printed relating to graſſes, his friend, James GARET, a perſon eminently ſkilled in flowers and exotics, ad⯑moniſhed Norton of ſome groſs errors; on which, the printer engaged LOBEL to ſu⯑perintend the work; that he actually did correct it "in a thouſand places;" and that there were many other miſtakes, which GERARD would not allow him to alter, alleging that it was ſufficiently correct, and that ‘"LOBEL had forgotten the Engliſh language."’

In order further to conceal his plagiariſm, [121] LOBEL adds, that he has inverted the diſtri⯑bution of the chapters in DODOENS's book, and adopted that of the Adverſaria. This may be conſidered as a futile objection, and even turned into an approbation of LOBEL's method; but he charges him alſo with largely plundering the Adverſaria, without any acknowledgment.

GERARD compriſes the whole vegetable kingdom in three books. The firſt con⯑tains the graſſes, grain, ruſhes, reeds, flags, and bulbous-rooted plants. The ſecond, all herbs uſed in diet, phyſic, or for ornament and pleaſure. The third, trees, ſhrubs, fruit⯑bearing plants, roſins, gums, roſes, heaths, moſſes, muſhrooms, and ſea plants. The whole divided into upwards of eight hun⯑dred chapters, which, in the arrangement of that time, may, if the expreſſion is al⯑lowable, be conſidered as ſo many genera.

In each chapter the ſeveral ſpecies are deſcribed; then follow the place, time of flowering, names, and virtues.

The figures Mr. Norton procured from Frankfort, being the ſame blocks which had been uſed for the Dutch Herbal of TABER⯑NAEMONTANUS [122] in 1588. In this manner, GERARD, with DODOENS for his founda⯑tion, by taking in alſo many plants from CLUSIUS, and from LOBEL, by the addition of ſome from his own ſtock, publiſhed a volume, which, from its being well timed, from its comprehending almoſt the whole of the ſubjects then known, by being writ⯑ten in Engliſh, and ornamented with a more numerous ſet of figures than had ever ac⯑companied any work of the kind in this kingdom, obtained great repute. To this we muſt add the fortunate circumſtance of its acquiring afterwards ſo learned an edi⯑tor as JOHNSON, which eſtabliſhed the cha⯑racter of it, and gave it precedence as a po⯑pular book, for more than a century. And notwithſtanding his manifeſt inferiority to LOBEL in point of learning, it muſt yet be owned, that GERARD contributed greatly to bring forward the knowledge of plants in England. His connection with the great, and his ſituation in London, favoured an ex⯑tenſive correſpondence, both with foreigners and his own countrymen; and his ſucceſs in procuring new exotics, as well as ſcarce [123] indigenous plants, was equal to his diligence and aſſiduity. In fact, we owe to GERARD and his friends the diſcovery of many new Engliſh plants; and his name will be re⯑membered by botaniſts with eſteem, when the utility of his Herbal is ſuperſeded. That he was conſidered as poſſeſſing a very extenſive ſhare of this ſcience, we are juſtified in believing, on the teſtimony of Mr. George BAKER, chief ſurgeon to the queen, who aſſures us, that he ſaw him ‘"tried with one of the beſt ſtrangers that ever came into England, and was ac⯑counted in Paris the only man, being recommended to me," ſays BAKER, "by that famous man, AMBROSE PAREY; and he being here, was deſirous to go abroad with ſome of our herbariſts, for the which I was the mean to bring them together, and one whole day we ſpent therein, ſearching the rareſt ſimples: but when it came to the trial, my French⯑man did not know one to his four^*."’

[124] Among the many who promoted GE⯑RARD's work by their communications, I muſt not omit the names of Thomas HES⯑KETH, of Lancaſhire; Thomas EDWARDS, apothecary, at Exeter; both ſkilled in the knowledge of Engliſh plants.

James GARET, of London, apothecary, "a curious ſearcher of ſimples." He was the correſpondent of CLUSIUS, to whom he communicated a great number of natu⯑ral curioſities, particularly of exotic growth, and is mentioned with great reſpect by that learned foreigner, in numerous places of his Libri Exoticorum. He ſeems to have been one of the principal cultivators of tulips, which he propagated by ſeeds and bulbs for twenty years, every ſeaſon bringing forth, as GERARD obſerves, ‘"new plants of ſun⯑dry colours not before ſeen, all which to deſcribe particularly, were to roll Siſi⯑phus's ſtone, or number the ſands."’

I find three perſons of the ſame name, James GARET the father, and James the ſon, and Peter, as I ſuppoſe, the brother of James the elder. PARKINSON, ſpeaking probably of the laſt, informs us, that he was originally a druggiſt in Lime-ſtreet. [125] He was, I believe, the tranſlator of à COS⯑TA, as hath been before noted.

Mr. Bredwell, ‘"practitioner in phyſic, a learned and diligent ſearcher of ſimples,"’ in the weſt of England.

Mr. Nicholas LETE, a merchant of Lon⯑don, ‘"greatly in love with rare and faire flowers, for which he doth carefully ſend into Syria, having a ſervant there at Aleppo, and in many other countries; for which myſelf and the whole land are much bound unto him."’

Dr. John MERSHE, of Cambridge.

Mr. James COLE, a merchant of London, ‘"a lover of plants, and very ſkilful in the knowledge of them."’

Among thoſe of eminent ſtation, who patroniſed the ſcience, GERARD does due honour to Sir Walter RALEIGH; Lord Ed⯑ward ZOUCH, the patron of LOBEL, who brought plants and ſeeds with him from Conſtantinople; and to Lord HUNSDON, Lord High Chamberlain of England, who, he ſays, ‘"is worthy of triple honour for his care in getting, as alſo for his curi⯑ous keeping, ſuch rare and ſtrange things from the fartheſt parts of the world."’

JOHNSON.

THOMAS JOHNSON was born at Sel⯑by, in Yorkſhire, and bred an apothe⯑cary in London. He afterwards kept a ſhop on Snow-Hill, ‘"where, by his un⯑wearied pains, advanced with good natu⯑ral parts," ſays Mr. Wood, "he attained to be the beſt herbaliſt of his age in Eng⯑land."’

He was firſt announced to the public, by a ſmall piece under the title of "ITER IN AGRUM CANTIANUM, 1629; et ERI⯑CETUM HAMSTEDIANUM, 1632: which [127] were the firſt local catalogues publiſhed in England. He ſoon after acquired great credit by his new edition and emendation of GE⯑RARD's "Herbal."

In the civil wars, his zeal for the royal cauſe led him into the army, in which he greatly diſtinguiſhed himſelf; and the uni⯑verſity of Oxford, in conſideration of his merit and learning, added to that of his loyalty, conferred upon him the degree of doctor of phyſic, May 9, 1643.

In the army, he had the rank of lieute⯑nant colonel to Sir Marmaduke RAWDON, governor of Baſinghouſe. Mr. Granger in⯑forms us, that ‘"he ſet fire to the Grange, near that fortreſs, which conſiſted of twenty houſes, and killed and burnt about three hundred of Sir William Waller's men, wounded five hundred more, and took arms, ammunition, and proviſions from the enemy."’ Wood adds, ‘"that going with a party on the 14th of Sep⯑tember, 1644, to ſuccour certain of the forces belonging to that houſe, which went to the town of Baſing to fetch pro⯑viſions thence, but beaten back by the [128] enemy, headed by that notorious rebel, Colonel Richard Norton, he received a ſhot in the ſhoulder, of which he died in a fortnight after. At which time his worth did juſtly challenge funeral tears; being then no leſs eminent in the garri⯑ſon for his valour and conduct as a ſol⯑dier, than famous through the kingdom for his excellency as an herbaliſt and phyſician."’

I have mentioned Johnſon's Iter Can⯑tianum, and Ericetum Hamſtedianum; but not having ſeen either, I can give no ac⯑count of them.

In 1633, he publiſhed his improved edi⯑tion of GERARD, under the title of "The HERBAL, or GENERAL HISTORY of PLANTS, gathered by John GERARD, of London, very much enlarged and a⯑mended by Thomas JOHNSON, citizen and apothecary of London, for Iſlip and Nor⯑ton." 1633. fol.; and again 1636. pp. 1630.

An interval of thirty-ſix years, from the date of Gerard's work, had effected a great change in the ſtate of botanical knowledge; [129] many new plants had been introduced, and many valuable works publiſhed on the con⯑tinent, particularly the Hortus Eyſtetten⯑ſis in 1613, and the Prodromus of Bau⯑hine in 1620. No publications had ap⯑peared at home, except ſuch as were adapted to the Floriſt and Gardener; Gaſ⯑par Bauhine's invaluable Pinax had facili⯑tated and ſhortened the labour of conſulting preceding authors. All theſe circumſtances were favourable to JOHNSON; and his ac⯑knowledged ſuperiority to GERARD in the learned languages, might juſtly raiſe the ex⯑pectation of the public; inſomuch that it becomes a matter of ſpeculation, why JOHN⯑SON acquieſced in the character of an editor only. It may indeed be converted into a ſtrong preſumption of the value ſet by the public on GERARD; which probably pre⯑vented the riſk of a new title.

The general expectation was not diſap⯑pointed. The advantages above noted en⯑abled JOHNSON to amplify and improve his author to ſuch a degree, that his book eminently deſerves the encomium that HAL⯑LER has beſtowed upon it, when he calls [130] it ‘"dignum opus, et totius rei herbariae eo aevo notae, compendium."’

After what has been ſaid of the plan, as it ſtands in GERARD, it remains only to ſhew briefly what JOHNSON has done. In about twelve pages, he has prefixed a con⯑ciſe, candid, and judicious account of the moſt material writers on the ſubject, from the earlieſt ages to the time in which he wrote; concluding with a particular account of his own work, from its origin in Dr. PRIEST's tranſlation. After this follows a table, pointing out, with great preciſion, all his additions; by which we learn, that he enriched the work with more than eight hundred plants not in GERARD, and up⯑wards of ſeven hundred figures, beſides in⯑numerable corrections. By procuring the ſame cuts that GERARD uſed, (to which collection a conſiderable acceſſion had been made) and by having ſome new blocks cut, his work contained a greater number of figures than any Herbal extant; the whole amounting to 2717. He informs us, in an apology he makes for not inſerting his additional matter in the edition of 1636, [131] that he intended to travel throughout the kingdom in ſearch of the more rare plants, and afterwards to compriſe all his diſcove⯑ries in an appendix.

In 1634, he publiſhed "MERCURIUS BOTANICUS; ſive PLANTARUM gratia ſuſ⯑cepti Itineris, anno 1634, DESCRIPTIO; cum earum Nominibus Latinis et Anglicis." Lond. 8vo. pp. 78.

It is dedicated to Sir Theodore MAYERNE, and others of the college, in his own, and the names of his aſſociates in the excurſion, who were all of the company of the Apo⯑thecaries. It was the reſult of a journey, through Oxford, to Bath and Briſtol, and back by Southampton, the Iſle of Wight, and Guildford, made with the profeſſed deſign to inveſtigate rare plants. He has deſcribed, in not inelegant Latin, their rout, which took up only twelve days, and the agree⯑able reception they met with among their medical acquaintance. We meet with a liſt of exotics, amounting to 117, cultivated by Mr. George GIBBS, a ſurgeon at Bath, who had made a voyage to Virginia, from whence he brought many new plants; which, as it exhibits the advanced ſtate of [132] gardening in this country at that time, is now a matter of curioſity.

The plants of ſpontaneous growth enu⯑merated in this ſhort tour, varieties being excluded. exceed ſix hundred, which, at a time when the cryptogamiae were ſcarcely noticed, and in the ſeaſon when neither the very early nor late plants could be ſeen, is no inconſiderable number. In this ca⯑talogue are ſeveral not diſcovered in Eng⯑land before. With this tour JOHNSON gave his ſmall tract, "De Thermis Bathonicis, ſive earum deſcriptio, vires, utendi tempus, modus, &c." Lond. 1634. pp. 19. There are three ſmall plans of the baths, and one of the city, which ſeem to be copied from Speed's map. Theſe are now pleaſing curioſities to the lovers of antiquity, and to all who contemplate the aſtoniſhing increaſe of the city ſince that time.

This was followed by "PARS ALTERA, ſive PLANTARUM gratia ſuſcepti Itineris in Cambriam ſeu Walliam DESCRIPTIO." Lond. 1641. 8^o.

JOHNSON, if not the firſt, was among the earlieſt Botaniſts who viſited Wales, and Snowdon, with the ſole intention of [133] diſcovering the rarities of that country in the vegetable kingdom. The journey ſeems to have anſwered his purpoſe, and afford⯑ed him a rich harveſt. In this expedition he firſt found the yellow poppy, papaver cambricum: mountain ſaw-wort, ſerratula alpina: roſe-root, rhodiola roſea; and ſeveral other plants.

I cannot aſcertain the age of JOHNSON at his death, but there is reaſon to think he could not be far advanced in life, if indeed he was arrived at the meridian of it. I ground my opinion on the circumſtance of LOBEL's total ſilence relating to him, in his Adverſaria, printed in 1605. En⯑gaged as JOHNSON was, in the exerciſe of a profeſſion, which, independent of the calls of duty, demands much ſacrifice of time, to the forms and civilities of life, his HERBAL is an ample teſtimony of zeal and induſtry. I do not find that he was the author of any other publications, than thoſe, of which I have given ſome account; but, he tranſlated the works of Ambroſe PAREY, which he publiſhed at London in 1643. They were reprinted, if I miſtake not, [134] for the laſt time in 1678. This excellent man, who in the character of ſurgeon, ſucceſ⯑ſively ſerved four ſovereigns of France, was attached to the proteſtant cauſe; and for his extraordinary merit, and his having cured Charles IX. of a tendon wounded in bleeding, was ſaved from the maſſacre of St. Bartholomew. He ſurvived this event 19 years, and died in 1590. His works were collected by himſelf, in 1582, in folio, and ran through nine or ten editions on the continent. PAREY's improvements in his profeſſion had been ſingularly important; there can be no doubt, therefore, that our author performed a very acceptable ſervice to his countrymen, by putting his writings into an Engliſh dreſs^*.

[135] Before JOHNSON is diſmiſſed, it would be unjuſt not to notice ſome of thoſe, to whom the author was eſpecially indebted for aſſiſtance, and for the communication of Engliſh plants. Among theſe, the firſt place is due to Mr. John GOODYER, of Maple Durham, in Hampſhire, whoſe name occurs repeatedly in GERARD's "Herbal," and very frequently in PARKINSON's, in which he is ſtiled ‘"a great lover and curious ſearcher of plants; who, beſides this" (ſpeaking of the geranium ſaxa⯑tile) "hath found in our country many other plants, not imagined to grow in our land."’ He ſeems not only to have been what may be called a practical Bota⯑niſt, but learned, and critically verſed in the hiſtory of the ſcience. This may be fairly inferred from his curious communi⯑cation, relating to the manuſcripts under the name of APULEIUS Madaurenſis, and from his obſervations on the ſaxifrage of the ancients, inſerted at p. 604. The great number of rare Engliſh plants, which Mr. GOODYER firſt brought to light, entitles [136] him to the moſt reputable rank among thoſe who have advanced the botanical knowledge of this kingdom.

Mr. George BOWLES, of Chiſſelhurſt, in Kent, alſo diſtinguiſhed himſelf by his ſuc⯑ceſsful inveſtigation of many new plants. He ſpent ſome time in Wales, where his diſcoveries were very ample; and he is mentioned with particular attention, in numerous inſtances, by our author.

The names of JOHNSON's aſſociates in his Kentiſh, and other ſimpling excurſions, occur in the preface; and in the body of the work we meet alſo with the following:

John TRADESCANT the elder, who be⯑came famous afterwards for his fine garden, and muſeum of natural curioſities.

Sir John TUNSTAL, gentleman uſher to the queen, is recorded as poſſeſſing a garden at Edgcome in Surrey, ſtored with plants, which are ſaid to have belonged to the queen.

Mr. Thomas GLYN, who firſt found that elegant plant the gnaphalium marinum, on the coaſt of Wales.

[137] Mr. Hugh MORGAN, apothecary to the queen, before mentioned under the article of LOBEL.

Mr. Robert ABBOT, of Hatfield, near St. Albans, a learned preacher, and an ex⯑cellent and diligent herbariſt.

BOELIUS or BOEL, of whom further no⯑tice more properly comes under the article of PARKINSON.

Mr. John REDMAN, ‘"a ſkilful herba⯑riſt,"’ an inhabitant of the northern part of England.

Frequent and reſpectable notice is alſo taken of Mr. John PARKINSON, the ſub⯑ject of the ſucceeding article. His Paradiſus Terreſtris is much commended, and his garden referred to as abounding in choice plants.

PARKINSON.

JOHN PARKINSON was born in 1567. I regret that I am not enabled to ſup⯑ply a more ample account of this laborious man, whoſe learning and abilities appear to me not to have been juſtly appreciated. He was bred an apothecary, and lived in London. He was contemporary with GE⯑RARD and LOBEL, during the latter part of their lives; and ſurvived JOHNSON ſeve⯑ral years. LOBEL, in the ſecond part of his Adverſaria, and JOHNSON, in his Gerardus Emaculatus, ſpeak of him as a man of emi⯑nence in his profeſſion, and as poſſeſſed of [139] a garden well ſtored with rarities. In fact, he roſe to ſuch a degree of reputation as to be appointed apothecary to King James; and at the publication of his "Theatre of Plants," he obtained, as we learn by Sir Theodore MAYERNE's commendatory letter prefixed to it, the title from Charles the Firſt of Botanicus Regius Primarius. The time of his death I cannot aſcertain; but, as his "Herbal" was publiſhed in 1640, and he appears to be living at that time, he muſt have attained his 73d year. There is a print of him prefixed to his Paradiſus, in the 62d year of his age, and a ſmall oval one, in the title of his "Herbal," or "Theatre of Plants."

His firſt publication was the "PARA⯑DISI IN SOLE PARADISUS TERRESTRIS; or, a garden of all ſorts of pleaſant flowers, which our Engliſh ayre will permit to be nurſed up: with a kitchen garden of all manner of herbs, roots, and fruits, for meat or ſauſe, uſed with us, and an or⯑chard of all ſorte of fruit-bearing trees and ſhrubbes fit for our land; together with the right ordering, planting, and preſerv⯑ing [140] of them, and their uſes and vertues. Collected by John PARKINSON, apothe⯑cary of London 1629." Folio. pp. 612.

There was a ſecond edition publiſhed after the author's death, corrected and en⯑larged, in 1656.

As the ſubject of this book intereſts the floriſt and gardener merely, it comes leſs within the ſcope of this work than his "Herbal." It is dedicated to Queen Elizabeth; and, agreeably to the panegyri⯑cal cuſtom of the times, is ſet off with re⯑commendatory verſes; among which we meet with ſome in Latin from Thomas JOHNSON, doubtleſs the editor of GERARD, and a Latin letter, in a high ſtrain of eu⯑logy, from Sir Theodore MAYERNE.

The plants are arranged without any other order than that expreſſed in the title page. Garden flowers are divided into 134 chapters, according to the generical names of the time; kitchen plants into 63 chapters; fruit trees and ſhrubs into 24 chapters; and a corollary of 22 ſpecies. Nearly one thouſand plants are ſeparately deſcribed; of which ſeven hundred and eighty are figur⯑ed [141] on one hundred and nine tables, which appear to have been cut on purpoſe for this work. Many are copied from CLUSIUS and LOBEL. The figures are leſs com⯑mendable for the deſign than the execution, and are much inferior, on the whole, to thoſe of GERARD's "Herbal." In the Latin names, the author has made uſe prin⯑cipally of Caſper BAUHINE; ſome are taken from LOBEL. The mode of arrange⯑ment in each chapter is ſimilar to that of GERARD. After the deſcription of all the ſpecies, follow the place, time of flowering, ſynonyms, and virtues. Leſs is ſpoken of the culture than ſeems to be requiſite.

Several Engliſhmen had written on gar⯑dening and agriculture in the ſixteenth century, of whom the firſt on huſbandry, as far as I can find, was Antony FITZHER⯑BERT, a famous lawyer and juſtice of the King's Bench, whoſe "Booke of Huſ⯑bandrie" was printed firſt in 1534. One of the earlieſt, if not the firſt on gardening, is Thomas HILL, "His profytable Art of Gardening," printed in 1574. The next was, "The new Orchard and Garden," by [142] William LAWSON, in 1597. In 1600, Sir Hugh PLATT, the author of many other uſeful tracts, put forth his "Garden of Eden;" a book of great merit in its time. All theſe paſſed through numerous editions, and the laſt preſerved credit to the end of the century.

PARKINSON however, as I apprehend, was the firſt author, who ſeparately deſcrib⯑ed and figured the ſubjects of the Flower Garden. The Paradiſus Terreſtris is there⯑fore, at this time, a valuable curioſity, as exhibiting the moſt compleat view of the extent of the Engliſh garden at the begin⯑ning of the laſt century. Intertropical productions had been but ſparingly import⯑ed. The real ſtove plants are very rare throughout the book. There are ſome American ſpecies, and particularly from Virginia, as being a part of that continent with which England had the moſt frequent intercourſe. But the principal productions of the Engliſh gardens were exotic Euro⯑pean, and Grecian plants, ſome Aſiatic, and a few from the northern coaſts of Africa.

A modern floriſt, wholly unacquainted [143] with the ſtate of the art at the time PAR⯑KINSON wrote, would perhaps be ſurprized to find that his predeceſſors could enume⯑rate, beſides ſixteen deſcribed as diſtinct ſpecies, one hundred and twenty varieties of the tulip, ſixty anemonies, more than nine⯑ty of the narciſſus tribe, fifty hyacinths, fifty carnations, twenty pinks, thirty cro⯑cuſes, and above forty of the iris genus. In the orchard we find above ſixty kinds of plums, as many apples and pears, thirty cherries, and more than twenty peaches.

In 1640, PARKINSON publiſhed his "THEATRUM BOTANICUM; or, Theatre of Plants, or an Herbal of a large extent: containing therein a more ample and ex⯑act hiſtory and declaration of the phyſical herbs and plants that are in other au⯑thors; encreaſed by the acceſs of many hundreds of new, rare, and ſtrange plants from all the parts of the world; with ſundry gummes, and other phyſical materials, than hath been hitherto pub⯑liſhed by any before: and a moſt large demonſtration of their nature and virtues. Shewing withal, the many errors, differ⯑ences, [144] and overſights of ſundry authors that have formerly written of them, and a certain confidence, or moſt probable conjecture of the true and genuine herbs and plants: diſtributed into ſundry claſſes or tribes, for the more eaſy knowledge of the many herbs of one nature and property, with the chief notes of Dr. Lobel, Dr. Bonham, and others, inſerted therein." London. Folio. pp. 1746. SEGUIER mentions and edition in 1656, which I never ſaw, and ſuſpect it was not a new impreſſion.

This work was the labour of PARKIN⯑SON's life, and was not publiſhed until he was arrived at a very advanced period. He tells us, in the preface, that, owing ‘"to the diſ⯑aſtrous times,"’ and other impediments, the printing of it was long retarded. Ori⯑ginally it was intended to have contained only the medicinal herbs, under the title of "A phyſical Garden of Simples," but he enlarged his plan, and endeavoured to comprehend all the Botany of his time. It is manifeſt, even from a curſory view of it, that it is a work of much more originality [145] than that of GERARD; and it contains abundantly more matter than the laſt edi⯑tion of that author, with all JOHNSON's augmentations. In the general diſpoſition of the ſubject, the order is chiefly founded on the known, or ſuppoſed qualities, and virtues of the plants; being divided into ſeventeen tribes, as follow:

• 1. Plantae odoratoe. Sweet-ſmelling plants.
• 2. Catharticae. Purging plants.
• 3. Venenatae, narcoticae, nocivae, et alexi⯑pharmicae. Venemous, ſleepy, and hurtful plants, and their counter⯑poiſons.
• 4. Saxifragae. Saxifrages, or break-ſtone plants.
• 5. Vulnerariae. Wound herbs.
• 6. Reſrigerantes, et intubaceae. Cooling, and ſuccory-like herbes.
• 7. Calidae, et acres. Hot, and ſharp-biting plants.
• 8. Umbelliferae. Umbelliferous.
• 9. Cardui, et ſpinoſae. Thiſtles, and thorny plants.
• [146] 10. Filices, et herbae capillares. Ferns, and capillary herbes.
• 11. Legumina. Pulſes.
• 12. Cerealia. Corn.
• 13. Gramina, junci, arundines. Graſſes, ruſhes, and reeds.
• 14. Paludoſae, aquaticae, marinae, muſci, et fungi. Marſh, water, and ſea plants, moſſes, and muſhrooms.
• 15. Miſcellaneae. The unordered tribe.
• 16. Arbores, et frutices. Trees, and ſhrubbes.
• 17. Exoticae, et peregrinae. Outlandiſh plants.
• 18. Appendix.

This heterogeneous claſſification, which ſeems to be founded on that of Dodoens, ſometimes on the medicinal qualities, ſome⯑times on the habit, and on the place of growth, ſhews the ſmall advances that had been made towards any truly ſcientific diſ⯑tribution. On the contrary, both GE⯑RARD, JOHNSON, and PARKINSON, had rather gone back, by not ſufficiently purſu⯑ing the example of LOBEL.

[147] In the particular diſpoſition of the ſub⯑jects, under each chapter or genus, PAR⯑KINSON follows the rules of GERARD, and JOHNSON, by giving, after the Latin and Engliſh name, the deſcriptions at large; then the place of growth, and time of flowering; the ſynonyms, and laſtly, the virtues and uſes.

Nice diſcrimination of ſpecies from each other, or from varieties, muſt not be ex⯑pected in this work, more than in GE⯑RARD, or his Emaculator. Almoſt every Botaniſt was then a Floriſt too. CLUSIUS himſelf, who had enlarged the ſcience, by his own diſcoveries, beyond any other man, continued to raiſe tulips from ſeed, for more than 35 years. PARKINSON's "Paradiſus" proves his attachment to the Flower Gar⯑den, in the early part of his life; and this bias influenced him throughout the "Thea⯑tre of Plants." As yet, no line had been drawn with ſufficient accuracy, between ſpecies and variety, between nature and the effect of culture, or of ſoil and ſituation, nor was this brought about till the eſſential parts of vegetables, the flower, and the fruit, became [148] objects of claſſification, inſtead of the vague diſtinctions hitherto obſerved; of which it may be ſufficient to adduce one example, out of hundreds equally futile. The ſea cabbage, (braſſica orientalis) a ſiliquoſe plant, is ranked by GERARD and JOHNSON, as well as by PARKINSON, even contrary to the examples of CLUSIUS and DODONAEUS, under the ſame generical name with the thorow wax, (bupleurum) an umbelliferous plant, merely becauſe the leaf is of the perſoliate kind.

Theſe are defects common to the age, and PARKINSON muſt not be appreciated by modern improvement, but by compariſon with his contemporaries. In this view, if I am not miſtaken, he will appear more of an original author than GERARD, or JOHNSON, independent of the advantages he might derive from being poſterior to them. His "Theatre" was carried on thro' a long ſeries of years, and he profited by the works of ſome late authors, which, though equal⯑ly in JOHNSON's power, he had neglected to uſe. PARKINSON's deſcriptions, in many inſtances, appear to be new. He is [149] more particular in pointing out the places of growth. In the enumeration of the ſynonyms, he has not only given nearly the whole of BAUHINE's "Pinax," but, very fre⯑quently, has himſelf conſulted the original authors, and enters minutely into a diſcuſ⯑ſion of their doubts. In the account of the virtues, and uſes, PARKINSON is diffuſe. It was his profeſſed deſign to make his work a Materia Medica; and if, in him, we meet with the qualities of plants eſtimated on Galenical principles, by the degrees of hot and cold, moiſt and dry, &c. it was the theory oſ the day, from which authors of higher eminence were not emancipated. He not only gives the opinions of the Greek and Roman phyſicians, but of the Arabi⯑ans, and has tranſlated from the moderns, and his contemporaries, whatever could il⯑luſtrate his ſubject, and render it as perfect as the intelligence of the times would al⯑low. To this end he has extracted largely from CLUSIUS's "Exotics," from D'A⯑COSTA, MONARDES, and GARCIAS ab HORTO on the drugs and ſimples of the Eaſt and Weſt Indies; of which, at that [150] time, many were newly introduced, and imperfectly known.

PARKINSON's work is much more ex⯑tenſive than JOHNSON's, in the number of ſubjects deſcribed, he having taken, as be⯑fore obſerved, advantages which the Ema⯑culator of GERARD neglected. Many of the plants of Aegypt, from Proſper ALPI⯑NUS, many of the North American, or Ca⯑nadian plants, from CORNUTUS, and ſome from COLUMNA's work, are introduced. He neglected no opportunities of procuring new plants from abroad. The nature of his profeſſion did not allow him to make diſtant or frequent excurſions in England; but, by the aſſiſtance of his correſpondents, and ſome of LOBEL's poſthumous writings, which he purchaſed, he was enabled to en⯑large, not only the catalogue of Britiſh plants, but to introduce many exotics be⯑fore unknown.

JOHNSON had deſcribed about 2850 plants, PARKINSON has near 3800. Theſe accumulations rendered the "THEA⯑TRUM BOTANICUM" the moſt copious book on the ſubject in the Engliſh lan⯑guage; [151] and it may be preſumed, that it gained equally the approbation of medical people, and of all thoſe who were curious and inquiſitive in this kind of knowledge. Both this work, and GERARD's afterwards, acquired conſequence by the references of Mr. RAY, who may be ſaid, in the lan⯑guage of the Catalogus Oxonienſis, to have raiſed them to claſſical eminence in En⯑gliſh Botany, and preſerved them from ob⯑livion as long as his own works remain. Without any deſign of depriving JOHNSON of his due praiſe, yet it is obvious, from the recollection of certain circumſtances, that PARKINSON laboured under diſadvan⯑tages and impediments, which probably tended to depreſs his work at the time, al⯑though it had undoubtedly been carrying on through a longer ſeries of years than John⯑ſon's, and was more copious in its deſign.

JOHNSON had the opportunity that GE⯑RARD himſelf obtained, of procuring all the cuts from abroad. PARKINSON's, on the other hand, though copied from the ſame figures, appear to have been cut anew, purpoſely for his work. The delay occa⯑ſioned [152] by this circumſtance, beſides the great expence, was, probably, among the obſtacles the author complains of, which ſo long retarded the publication of his work. Add to this, that the figures were after all inferior to the old tables, both in number and execution. JOHNSON's exceed thoſe of PARKINSON, by more than an hundred. Both theſe works may be conſidered as Di⯑geſts of the Botany of the age, in the Eng⯑liſh tongue; but it is to be feared the ſame cenſure lies againſt them which Caſpar BAUHINE lodged againſt DALECHAMP's hiſtory, publiſhed in 1588, in which he de⯑monſtrated, that more than 400 plants were twice deſcribed.

Nor is it wonderful that the attempt to comprehend, and diſcriminate the whole vegetable kingdom, was a plan too exten⯑ſive for one man, eſpecially in the aug⯑mented ſtate in which PARKINSON found it. The magnitude of the deſign neceſ⯑ſarily involved a multitude of errors, and expoſed both GERARD and PARKINSON to the cenſures of malignant critics. Had the candour of LOBEL been equal to his [153] learning and knowledge, he had ſpared much of his acrimony againſt theſe induſ⯑trious writers, whoſe laudable endeavours rather merited his applauſe.

Among thoſe contemporaries, whoſe col⯑lateral aſſiſtance is acknowledged by PAR⯑KINSON, Mr. (or, as he is ſtiled in ſome parts of the work, Dr.) William BOEL claims particular notice. He was a native of the Low Countries, and had travelled into various parts of Germany and Spain; had been in Barbary, reſided at Tunis, and, at the publication of "the Herbal," lived at Liſbon. From all theſe countries he ſent ſeeds of many plants before unknown in England. He was the correſpondent of CLUSIUS, and ſeems to have been very zealous for the improvement of natural knowledge.

Mr. John GORDIER, ‘"a great lover and curious ſearcher of plants, who, be⯑ſides this," (ſpeaking of the Geranium lucidum) "hath found in our country other plants, not imagined to grow in our land."’

In PARKINSON's works we alſo find the [154] name of Mrs. Thomazin TUNSTAL, a lady whom he celebrates, not only for her taſte in cultivating a garden which was well ſtored with exotics, but for her knowledge of Engliſh botany, and her diſcoveries of ſe⯑veral curious vegetables found about Ingle⯑borough Hill, in Lancaſhire; which were not known before to grow in England. Whe⯑ther ſhe was allied to Sir John TUNSTAL, noticed in the account of JOHNSON, I can⯑not aſcertain.

Beſides the names of BOWLES, GOOD⯑YER, TRADESCANT, and others, men⯑tioned by JOHNSON, we meet with the following, as having contributed to the general ſtock. John NEWTON, ſurgeon, at Colliton, Somerſetſhire; Dr. Antony SAD⯑LER, phyſician at Exeter; Mr. William QUICK, apothecary, London; Mr. BRAD⯑SHAUGH, of Yorkſhire; Mr. SILLIARD, of Dublin, and divers others^*.

WOODEN CUTS.

AS we are now arrived at the period, when wooden cuts were about to be ſuperſeded by engravings on metal, PAR⯑KINSON's "Herbal" being the laſt of any importance in which they were uſed in England, it may not be incongruous to our plan to notice the origin and progreſs of that art, which contributed not a little to facilitate the knowledge of plants. Rude as theſe repreſentations were, compared with the elegance of modern times, yet, in an age when ſpecific diſtinctions were not fixed, and the diagnoſtic of the plant de⯑pended [156] ſo much on habit, they ſpoke to the eye, and often diſcriminated the ſubject, when the laboured deſcription failed.

It has been before obſerved, that SE⯑GUIER is of opinion the firſt Herbal with wooden cuts was the "Buch der Natur," "The Book of Nature," printed at Augſ⯑burgh, in 1478, if not three years earlier. Theſe are thought to have paſſed into the HERBARIUS, printed at Mentz in 1484; from which book was compiled the ORTUS SANITATIS, printed at the ſame place in 1485; with improvements in the work in general, and better figures, by CUBA. Of this work ſome notice has before been taken, as the foundation of the Engliſh "Grete Herbal," firſt printed here in 1516.

The HORTUS SANITATIS was tranſlated into various languages, and in ſome new⯑modelled, without concealing its origin, according to the fancy of different editors and printers; and paſſed through innume⯑rable editions on the Continent; having been the popular book on the ſubject, as the "Grete Herbal" was in England, for fiſty or ſixty years.

[157] It does not appear that CUBA was pub⯑licly known as the author of the HORTUS SANITATIS, until EGENOLF, a bookſeller of Frankfort, gave an improved edition, with an entirely new ſet of figures, under the care of EUCHARIUS RHODION or RO⯑ESLIN, a phyſician of the ſame city, in 1533. Egenolf's book paſſed through va⯑rious editions, until a better work was com⯑poſed by DORSTEN, under the title of "Bo⯑tanicon," in 1540, at Frankfort; in which the ſame figures were employed. They were uſed alſo in the "Encyclopaedia Medica" of J. DRYANDER, in 1542; and in the ſucceeding year, in an edition of DIOSCO⯑RIDES, by Hermann Ryff, printed by Ege⯑nolf. Finally, ADAM LONICER, the ſon-in-law of Egenolf, having totally reformed the work of CUBA, employed them in his Herbal, printed in 1546. In ſucceeding editions, he introduced new figures, took others from TRAGUS to the number in the whole of 880, and compoſed a work, which paſſed through a great number of editions, and was not ſuperſeded in the preſent century, as appears by an edition [158] printed ſo lately as in 1723, and even in 1737.

We are informed by TRAGUS, that Ege⯑nolf ſpared no expence in the encourage⯑ment of artiſts to procure theſe icons, rude and imperfect as they appear to us. He ſe⯑cured to himſelf, by this means, the mo⯑nopoly of printing Herbals, for a ſucceſſion of years; and acquired both fame and riches.

At length, theſe were all ſuperſeded by thoſe of BRUNSFELSIUS to his Herbal, printed in 1532; which were drawn from nature, and appear to have been the firſt that were worthy of notice. Theſe were, however, greatly excelled by FUCHSIUS, in 1542; whoſe figures, although only out⯑lines, are uncommonly beautiful, and not leſs juſt. They conſiſt of five hundred figures in folio, of the moſt common and uſeful plants; and were copied, in a ſmaller ſcale, by many ſucceeding authors. TRA⯑GUS took moſt of them into his "Hiſtory of German Plants," to which he added many new ones, to the amount in all of 567. Thoſe of TRAGUS are little more [159] than outlines; and, allowing for the time, they ſufficiently well expreſs the habit of moſt of the ſubjects.

Egenolf having ſet the example, printers, after this time, themſelves bore the expence of cutting the blocks; by which means, certain printers monopoliſed the printing of Herbals; and a kind of commerce between them and authors took place, and mutual exchanges were made for the uſe of each other's books. Among theſe, no one poſ⯑ſeſſed at length a greater collection than the famous PLANTIN, of Antwerp; who recommended himſelf ſo highly by the excellency of his types, and mode of exe⯑cuting his works. Hence he became the common printer to ſeveral of the celebrated botanic writers of the ſixteenth century. When CLUSIUS publiſhed his French tranſ⯑lation of DODOENS, with Loe, at Antwerp, he gave figures copied from FUCHSIUS; all which Plantin bought. He afterwards acquired the figures cut for CLUSIUS's own works, and thoſe of LOBEL. DODONAEUS, beſides ſome new blocks, had the uſe of all the above in the "Pemptades," in 1584, which work contains 1300 figures. TABERNAE⯑MONTANUS [160] obtained the uſe of this col⯑lection, namely, thoſe of FUCHSIUS, CLU⯑SIUS, LOBEL, and DODONAEUS; to which he added thoſe of MATTHIOLUS; inſo⯑much that his Herbal, printed at Frankfort in 1588, comprehends more than two thou⯑ſand figures. DALECHAMP, in his "Ge⯑neral Hiſtory of Plants," printed about the ſame time, augmented them to near two thouſand ſeven hundred.

The fate of GESNER's excellent figures I can but briefly mention; it forms a mor⯑tifying, but curious anecdote, in the literary hiſtory of the ſcience. Of the fifteen hun⯑dred figures left by GESNER, prepared for his "Hiſtory of Plants," at his death, in 1565, a large ſhare paſſed into the "Epi⯑tome Matthioli," publiſhed by CAMERA⯑RIUS in 1586, which contained in the whole 1003 figures; and in the ſame year, as alſo into a ſecond edition in 1590, they embel⯑liſhed an abridged tranſlation of MAT⯑THIOLUS, printed under the name of the "German Herbal." In 1609, the ſame blocks were uſed by Uffenbach for the Her⯑bal of CASTOR DURANTES, printed at Frankfort. This publication, however, [161] comprehends only 948 of theſe icons, nearly another hundred being introduced of very in⯑ferior merit. After this period, CAMERA⯑RIUS the younger being dead, theſe blocks were purchaſed by Goerlin, a bookſeller of Ulm; and next ſerved for the "Parnaſſus Medicinalis illuſtratus" of BECHER, printed at that city in 1663; the ſecond part of which work contains all thoſe of the "Epi⯑tome," except ſix figures. In 1678, they were taken into a German Herbal, made up from MATTHIOLUS, by Bernard VER⯑ZASCHA, printed at Baſil; and ſuch was the excellency of the materials and work⯑manſhip of theſe blocks, that they were exhibited a ſixth time in the "Theatrum Botanicum," or Kräuterbuch of ZWINGER, being an amended edition of VERZASCHA, printed alſo at Baſil in 1696, with the addi⯑tion of more than one hundred new blocks, copied from C. BAUHINE and TABERNAE⯑MONTANUS; and finally, into a new edition of the ſame work, ſo late as the year 1744.

Thus did the genius and labours of GES⯑NER add dignity and ornament to the works of other men, and even of ſome whoſe en⯑mity he had experienced during his life-time.

[162] Beſides the above mentioned, GESNER left five volumes, conſiſting entirely of figures, which, after various viciſſitudes, became the property of TREW, of Norim⯑berg. Senſible that whether we view the extent of GESNER's knowledge and learn⯑ing, or his ſingular induſtry, ſuch muſt be the veneration for his character, that any of his remains muſt claim the attention of the curious, the poſſeſſor gratified the pub⯑lic, by the pen of Dr. SCHMIEDEL, with an ample ſpecimen, publiſhed in 1753.

Thus far for foreigners. The rude icons of the "Grete Herbal," it has been ob⯑ſerved, were evidently copied from thoſe in the HORTUS SANITATIS; for that they were not the ſame tables, appears from the diminiſhed ſize. Of the figures in TURNER's Hiſtory, which amount to upwards of 500; the greater part are thoſe of FUCHSIUS's octavo ſet; and the remainder, nearly 100, were new. LYTE printed his tranſlation of DODOENS with Loe, at Antwerp, for the conveniency of his figures, which are alſo borrowed from FUCHSIUS; to which LYTE added about thirty new ones.

GERARD, in 1597, and JOHNSON, his [163] "Emaculator" afterwards, in 1633 and 1636, procured all the blocks from Frank⯑fort, with which the Herbal of TABERNAE⯑MONTANUS had been illuſtrated. JOHN⯑SON by this means accumulated upwards of 2700 cuts.

The blocks for PARKINSON's "Thea⯑trum," and his "Paradiſus," were, I appre⯑hend, cut in England; and thoſe for the firſt ſeem to be copies from GERARD, though much inferior in execution. The laſt of the kind uſed in England, were a new ſet cut for SALMON's "Herbal," in 1710; except, I believe, thoſe for a very indifferent per⯑formance, under the name of "An Herbal," publiſhed ſince that time, in quarto.

The earlieſt copper-plates of plants on the Continent, are ſaid to be thoſe of Co⯑lumna in his "Phytobaſanos," in 1592. In England, except ſome ſingle figures, and the few plates in the firſt edition of PLOT's "Oxfordſhire" in 1677, thoſe of the "Hiſ⯑toria Oxonienſis" are the firſt exhibition of any great work; and of theſe, the graſſes are, to this time, perhaps unparalleled in the neatneſs and accuracy of the execution.

HORTUS OXONIENSIS.

HITHERTO Botany, however ſuc⯑ceſsfully it might have been culti⯑vated by individuals in England, had re⯑ceived no encouragement from any public inſtitutions; but the time was now ar⯑rived, when it acquired additional vigour and improvement from the foundation of a phyſic-garden at Oxford. Theſe elegant and neceſſary aids to ſcience had conſidera⯑bly multiplied ſince the firſt foundations of [165] the kind, before noticed, in Italy and elſe⯑where. Several univerſities in the more northern and weſtern parts of Europe had procured the eſtabliſhment of gardens: Pa⯑ris, in 1570; Leyden, in 1577; Leipſic, in 1580; Montpelier, in 1598; Jena, in 1628; and Oxford, in the year 1632. This laſt was owing to the munificence of HENRY Earl of Danby, who gave for this purpoſe five acres of ground, built green-houſes and ſtoves, and an houſe for the accommodation of the gardener; endowed the eſtabliſhment, and placed in it, as the ſuperviſor, Jacob BOBART, a German from Brunſwick, who lived, as WOOD tells us, in the garden⯑houſe, and died there on February 4, 1679. A liſt of the plants was publiſhed, under the title of "CATALOGUS PLANTARUM Horti medici OXONIENSIS Latino-anglicus et Anglico-latinus: alphabetico ordine." Oxon. 1648. 12^o. pp. 54 and 51. DILLENIUS informs us, that BOBART drew up this catalogue. In the preface we are told the garden contained 1600 ſpecies, by which muſt be underſtood both exotic and indi⯑genous, including varieties of each. The [166] plants are barely enumerated, without any ſynonyms, or references to any author. The number of Engliſh ſpecies recited, extends to 600, or nearly. The copiouſneſs of this catalogue ſets the zeal and diligence of BOBART in a favourable light. Under his care, and that of his ſon, the garden of Oxford continued to flouriſh for many years.

The CATALOGUS OXONIENSIS was re⯑publiſhed in the year 1658, in a much im⯑proved ſtate, by the joint aſſiſtance of Dr. STEPHENS, Mr. William BROWNE, and the two BOBARTS, father and ſon, under the following title, "CATALOGUS HORTI BOTANICI OXONIENSIS, alphabetice digeſ⯑tus, duas praeterpropter, plantarum chilia⯑das complectens, priore duplo auctior, idemque elimatior, nec non etymologiis, qua Graecis, qua Latinis, hinc inde petitis, enucleatior: in quo nomina Latina pariter et Graeca vernaculis; et in ejus ſequiore parte, vernacula Latinis praeponuntur. Cui acceſſere plantae minimum ſexaginta ſuis nominibus inſignitae, quae nullibi niſi in hoc opuſculo memorantur. Curâ et operâ ſociâ Philippi STEPHANI, M.D. et [167] Gulielmi BROUNE, A.M. adhibitis etiam in conſilium D. BOBERTO patre, hortulano aca⯑demico ejuſque filio, utpote rei herbariae callen⯑tiſſimis." Oxon. 1658. 8^o. pp. 214.

Of Dr. Philip STEPHENS, whoſe name ſtands firſt among the authors of this cata⯑logue, we find little mention elſewhere, as eminent in botanical ſcience. He was born at the Devizes in Wiltſhire, and was firſt of St. Alban's Hall, Oxon; afterwards made Fellow of New College by the viſitors, and became Principal of Magdalen Hall. He died at London after the Reſtoration.

MERRET, without any notice of Dr. STEPHENS, expreſsly calls Mr. BROWNE the author of this Catalogue; and Wood ſays, that he had the chief hand in it. William BROWNE was a native of Oxſord, became Bachelor of Divinity, and Senior Fellow of Magdalen College. He died in March 1678, aged about 50, and was bu⯑ried in the outer chapel of his college.

In this enlarged edition, the authors have, in every inſtance where it was poſſible, not only adopted the ſpecifical appellations giv⯑en by GERARD and PARKINSON to each [168] plant, but quoted the page of their works. This is the firſt book, as far as I know, on the ſubject, printed in England, in which the latter of theſe circumſtances takes place. It is remarkable, that ſo obvious an aſſiſtance, after having been introduced by Caſpar BAU⯑HINE in his "Phytopinax," ſhould be want⯑ing in the "Pinax" itſelf. Had GERARD and PARKINSON retained, throughout their works, the exact ſynonyms of the authors from whom they transferred their plants, and quoted the pages, they would unqueſtionably have rendered their writings much more uſeful to poſterity, and have preſerved them from diſuſe and oblivion, for a much longer period. The ſame may be obſerved of Mr. RAY, who has totally neglected this valu⯑able improvement. So novel was the prac⯑tice, that the authors of the HORTUS OXO⯑NIENSIS thought it neceſſary to apologiſe for it, and ſhield themſelves under the au⯑thority of the "Hortus Eyſtettenſis."

There are many dubious and ill-aſcer⯑tained plants in this Catalogue; and thoſe marked as new, are almoſt wholly varieties. Engliſh Botany ſeems to have received little [169] or no acceſſion by it; and I am not aware of one indigenous plant firſt mentioned in this liſt.

The ſecond part, or alphabetical liſt of Engliſh names, is intended only to lead to the Latin generical term in the firſt part.

HOW.

Until this period, no attempts had been made in England to ſeparate the indigenous from exotic botany. It is true, Dr. JOHN⯑SON, as before mentioned, had publiſhed local catalogues of the plants of certain diſ⯑tricts; but no one had eſſayed a general liſt or deſcription of the Engliſh plants alone, in the way of what is now called a Flora: a term, which, as far as I can find, was firſt adopted by Simon PAULI, for a catalogue of the plants of Denmark, publiſhed in 1648. It is to Dr. How that we owe the firſt ſketch of a work of this kind; and, though he does not entitle his book Flora, he yet mentions that term in his preface.

William How was born in London in the year 1619, and educated at Merchant Tay⯑lors ſchool. He became a commoner of St. John's college, Oxford, at eighteen: he [170] took his bachelor's degree in 1641, and that of maſter of arts in 1645; and entered on the phyſical line. It does not appear that he ever took his doctor's degree, though he was commonly called Dr. How. With many other ſcholars of that time, he en⯑tered into the king's army, and for his loy⯑alty was promoted to the rank of captain, in a troop of horſe. Upon the decline of the royal cauſe, he proſecuted his ſtudies in phyſic, and practiſed in that faculty. He lived firſt in St. Lawrence Lane, and after⯑wards in Milk Street. He died about the beginning of September 1656, and was bu⯑ried by the grave of his mother, in St. Mar⯑garet's church, Weſtminſter; leaving behind him, as Mr. Wood ſays, ‘"a choice library of books of his faculty, and the character of a noted herbaliſt."’

Dr. How's principal publication, and for which he is here recorded, bears the following title:

"PHYTOLOGIA BRITANNICA, natales exhibens indigenarum Stirpium ſponte emer⯑gentium." Lond. 1650. 12^o. pp. 133.

The plants are arranged in the alphabe⯑tical order of the Latin names, with one or [171] two ſynonyms, taken, as beſt pleaſed the author, from various writers on the conti⯑nent, as well as from GERARD, PARKIN⯑SON, and LOBEL. The place of growth to each plant is noticed, and the particular ſpots where the rare ones grow, are ſpecified. The liſt contains 1220 plants, which (as few moſſes and fungi are enumerated) is a copious catalogue for that time, even ad⯑mitting the varieties, which the preſent ſtate of botany would reject.

The author of this little volume was unqueſtionably a man of very conſiderable learning, and had a ſtrong paſſion for the knowledge of plants; but his ſituation in life does not ſeem to have allowed him the opportunity of travelling into the various parts of England, to gratify his taſte in Eng⯑liſh botany, with which he was not criti⯑cally and extenſively acquainted. Mr. RAY, in the preface to his "Catalogus Plantarum Angliae," has given a liſt of more than thirty ſpecies in the "Phytologia," which have no title to a place as indigenous plants of Eng⯑land. Some of theſe being inhabitants of [172] Southern Europe; others evidently the ac⯑cidental outcaſts of gardens; and ſome, as certainly, miſtaken for other plants, as ap⯑peared from the impoſſibility of finding them in the ſpots which How had pointed out.

The rare plants were almoſt wholly com⯑municated by his friends, Mr. STONE⯑HOUSE, Dr. BOWLES, Mr. HEATON, Mr. LOGGINS, Mr. GOODYER, and others. He drew ſome from a manuſcript of Dr. JOHNSON, the editor of GERARD. I wiſh it were in my power to commemorate theſe perſons in a more ample manner, who, at an early period, contributed to extend and illuſtrate Engliſh botany. Mr. STONE⯑HOUSE, in particular, has deſerved highly of the lovers of this ſcience. He appears to have travelled much in England, from his recording the plants diſcovered by him in many counties. In Yorkſhire he was particularly converſant; and, I conjecture, he lived at a place called Darfield, near Barnſley, in that county.

Dr. BOWLES, and Mr. GOODYER, are, I believe, the ſame perſons mentioned under [173] the article of JOHNSON. Of Mr. HEA⯑TON, I ſhall take further notice in the ſe⯑quel of theſe anecdotes.

It has been obſerved, that ſome of LO⯑BEL's papers fell into the hands of PAR⯑KINSON, and ſome into Dr. How's poſſeſ⯑ſion. Theſe were the fragment of LOBEL's great work, which How publiſhed in 1655, under the ſubſequent title:

"Matthiae de LOBEL, M.D. botanographi regii eximii, STIRPIUM ILLUSTRATIONES, plurimas elaborantes inauditas plantas ſub⯑reptitiis Joh. PARKINSONI rapſodiis (ex co⯑dice M.S. inſalutato) ſparſim gravatae, ejuſ⯑dem adjecta ſunt ad calcem Theatri Botanici [...]. Accurante Guil. How, Anglo." Lond. 1655. 4^o. pp. 170.

This work has been noticed under the article of LOBEL. It is ſufficient to obſerve here, that the notes which the editor has affixed, would almoſt perſuade the reader that he had publiſhed the work with a view to take an invidious retroſpect of PARKIN⯑SON's "Theatre." In the preface to the "Phytologia," and in that of this work, both written in a flowery and bombaſt ſtile, as well [174] as throughout the notes, he ſpeaks of PAR⯑KINSON in very contemptuous language, and repreſents him as having made LOBEL's obſervations his own, without acknow⯑ledgment. Whatever may have been the caſe in particular inſtances, the attack, on the whole, was uncandid; ſince PARKIN⯑SON, in the very title of his "Theatre," pro⯑feſſes to have made uſe of, and inſerted, Dr. LOBEL's notes, together with thoſe of Dr. BONHAM and others. In fact, there is a pe⯑tulance and an acrimony in the ſtile, both of the author and of the editor of this work, which, howſoever exampled in the laſt age, is, happily, much leſs frequently the lan⯑guage of literature in the preſent.

TRADESCANT.

ALTHOUGH it does not appear that the TRADESCANTS contributed materially to amplify what is more eſpeci⯑ally meant by Engliſh Botany, or the diſco⯑very and illuſtration of the plants ſponta⯑neouſly growing in England: yet, in a work devoted to the commemoration of Botaniſts, their name ſtands too high not to demand an honourable notice; ſince they contributed, at an early period, by their [176] garden and muſeum, to raiſe a curioſity that was eminently uſeful to the progreſs and improvement of natural hiſtory in general.

John TRADESCANT was by birth a Dutch man, as we are informed by A. Wood. On what occaſion, and at what period, he came into England, is not preciſe⯑ly aſcertained. He is ſaid to have been, for a conſiderable time, in the ſervice of Lord Treaſurer SALISBURY and Lord WOOTON. He travelled ſeveral years, and into various parts of Europe; as far eaſtward as into Ruſſia. He was in a fleet that was ſent againſt the Algerines in 1620, and mention is made of his collecting plants in Barbary, and in the iſles of the Mediterranean. He is ſaid to have brought the trifolium ſtella⯑tum Lin. from the iſle of Fermentera; and his name frequently occurs in the ſecond edition of GERARD by JOHNSON; in PAR⯑KINSON's "Theatre of Plants," and in his "Garden of Flowers," printed in 1656. But I conjecture that TRADESCANT was not reſident in England in the time of GE⯑RARD himſelf, or known to him.

He appears however to have been eſta⯑bliſhed [177] in England, and his garden founded at Lambeth; about the year 1629 he ob⯑tained the title of gardener to Charles I. TRADESCANT was a man of extraordinary curioſity, and the firſt in this country, who made any conſiderable collection of the ſub⯑jects of natural hiſtory. He had a ſon of the ſame name, who took a voyage to Virginia, from whence he returned with many new plants. They were the means of introduc⯑ing a variety of curious ſpecies into this kingdom; ſeveral of which bore their name. Tradeſcant's Spiderwort, Tradeſcant's Aſter, are well known to this day; and LINNAEUS has immortalized them among the Bota⯑niſts, by making a new genus, under their name, of the Spiderwort, which had before been called Ephemeron. His Muſeum, called Tradeſcant's Ark, attracted the curioſity of the age, and was much frequented by the great, by whoſe means it was alſo much enlarged, as appears by the liſt of his bene⯑factors, printed at the end of "his MUSEUM TRADESCANTIANUM;" among whom, after the names of the king and queen, are found thoſe of many of the firſt nobility.

This ſmall volume, the author entitled [178] "MUSEUM TRADESCANTIANUM; or, a Collection of Rarities preſerved at South Lambeth, near London. By John TRA⯑DESCANT." 1656, 12^o. It contains liſts of his birds, quadrupeds, fiſh, ſhells, inſects, minerals, fruits, artificial and miſcellaneous curioſities, war inſtruments, habits, utenſils, coins, and medals. Theſe are followed by a catalogue, in Engliſh and Latin, of the plants of his garden, and a liſt of his be⯑nefactors. The reader may ſee a curious account of the remains of this garden, drawn up in the year 1749, by the late Sir William WATSON, and printed in the 46th volume of the Philoſophical Tranſactions. Prefixed to this volume were the prints of both father and ſon; which, from the cir⯑cumſtance of being engraved by HOLLAR, has rendered the book well known to the collectors of prints, by whom moſt of the copies have been plundered of the impreſ⯑ſions.

In what year the elder TRADESCANT died, is not certain, but his print above⯑mentioned repreſents him as a man ad⯑vanced in age.

The ſon inherited the muſeum, and be⯑queathed [179] it by a deed of gift to Mr. ASH⯑MOLE, who lodged in Tradeſcant's houſe. It afterwards became part of the Aſhmolean muſeum, and the name of TRADESCANT was unjuſtly ſunk in that of Aſhmole. John, the ſon, died in 1662. His widow erected a curious monument, in memory of the family, in Lambeth church yard, of which a large account, and engravings from a draw⯑ing of it in the Pepyſian library at Cambridge, are given by the late learned Dr. DUCAR⯑REL, in the 63d volume of the Philoſophical Tranſactions ^*.

R. TURNER, CULPEPPER, and LOVELL.

The influence of Aſtrology in Phyſic and Botany, was far from being worn out in the middle of this age. By the credulity and ſuperſtition of ſome, and the diſhoneſty of others, it ſtill maintained its ground. Se⯑veral [180] phyſicians, and other men of learning, ſhewed ſome bias towards it. Many prac⯑titioners of an inferior claſs, and numerous empirics, were ſtill advocates for aſtrological influence in the preparation and application of ſimples.

There is an Herbal written by Robert TURNER, who calls himſelf Botanologiae Studioſus, under the title of "BOTANO⯑LOGIA, the Britiſh Phyſician; or, The Nature and Vertues of Engliſh Plants; exactly deſcribing ſuch as grow naturally in the land, with their ſeveral names, Greek, Latin, or Engliſh; natures, places where they flouriſh, and are moſt proper to be gathered; their degrees of tempera⯑ture, applications, and vertues, phyſical and aſtrological uſes treated of, &c." London, 1664, 12^o. But, of the aſtro⯑logical herbaliſts, Nicholas CULPEPPER ſtands eminently forward. His "Herbal," firſt printed in 1652, which c ontinued for more than a century, to be the manual of good ladies in the country, is well known; and, to do the author juſtice, his deſcriptions of common plants were drawn up with a [181] clearneſs and diſtinction that would not have diſgraced a better pen.

Yet there is one author of this order, whoſe reſpectability might exempt him from to⯑tal oblivion. Robert LOVELL's "compleat Herbal," although ſaid to be written by him whilſt a young man, is of ſo ſingular a complexion, as to merit notice in a work of this kind, were it only to regret the miſ⯑application of talents, which demonſtrate an extenſive knowledge of books, a won⯑derful induſtry in the collection of his ma⯑terials, and not leſs judgment in the ar⯑rangement. The firſt edition was printed in 1659; the ſecond in 1665, in 8^o. at Ox⯑ſord, pp. 672, excluſive of the introduc⯑tion of 84 pages, and bears the following title, "PAMBOTANOLOGIA: ſive Enchi⯑ridion Botanicum; or, A compleat Her⯑bal; containing the ſum of antient and modern authors, both Galenical and Chymical, touching trees, ſhrubs, plants, fruits, flowers, &c. in an alphabetical order, wherein all that are not in the phyſic garden in Oxford are noted with aſteriſks. Shewing their place, time, [182] names, kinds, temperature, virtues, uſe, doſe, danger, and antidotes; together with an introduction to herbariſme, &c. an appendix of exotics, and an univerſal index of plants, ſhewing what grow wild in England; 2d edition with additions." Oxford, 1665, 12^o.

To thoſe whoſe curioſity leans that way, it may not be eaſy to direct them to a more conciſe, or more perfectly methodical ar⯑rangement of ſimples, according to the Ga⯑lenical principles of the four elements, tem⯑peraments, and qualities, than may be met with in the introduction to this book.

The arrangement of the matter in the work itſelf is according to the alphabet of the Engliſh names; to which is ſubjoined the place of growth, the time of flowering, then the name in Greek, and the Latin of⯑ficinal term. There are no deſcriptions of the plants; but the qualities and uſes of each are collected from a profuſion of au⯑thors, and applied to all the ſpecies under each generical term; the form in which the medicine ſhould be given, the authority for each carefully cited, and the officinal [183] compounds into which they enter aſſidu⯑ouſly noticed. The author includes ſimples, both of exotic and of indigenous growth.

He profeſſes to have cited near two hun⯑dred and fifty authors, of which he gives the liſt. At p. 482 begins an appendix on the drugs of the Eaſt and Weſt Indies, ex⯑tracted from the Arabians, and from HER⯑NANDEZ. A copious index of names to all the plants of his "Herbal," with the ſynonyms; eſpecially of the older au⯑thors; of ſuch as are mentioned in TRA⯑DESCANT; BAUHINE's Pinax; of thoſe which are in the foreign botanical gardens, and not in that of Oxford; and laſtly, of thoſe in the PHYTOLOGIA BRITANNICA. The work concludes with a large index of diſeaſes, with the appropriate remedies from the ſimples of his work. In his catalogue of authors, he gives the number of figures contained in their works, which I tranſcribe as a matter of curioſity, that cannot fail to gratify the botanical reader^*.

PECHEY.

After the recital of CULPEPPER and LOVELL, I cannot refuſe admittance to an author of more reſpectability, though not deeply ſkilled in botanical knowledge.

"The compleat Herbal of Phyſical Plants; containing all ſuch Engliſh and foreign herbs, and ſhrubs, and trees, as are uſed in phyſic and ſurgery. By John [185] PECHEY, M.D. fellow of the college of phyſicians." 8^o. 1694; reprinted at Am⯑ſterdam the ſame year, and in 1707. The deſcriptions, which are ſhort, are taken from RAY's hiſtory; the virtues from a variety of authors. The natural places of growth of the Engliſh plants are ſpecified; but the author betrays his want of botani⯑cal knowledge, by enumerating ſeveral in⯑digenous as exotic plants. PECHEY was the firſt who introduced into uſe the caſu⯑munar; of which he is ſaid to have made a ſecret, and conſidered it as a corrector of the Peruvian bark.

In the ſame year was publiſhed, "PHI⯑LOBOTANOLOGIA: ſ. Hiſtoria Vegetabilium ſacra; or, A Scriptural Herbal. By William WESTMACOTT." 8^o. 1694. Not having ſeen this volume I can give no further ac⯑count of it.

SALMON.

If my readers will excuſe the anachroniſm, I am here tempted to anticipate the name of an author, the complexion of whoſe [186] writings renders it not improper to notice him after CULPEPPER and LOVELL; al⯑though in the time he lived, the influence of aſtrology had loſt ſtill more of its power. To the faſtidious critic in Botany, it might need ſome apology, that I introduce into theſe anecdotes the name of SALMON; well known as a multifarious writer, and author of numerous publications in phyſic, all of the empirical caſt. I confeſs, however, I could not paſs over, in total ſilence, a writer to whom, although no praiſe can be due as a botaniſt, yet the commendation of induſtry ought not to be withheld from a man who could beſtow twenty years labour, in the compilation of "an Herbal" of 1296 pages, in folio. I will recite the title, which will ſufficiently ſhew the nature of his work.

"The ENGLISH HERBAL; or, Hiſ⯑tory of Plants; containing, 1. Their names, Greek, Latin, and Engliſh. 2. Species, or various kinds. 3. Deſcrip⯑tions. 4. Places of growth. 5. Times of flowering and feeding. 6. Qualities or properties. 7. Their ſpecifications. 8. Preparations, Galenic and Chymic. [187] 9. Virtues and uſes. 10. A compleat florilegium of all the choice flowers culti⯑vated by our floriſts, interſperſed through the work, in their proper places, where you have their culture, choice, increaſe, and way of management, as well for pro⯑fit as delectation, adorned with exquiſite icons, or figures of the moſt conſiderable ſpecies. By William SALMON, M.D." London, fol. 2 vol. 1711.

The order of SALMON's book is alphabe⯑tical, and, as it is a work of mere compila⯑tion, he profeſſes to have conſulted all the botanical authors of repute, and enumerates the names of ſuch. His deſign was to treat on medicinal herbs principally. As a bo⯑tanical work it is beneath all criticiſm; the errors in this way being enormous, both in multitude and degree. In detailing the powers of ſimples, he follows the Galenic terms of expreſſion ufed by the writers of the preceding century, and diſtributes, with a laviſh hand, extraordinary and numerous powers to almoſt every herb he deſcribes. Excluſive of his induſtry, ſome merit is due to SALMON for the regular arrangement of [188] his ſubjects, ſubordinate to his method; qualities which, under the direction of more ſkill in Botany, and a ſounder judge⯑ment in diſcriminating the properties of ſimples, might have enabled him to have executed more effectually what ſeems to have been his purpoſe, that of ſuperſeding the Herbals of GERARD and PARKINSON, in which he totally failed. His tables, I have noticed heretofore, in ſpeaking on wooden cuts. But from theſe authors I return to writers of dignity and importance; and, with peculiar ſatisfaction, to the view, eſpecially, of a character, from whoſe pene⯑trating genius, and perſevering induſtry, not Botany alone, but Zoology, may date a new aera. On this occaſion I ſingularly lament, that I am not furniſhed with any new ma⯑terials to illuſtrate the life of RAY; of whom it may with truth be maintained, that in theſe branches of natural hiſtory, he became, without the patronage of an Alexander, the Ariſtotle of England, and the Linnaeus of the time.

RAY.

IF we here take a retroſpective view of the progreſs of botany during the firſt period of the ſeventeenth century, we find that, however particular individuals, both in England and on the continent, might have laboured in its advancement, it was not, on the whole, in a flouriſhing ſtate, either here, or in any other part of Europe. From the time of the BAUHINES, even to that of RAY, its progreſs as a ſcience was ſlow. The Remains of John BAU⯑HINE, his "Hiſtoria Plantarum Univer⯑ſalis," printed in 1650, in three large [190] folio volumes, at the expence of 40,000 florins, defrayed by F. L. à Graffenreid, was the principal performance on the con⯑tinent, and that indeed was invaluable. It is a monument of learning and induſtry, of which few examples can be expected in any one age. That which GESNER performed for zoology. John BAUHINE effected in botany. It is, in reality, a repoſitory of all that was valuable in the ancients, in his immediate predeceſſors, and in the diſcove⯑ries of his own time, relating to the hiſtory of vegetables, and is executed with that accuracy and critical judgment which can only be exhibited by ſuperior talents.

The obſtacles to the improvement of botany were various. Europe had been in⯑volved in war, the perpetual enemy to free intercourſe among the learned; and to commerce, which is ever friendly to natural ſcience. Simples were neglected in phyſic, for medicines drawn from chymiſtry. Even alchymy yet employed the induſtry of many in every nation of Europe. Botanical gar⯑dens, although ſeveral, both public and pri⯑vate, had been eſtabliſhed, did not, however, [191] flouriſh. The Indies had not yet poured in their treaſures with that liberal hand which was ſoon after experienced. Even the paſ⯑ſion of the floriſt for varieties aſſiſted in depreſſing the genuine ſpirit of the bota⯑niſt. But the time was now approaching, when botany was about to receive a capi⯑tal advantage and embelliſhment, by the introduction and eſtabliſhment of ſyſtem; of the riſe and progreſs of which, it will not be incongruous to my plan to give a ſhort account, ſince this great revolution formed a new aera in the hiſtory of the ſcience. As the revival of it, however, did not take place till the time of Mr. RAY and Dr. MORISON, I will poſtpone what I have to ſay on this ſubject, till I have given ſome account of the writings of thoſe juſtly celebrated naturaliſts, by whoſe la⯑bours ſyſtem itſelf was reſtored and im⯑proved.

The earlieſt anecdotes of Mr. RAY, to which I can refer, are ſome brief outlines of his life, in the "Compleat Hiſtory of Eu⯑rope for the year 1705." A more con⯑nected account of this learned and excellent man may be ſeen in the "General Dictio⯑nary," [192] and the "Biographia Britannica;" but the moſt detailed relation is that of Dr. SCOTT, publiſhed in 1760, from ma⯑terials collected by Dr. DERHAM. This is well abridged in the Biographical Dictio⯑nary. It is much to be regretted, that our curioſity has not been more amply grati⯑fied than by theſe ſhort and imperfect me⯑moirs.

A more circumſtantial narrative of the life of Mr. RAY would, even at this diſtance of time, be a valuable acceſſion to biography, and highly grateful to thoſe, who are ſenſible of the great improvements which he gave to the ſcience of natural hiſtory in general; nor could ſufficient juſtice be done to his manifold talents, diſcoveries, and writings, but by a pen of the firſt eminence in bio⯑graphical literature.

The limits of my plan will not allow of more than a general detail of the principal events of his life, as connected in chrono⯑logical order with his writings.

John Wray, or, as he always ſpelt his name after the year 1669, RAY, was born at Black Notley, near Braintree, in Eſſex, Nov. 29, [193] 1628. His father, though in ſo humble a ſituation as that of a blackſmith, ſent his ſon to the grammar-ſchool at Braintree; and in 1644, entered him at Catherine Hall, in Cambridge; from whence he removed, in leſs than two years, to Trinity College, where the politer ſciences were more culti⯑vated. Dr. BARROW was his fellow pupil, and intimate friend, and, on account of their early proficiencies, both were the fa⯑vourites of their learned tutor, Dr. DU⯑PORT. He was choſen minor-fellow of Trinity, in 1649; in 1651, was made Greek lecturer of the college; in 1653, mathe⯑matical lecturer; and in 1655, humanity reader. Theſe appointments were ſufficient teſtimonies of his talents and abilities at this early period. He afterwards paſſed through the offices of the college, and be⯑came tutor to many gentlemen of honour⯑able birth and attainments, who gave him due praiſe and acknowledgments for his watchful care of them. He alſo diſtin⯑guiſhed himſelf, while in college, as a ſen⯑ſible and rational preacher, and a ſound divine. As his favourite ſtudy was the [194] works of God, he laid, at this time, in his college lectures, the foundation of his "Wiſdom of God in the Creation," and of his "Three Phyſico-theological Diſ⯑courſes;" which were afterwards ſo well received by the public.

At the period when Mr. RAY turned his attention to the ſtudy of nature, the know⯑ledge of plants was not highly ſuperior to the ſtate in which TURNER had found it, in the ſame place, more than a century be⯑fore. In this ſtudy RAY could find no maſter. I am not able to ſay, that a ſingle publication, of a ſcientific nature, on the ſubject of plants, had ever appeared at Cam⯑bridge; for Maplet's "Green Foreſt" will ſcarcely be thought worthy of that appella⯑tion. Oxford had, indeed, not only experi⯑enced the benefit of private encouragement, but of public munificence, in the eſtabliſh⯑ment of a Garden. But at the ſiſter uni⯑verſity Mr. RAY ſtood alone, himſelf indeed an hoſt! Self-taught as he was, and full of ardour, he ſo forcibly diſplayed the uti⯑lity of botanical knowledge, and its inti⯑mate connection with the arts, and conve⯑niences [195] of life, independent even of thoſe charms, which the views of nature ever af⯑ford to contemplative minds, that he ſoon made it an object of attention; and num⯑bered among his aſſociates in theſe ſtudies, Mr. NID, a ſenior fellow of his own col⯑lege, Mr. Francis WILLUGHBY, and Mr. Peter COURTHOPE. The firſt of theſe gentlemen became his inſeparable compa⯑nion; but he had the misfortune to deplore his death, a little time before the publica⯑tion of his firſt work, which came out under the title of "CATALOGUS PLANTARUM CIRCA CANTABRIGIAM NASCENTIUM." Cantab. 1660." pp. 182. cum Indicibus, &c. pp. 103. 12^o.

This little volume contains all the plants which the author had obſerved ſpontane⯑ouſly growing in the neighbourhood of Cambridge, amounting to 626, all varieties and dubious plants excluded. The num⯑ber is ſmall, when compared with many modern catalogues; but not ſo, when it is recollected, that, at that period, a very few of the Cryptogamia claſs, and not many of [196] the Graminaceous tribe, had been inveſti⯑gated.

The plants are diſpoſed in the alphabeti⯑cal order of the Latin names; and the ſyno⯑nyms of the four principal authors then in uſe given at length. Theſe are GERARD and PARKINSON, and the two BAUHINES; nor are others wanting, when characteriſtic of the plant. Prefixed is a liſt of the au⯑thors, ſo accurately and inſtructively drawn up, as not to have loſt its utility to this day. Mr. RAY has interſperſed many ſe⯑lect obſervations, on the medicinal and oeco⯑nomical uſes of the plants; on the ſtruc⯑ture of the flower; on varieties: and has not only deſcribed ſome new plants, diſco⯑vered by himſelf, but given accurate diſ⯑tinctions of many, before imperfectly known. Subjoined, the reader finds an index of the Engliſh names, preceding the Latin; an in⯑dex, ſpecifying the particular places of the more rare plants; then, a copious etymo⯑logy of the names, and an explanation of the terms uſed in the ſcience. In fine, he has done every thing to facilitate the labour [197] of the ſtudent in this part, as in the for⯑mer to inſtruct and entertain the more erudite reader.

I have been the more diffuſe on this ſmall volume, as the author has obſerved nearly the ſame plan, in his ſubſequent catalogues, and SYNOPSIS. Moles parva, Vis magna. When the time in which this publication was made, and the meagre ſtructure of pre⯑ceding catalogues is conſidered, I may ſafely appeal to modern judges, whether this was not an extraordinary production. Few lo⯑cal catalogues had been publiſhed at home; and, I believe, not one abroad, that diſ⯑played any thing like a comparable ſhare of ſcience and erudition, ſo aptly united.

Among the variety of notes in this cata⯑logue, there is one, poſſibly not of public notoriety. Mr. RAY informs us, that the people of Norwich had long excelled in the culture and production of fine flowers; and that in thoſe days, the floriſts held their annual feaſts, and crowned the beſt flower with a premium, as at preſent.

There can be no doubt that this volume met with the moſt favourable reception [198] from the learned in this way; that it pro⯑moted the ſtudy of plants; and, by raiſing the reputation of its author, encouraged him to proſecute his ſtudies with vigour.

Theſe occupations, however, did not di⯑vert Mr. RAY from his object of entering into the miniſtry. He was, in Dec. 1660, ordained both deacon and prieſt, by Dr. Sanderſon, biſhop of Lincoln, and conti⯑nued fellow of Trinity College till the Bar⯑tholomew act; which, as he did not ſub⯑ſcribe, neceſſarily ſuperſeded him. This event took place Sept. 18, 1662.

The deſire Mr. RAY had to extend his knowledge of Engliſh botany, had induced him, in the autumn of 1658, to take a jour⯑ney, which he performed alone, through the midland counties of England, and the nor⯑thern part of Wales, in ſearch of plants. This tour held him from Auguſt 9, to September 18. Of this, and of two other tours, Mr. RAY preſerved ſome ſhort me⯑morandums, in which he has noticed his daily progreſs, ſome remarkable facts that occur⯑red, ſome obſervations on the antiquities that he met with, and ſome of the rare [199] plants. Dr. SCOTT has publiſhed theſe Itineraries, with his life.

In his ſubſequent journies, he was com⯑monly accompanied by ſome friends of a congenial taſte; thus, in his ſecond tour, in the autumn of 1661, Mr. WILLUGHBY, and ſome other gentlemen, travelled with Mr. RAY into Scotland, through the coun⯑ties of Durham and Northumberland, to Edin⯑burgh, Glaſgow, and back through Cumber⯑land and Weſtmorland. This journey held ſix weeks, from July 26, to Auguſt 30. In 1662, Mr. RAY, accompanied by Mr. WILLUGHBY, took his third and moſt ex⯑tenſive Engliſh tour; through the middle counties of England, into Cheſhire; thence into North Wales, and through the middle Welch counties, into Pembrokeſhire, coaſting the ſouthern part, to Bath and Briſtol; thence to the Land's End, through Somerſet and De⯑von; returning through Dorſetſhire, Wilt⯑ſhire, and Hampſhire. They were abſent in this excurſion, from May 8, to July 18; and Mr. RAY gathered a plentiful harveſt, which afterwards enabled him to enrich his general "Catalogue of Engliſh Plants," [200] then in meditation; nor did he omit to avail himſelf of every opportunity, particularly at Tenby, in Wales, and in Cornwall, of de⯑ſcribing ſuch birds and fiſhes as were leſs frequent in other parts, preparatory to his intended publications in the zoological way.

In 1663 he publiſhed an Appendix to the "Cambridge Catalogue," containing emen⯑dations, and the addition of forty-two plants. And in 1685, came out another Appendix, with the addition of ſixty more, not noticed before; which were principally communicated by Mr. DENT, of Cambridge. Theſe little tracts are become very ſcarce. Thoſe who are curious to ſee what theſe additional plants were, may find them diſ⯑tinguiſhed from the others in Profeſſor MARTYN's "Plantae Cantabrigienſes."

Being now at liberty from the conſtraints and buſineſs of a college life, he was led to accompany Mr. WILLUGHBY, Mr. SKIP⯑PON, and Mr. Nathaniel BACON, two of them his pupils, to the continent. Mr. RAY was abſent from April 18, 1663, to March 1665-6; during which time, they [201] viſited France, Holland, Germany, Switzer⯑land, Italy; and extended their journey to Sicily and to Malta. The fruit of this ex⯑pedition will afterwards appear.

On his return from the continent, he ſpent the ſummer of 1666 between his friends in Eſſex and Suſſex, and in reading the publications which had appeared in England during the three years of his ab⯑ſence. The winter paſſed in reviewing and arranging the muſeum of his friend and pu⯑pil, Mr. WILLUGHBY, rich in animal and foſſil productions; in arranging his own catalogues for his general liſt of Engliſh vegetables; and in framing the tables for Dr. WILKINS's "Real, or Univerſal Cha⯑racter."

In the ſummer of 1667, Mr. RAY, ac⯑companied by his much-honoured friend, Mr. WILLUGHBY, made his fourth excur⯑ſion into the diſtant counties. They left Middleton Park on June 25, and took their route to the Land's End, through the coun⯑ties of Worceſter, Glouceſter, and Somerſet; and returned through Hants to London on September 13. In this journey, beſides the [202] pointed objects of their purſuit, they took notes on the mines, and ſmelting, and on the method of making ſalt; and Mr. RAY did not omit to make, as he had done be⯑fore, ample additions for his collections of proverbs and of local Engliſh words.

On Nov. 7, of this year, he was choſen fellow of the Royal Society, and was pre⯑vailed on by Biſhop WILKINS to tranſlate his "Real Character" into Latin. This he performed, though it was never pub⯑liſhed; and the manuſcript is extant in the library of the Royal Society. The latter end of the year, and the beginning of 1668, he ſpent with gentlemen who had all been his pupils at Trinity; Mr. BURREL, and Mr. COURTHOPE, at Danny, in Suſſex; Sir Ro⯑bert BARNHAM, at Bocton, in Kent; and with Mr. WILLUGHBY, in Warwickſhire. In the autumn of this year, he took his fifth journey, alone, into Yorkſhire and Weſt⯑morland, returning in September to Middle⯑ton Hall; and ſpent the winter with Mr. WILLUGHBY, then lately married.

RAY.

ABOUT this time Dr. TONGE, Dr. BEAL, and ſome other philoſophical gentlemen, in England, were buſied in ex⯑periments relating to the motion of the ſap in trees. Among theſe alſo, in the ſpring of 1669, Mr. RAY and Mr. WILLUGHBY entered upon a ſet of the like experiments, and induced Mr. (afterwards Dr.) LISTER, to proſecute the ſame. Theſe experiments were made on the birch, the ſycamore or greater maple, the alder, the aſh, the haſel, cheſnut, walnut, and willow; of which the two firſt [204] were found to be the beſt adapted to the purpoſe, from their bleeding moſt freely.

The experiments of Mr. RAY and Mr. WILLUGHBY, which were printed in the fourth volume of the Philoſophical Tranſ⯑actions, proved the aſcent and deſcent, as well as the lateral courſe, of the ſap; but theſe gentlemen declined giving any deci⯑ſive opinion, as to a real circulation up⯑wards by the veſſels of the wood, and downwards by thoſe between the wood and the bark; which was the doctrine main⯑tained ſoon after this time by GREW and MALPHIGI, and indeed afterwards adopt⯑ed by Mr. RAY himſelf.

This doctrine of the circulation of the ſap, I need ſcarcely remark, gave way to the experiments of Dr. HALES and others; which teaches, that the ſap riſes and falls, in the ſame ſyſtem of veſſels, as it is affected by the joint operations of air and warmth. Yet there have not been wanting ingenious men of late years, alſo, who, conceiving the analogy between animals and vegetables to be greater than is uſually imagined, and even that plants not only live, but feel, have [205] advanced it as ſtill probable, that there is a real circulation of the juices; the ſuccus com⯑munis riſing from the roots, and the ſuccus proprius deſcending towards them. Whe⯑ther theſe phyſiologies will yield to the pro⯑lepſis plantarum of the LINNAEAN ſchool, time muſt evince.

When Mr. RAY was at Cheſter, in 1669, he availed himſelf of an opportunity of viewing a young porpeſs, and of attend⯑ing the diſſection of it. Of the anato⯑mical ſtructure of this animal, he com⯑municated a circumſtantial account to the R. S. in 1671; and it was printed in the Philoſophical Tranſactions, N^o 74 and 76.

In 1671, Mr. RAY wrote a paper, print⯑ed in the Philoſophical Tranſactions, N^o 74, on the ſubject of "Spontaneous Genera⯑tion," a point of philoſophy which had been much diſcuſſed, and to which ſome among the learned were yet attached. It appears from this paper, that he very early rejected this doctrine, and was confirmed in his opinion by the experiments of REDI.

We are now to reap the fruit of Mr. RAY's repeated journies into the various [206] parts of England, taken with a profeſſed view, to aſcertain the loci natales of all the native plants, more accurately than had yet been done; to inveſtigate the more rare, and perchance to diſcover new ones. In each of theſe departments he had proved ſucceſs⯑ful, and in this year drew up his "Cata⯑logue," and dedicated it to his friend and Maecenas Mr. WILLUGHBY, under the fol⯑lowing title, "CATALOGUS PLANTARUM ANGLIAE et inſularum adjacentium tum indigenas tum in agris paſſim cultas com⯑plectens." Lond. 1670, pp. 358. 8^o.

This work is modelled after the Cam⯑bridge Catalogue in general, as to the order of the ſubject, except that the author has been much more ſparing of the ſynonyms, from all authors but the four claſſial wri⯑ters, GERARD, PARKINSON, and the two BAUHINES. Several new plants are de⯑ſcribed in this volume, and many doubtful ones diſcriminated, with that critical accu⯑racy which ſo ſingularly marked his pen; and which had not before been ſeen in any Engliſh writer.

Hitherto the cryptogamous and gramina⯑ceous [207] tribe, had engaged but little atten⯑tion; and in this volume, theſe claſſes do not far exceed the number regiſtered in the Cambridge Catalogue. The whole number of plants in this liſt, amount to about 1050 only. This ſmall number had been owing to the extreme caution of Mr. RAY, not to admit any varieties to hold the place of ſpecies; and to exclude all others on doubt⯑ful authority. How, in his "Phytologia," has upwards of 1200; and MERRETT, in his "Pinax," upwards of 1400; certain proofs that the authors had not ſufficiently ſtudied the nicer diſtinctions, which guided the judgment of Mr. RAY; and as a proof, it may be obſerved, that many of their plants are to this day undiſcovered. Senſible as Mr. RAY was of the errors of MERRETT's "Pinax," he purpoſely omitted quoting it, as he writes to Dr. LISTER, that he might avoid that cenſure of it, which could not properly have been withheld, had he given his impartial opinion of that performance.

In this year, he informs Dr. LISTER, that he had, what he thought, a moſt libe⯑ral offer, of one hundred pounds a year, and [208] all his expences defrayed, to accompany three young gentlemen abroad. But he declined it, although he much wiſhed to have taken a review of the alpine plants. Indiſpoſi⯑tion had ſome ſhare in this refuſal, and we find that in the next ſpring, 1671, he ſuf⯑fered much from a jaundice. He was ſo far recovered, however, before July, as to be able to ſet off on his ſixth journey, in which he took with him Thomas WILLISEL, an unlettered man, but one, whoſe love for plants, and his zeal and aſſiduity in collect⯑ing them, merits commemoration. They travelled through Derbyſhire, Yorkſhire, and all the northern counties, as far as to Ber⯑wick, and back through the biſhoprick of Durham.

In the ſame year died, to the unſpeakable loſs and grief of Mr. RAY, his moſt valua⯑ble friend Francis WILLUGHBY, Eſq on July 3d, in the 37th year of his age. The ſtricteſt intimacy had ſubſiſted between them, from the time of their being fellow collegians; and it was cemented by a con⯑geniality of taſte, which not unfrequently forms a ſtronger bond of union, than the [209] ties of blood. Mr. WILLUGHBY had im⯑bibed, very early, a ſtrong taſte for the ſtudy of the animal kingdom, and had made extraordinary collections for compleating the "Hiſtory of Birds and Fiſhes;" in which he had ever been aſſiſted by his friend Mr. RAY; who experienced his high attachment and confidence, in being left one of his executors, and charged with the education of his two ſons, the eldeſt of whom, was not four years of age. To this care he liberally annexed an annuity of ſixty pounds per annum for life, which was ever regularly paid.

Immediately after this melancholy event, he deſiſted from journeying again into the weſtern counties, as he had intended; and refuſed an invitation from Dr. LISTER, to live with him at York; in order to give himſelf up to the faithful diſcharge of his truſt.

For the uſe of theſe young gentlemen, Mr. RAY drew up, in 1672, his Nomen⯑clator Claſſicus, induced thereto by obſerv⯑ing the multitude of errors in the names of plants and animals, in the manuals of daily uſe. This compilation had authority [210] enough to recommend itſelf to ſubſequent writers of dictionaries and lexicons, and has been reprinted ſeveral times.

On November 19th, 1672, he ſuſtained, in the death of Biſhop WILKINS, the loſs of another of his beſt friends. For this candid, ingenious, and learned man, he had a ſincere eſteem and veneration.

In the lot of human life, ſuch chaſms are not eaſily filled up after the age of forty-five. It is however not unreaſonable to con⯑jecture, that theſe privations added ſtrength to his motives for domeſtic retirement, and accelerated at leaſt, that connexion he made the next year, when he married Mar⯑garet the daughter of Mr. John Oakely, of Launton, in Oxfordſhire. They were mar⯑ried in the church of Middleton, on June the 5th, 1673.

In the ſame year Mr. RAY gave to the public the fruit of his foreign travels, under the title of, "Obſervations, topographical, moral, and phyſiological, made in a jour⯑ney through part of the Low Countries, Germany, Italy, and France." London, 1673. 8^o. pp. 499.

The great object of accompanying his [211] three aſſociates in this tour, was, the en⯑largement of his knowledge in natural hiſ⯑tory, and particularly in the vegetable king⯑dom; and the great number of plants ob⯑ſerved and collected by him, exceeded, as he informs us, his expectation: not that any opportunities eſcaped him of deſcribing the birds and fiſhes of the ſeveral countries they paſſed through, in aid of Mr. WIL⯑LUGHBY's plans. His notes concerning thoſe of Germany, were unfortunately loſt. The volume before us, however, is by no means confined to natural hiſtory. Mr. RAY treats on the manners of the people, and expatiates often on the excellencies and defects of the ſeveral governments, particu⯑larly of the cities on the continent, and on the ſtate of the academies and univerſities. He does not omit to notice the antiquities that occurred and of thoſe at Rome, he gives a very methodical account. Beſides many miſcellaneous remarks on various other parts of natural hiſtory, he has taken occa⯑ſion to make a digreſſion, which, at that time, muſt have been of a very intereſting nature, on the moſt remarkable places, [212] where petrified ſhells and figured foſſils are found, both in England and elſewhere; and on the various opinions of authors, re⯑lating to the origin of theſe bodies. He freely declares his ſentiments, that they are the remains of once-organized bodies, in oppoſition to thoſe who imagined them to be the product of what they called a plaſtic power. He afterwards confirms his poſi⯑tions, by additional arguments recited in a letter to Dr. ROBINSON. See Letters, p. 165.

In the courſe of their journey, he every where notices thoſe plants that are not na⯑tives of England, and gives copious cata⯑logues of them. They ſpent in the whole, ſix months at Geneva, which gave Mr. RAY an opportunity of informing himſelf largely, relating to the plants of Switzer⯑land, particularly thoſe of Mount Sa⯑leve, the Dole, and of Mount Jura. He even diſcovered ſome that were unknown to the preceding botaniſts, although theſe were the regions of GESNER, and the BAUHINES.

The celebrated HALLER, even ranks [213] him among thoſe who made large acceſſions to the Botany of that country, and gives the ſtrongeſt teſtimony of his ſkill, fidelity, and judgment, in diſcriminating, deſcribing, and extricating the plants of that fruitful region.

To the end of theſe "Obſervations," is affixed an alphabetical liſt of the plants mentioned in the body of the book, under the title of "CATALOGUS STIRPIUM IN EXTERIS REGIONIBUS, à nobis obſervata⯑rum, quae vel omnino vel parcè admodum in Anglia ſponte proveniunt." pp. 115.

In the arrangement he cites the ſame au⯑thors for ſynonyms as in his preceding ca⯑talogues, and occaſionally introduces obſer⯑vations on the qualities and uſes.

RAY.

THE talents of Mr. RAY were not confined to natural hiſtory. He had a reliſh, among other departments of litera⯑ture, for philological enquiries, and the ge⯑nius of the Engliſh language had engaged much of his attention. Of his purſuits in this way, he has left memorials, which have extended his reputation beyond the ſphere of natural hiſtory, and made him known to the learned world in general.

I refer to his "Collection of Engliſh Proverbs," and to his "Collection of [215] Engliſh Words." The foundation of theſe publications was laid in his various tours through the different parts of England. His "Proverbs" were finiſhed for the preſs in 1669, but not publiſhed till 1672, and a ſecond edition, much enlarged, in 1678, under the following title: "A COLLEC⯑TION OF ENGLISH PROVERBS, digeſted into a convenient method for the ſpeedy finding one upon occaſion; with ſhort annotations. Whereunto are added local proverbs, with their explications, old pro⯑verbial rhythmes, leſs known, or exotic proverbial ſentences and Scottiſh pro⯑verbs. Enlarged by the addition of many hundred Engliſh, and an appendix of He⯑brew proverbs, with annotations and pa⯑rallels." Cambridge. 8^o. pp. 414.

It has been reprinted many times, and, I think, ſo lately as in the year 1768.

To collect theſe ſententious maxims of knowledge, both of a moral, prudential, and even a jocular nature, has not been deemed unworthy employment, by men of eminent learning and intelligence. The Adagies of ERASMUS furniſh a ſufficient [216] example of the eſtimation he gave them. They were an oral and traditionary kind of didactics, which bore a greater value before the diffuſion of knowledge by the uſe of printing; and, in oriental countries, are ſtill a favourite and uſual mode of inſtruction.

Of ſuch as have been handed down in Britain, from father to ſon, through nu⯑merous generations, Mr. RAY's collection contains an ample ſtore. It is, I believe, the principal in its way; and the author has interſperſed many notes, which illuſtrate the origin and ſenſe of theſe aphoriſtic leſ⯑ſons, and throw no ſmall light on the manners and cuſtoms of various people.

In 1674, was publiſhed, his "COLLEC⯑TION OF ENGLISH WORDS not gene⯑rally uſed, with their ſignifications, and original, in two alphabetical catalogues, one of the northern, and the other of the ſouthern counties. To which is added, an account of the preparing and refining ſuch metals and minerals as are gotten in England." London, 12^o.

This little volume is dedicated to his friend Mr. COURTHOPE, at whoſe ſuggeſ⯑tion, [217] he tells us, it was undertaken, and who contributed largely to augment it. In the firſt edition was a catalogue of the Engliſh birds and fiſhes; but this was omitted in a ſubſequent improved and enlarged edition, in 1691, Mr. RAY having then projected his "Synopſis Animalium."

This is one of thoſe philological collec⯑tions, which tends to amuſe and gratify gene⯑ral curioſity, is of uſe, not only to ſtrangers and thoſe who travel, but to thoſe who ſtay much at home; while it contributes to en⯑large the extent, and illuſtrate the conſtruc⯑tion of the Engliſh tongue. Mr. Thoreſby, of Leeds, ſent to Mr. Ray, a large addition to this liſt in the year 1703, which was printed in his "Philoſophical Letters," by Dr. Derham.

In 1675, he communicated to the Royal Society ſome experiments, made, I believe, by Mr. WILLUGHBY, accompanied with his own obſervations, tending to aſcertain the true uſe of the air-bladder in fiſhes. They are ſuch as the preſent phyſiology of fiſhes have confirmed; and were printed in the Philoſophical Tranſactions, N^o 115.

[218] In the year 1677, his "Catalogue of Engliſh plants" being out of print, he gave another edition, augmented with new obſervations, and the addition of 30 ſpecies of the more perfect plants, and 16 funguſes; ſeveral of theſe were new diſcoveries. He here alſo gives the figures of the pentaphylloides fruticoſa, (potentilla fruticoſa Lin.) and the fungus phalloides (phallus impudicus Lin.)

Mr. RAY continued, after his marriage, to reſide at Middleton Hall, where his engage⯑ments at this period of his life, were ſuch as called forth all the talents of his literary abilities, and demanded all his care as a faithful guardian. He was employed in a double duty, that of his truſt to the ſons of his late eſtimable friend, and of editor to the remains of their father, "On the Hiſ⯑tory of Birds and Fiſhes." The Ornitho⯑logy was firſt publiſhed, to which, as it conſiſted of looſe papers, written in Latin, and in an undigeſted ſtate, Mr. RAY gave method, and ſupplied, from his own obſer⯑vations, a large ſhare of valuable materials. It was publiſhed under the following title: "ORNITHOLOGIAE LIBRI TRES: in quibus, [219] Aves omnes hactenus cognitae, in methodum na⯑turis ſuis convenientem redactae accuratè deſcri⯑buntur. Iconibus elegantiſſimis et vivarum avium ſimillimis aeri inciſis illuſtrantur. Totum opus recognovit, digeſſit, ſupplevit Johannes RAIUS." Lond. 1676, fol. pp. 307, t. 77, f. 353.

Mr. RAY tranſlated this work into Eng⯑liſh, and publiſhed it, with large additions, in 1678, with figures engraved at the ex⯑pence of Mrs. WILLUGHBY. The exe⯑cution of the figures was wholly inadequate to the merit of the work. Theſe occupa⯑tions, however, did not prevent him from renewing a correſpondence with Mr. OL⯑DENBURGH, ſecretary of the Royal Society, a learned German, who, after having re⯑ſided ſome time at Oxford, had been choſen into that office at the firſt eſtabliſhment of the ſociety. Mr. RAY, in the year 1674, was induced to engage, at the requeſt of the ſociety, with other diſtant members, to furniſh obſervations on the ſubjects of na⯑tural hiſtory, to be read at their meetings; the ſociety notwithſtanding the extreme di⯑ligence of the ſecretary, and ſome few [220] others, being, at this juncture, rather in a languiſhing ſtate.

On this occaſion he wrote ſeveral papers, of which ſome were afterwards printed in the Philoſophical Tranſactions. Among thoſe, which were not publiſhed, as we find by his letters, were the following. "On the Acid of Ants: On a Foſſil of the figured Kind, found in Malta, and known by the name of St. Paul's Baſtoons Letters, p. 120: On the Trochites: On Muſhrooms: On the Darting of Spiders: On the Seeds of Plants; and on the ſpecific Differences of Plants."

On the death of the mother of his friend, the Dowager Lady WILLUGHBY, and the removal of his ſons from under Mr. RAY's tuition, he retired, ſome time in the year 1676, to Sutton Cofield, about four miles diſtant from Middleton Hall, where he remained till Michaelmas 1677. He then made a ſecond removal to Falkborne Hall, near Black Notley; at which laſt place he built a houſe, and finally ſettled June 24, 1679.

Mr. WILLUGHBY's Icthyology remaining [221] yet unpubliſhed, Mr. RAY, in 1684, ar⯑ranged the materials, which had been left in a very imperfect and indigeſted ſtate. Perhaps no one but Mr. RAY could have fulfilled this poſthumous office; certainly no man ſo effectually, ſince Mr. RAY had not only himſelf entirely furniſhed Mr. WILLUGHBY with many, but even the remainder had chiefly been collected during their almoſt daily intercourſe, and whilſt travelling together.

He wrote the two firſt books himſelf; reviſed, methodiſed, and enlarged the whole; and ſent it to the Royal Society; the mem⯑bers of which contributed to furniſh the plates; and, by the aſſiſtance of Biſhop FELL, it was printed at Oxford; the Royal Society being at the whole expence. It came out under the following title:

"Franciſci WILLOUGHBEII, Armig. De HISTORIA PISCIUM, LIBRI quatuor, juſſu et ſumptu S. RAY. Lond. editi. Totum opus recognovit, coaptavit, ſupplevit, librum etiam primum et ſecundum integros adjecit J. RAIUS." Oxon. 1686. fol. pp. 343.

RAY.

MR. RAY being ſettled at Black Not⯑ley, and delivered from that anxiety which had attended him ſince Mr. WIL⯑LUGHBY's death, reſumed with great vigour his wonted ſtudy of plants; and, having al⯑ready acquired a reputation that juſtified any expectation his friends might have formed, he, in compliance with their wiſhes, at⯑tached himſelf ſeriouſly to write "A Gene⯑ral Hiſtory of Plants."

Preparatory to this great work, which he intended to arrange ſyſtematically, he put forth, in 1682, his "METHODUS PLAN⯑TARUM," enlarged, and improved, from the [223] ſynoptical tables, which he had printed in Biſhop WILKINS's "Real Character," in 1668. It bears the following title:

"METHODUS PLANTARUM NOVA bre⯑vitatis et perſpicuitatis cauſâ ſynoptice in ta⯑bulis exhibita: cum notis Generum tum ſum⯑morum tum ſubalternorum characteriſticis. Obſervationibus nonnullis de ſeminibus Plan⯑tarum et indice copioſo." Lond. 1682. 8^o. pp. 166.

LINNAEUS, on what authority I know not, mentions an edition of this work, with the date of 1665, totally ſeparate from that of 1682; but as that is earlier than Biſhop WILKINS's Table, it is probably a miſ⯑take.

The firſt principle of Mr. RAY, in this work, is to preſerve all plants together, as far as poſſible, in the natural characters, ariſing from conformity in the fructifica⯑tion, and in the general habit. Hence aroſe, with him, in common as with others, too great a neglect of the flower, and too much attention to the leaves. He adheres to the ancient diviſion of the vegetable kingdom, into trees, ſhrubs, and herbaceous plants; [224] ranking, however, with the latter, ſuch as had been called Suffrutices, or ſhrubby. Trees he divides into nine claſſes, account⯑ing the laſt anomalous; Shrubs into ſix; and Herbs into forty-ſeven.

In the progreſs of his improvements after⯑wards, he reduced theſe claſſes to thirty-three. His method, which is indeed ex⯑tremely elaborate, will beſt be ſeen by a view of the claſſes. It will, however, be but juſtice to refer the account to the laſt edition, that it may appear in the greateſt perfection which he gave it.

To this book Mr. RAY has ſubjoined a clear, conciſe view, and a ſynoptical table, of the ſyſtem of CAESALPINE, and gives his reaſons for not adopting it; although he candidly confeſſes his obligations to the author, whom he acknowledges to be the parent of ſyſtem.

In 1683 and 1684, Mr. RAY and Dr. Tancred ROBINSON exchanged ſeveral let⯑ters, while the latter was on a foreign tour, relating to various undetermined facts in natural hiſtory; among which, it had been difficult to ſettle the exact ſpecies of the [225] Macruſe, a bird allowed by the Roman Catholics to be eaten in Lent. Their ob⯑ſervations relating to this particular were publiſhed in the Phil. Tranſ. for 1685, in No. 172. It proved to be the Scoter, or Anas nigra Linnaei.

We are now come to that performance, which LINNAEUS and HALLER ſo juſtly ſtile Opus immenſi laboris; and which, con⯑ſidered as the work of one man, has per⯑haps been exceeded by none, unleſs indeed by that of John BAUHINE, who, however, did not live to put the finiſhing hand to his labour.

Mr. RAY informs us, that it was at the perſuaſion of his friend, Mr. WILLUGHBY, that he began to collect materials, with a view to a General Hiſtory of Plants. But that, after the loſs of his friend in 1672, he relaxed; and, on hearing that Dr. MO⯑RISON was employed on a ſimilar deſign, from which conſiderable expectations were formed, at length gave up his purpoſe. On the deceaſe of Dr. MORISON in 1683, who left the much greater part of his work un⯑finiſhed, by the perſuaſion of his friends, [226] and particularly of Mr. HOTTON, to whom it was dedicated, he reſumed his deſign, and proſecuted the work with vigour. We can⯑not ſufficiently admire the wonderful aſſi⯑duity and addreſs of this great man, which enabled him, in four years, to collect ſuch a ſtock of matter, as to furniſh two folio volumes, of near one thouſand pages each. It even does not appear that he had the aſſiſtance of an amanuenſis in this labour; which he effected, however, with a ſkill and judgment that gained him the applauſe of all ſucceeding maſters in the ſcience.

This important undertaking was intended by the author to comprehend the whole botany of the age, by deſcribing ſeparately, and reducing to his own ſyſtem, all the plants of the BAUHINES, and of thoſe who had enlarged the ſtock by ſubſequent diſ⯑coveries. Theſe, at the publication of RAY's firſt volume, were, the plants of Mexico, from HERNANDEZ; thoſe of Braſil, from PISO and MARCGRAAVE; and of the Eaſt Indies, from BONTIUS. The rare plants of Italy, from ZANONI; the new plants of MORISON, BREYNIUS, and MENTZEL. [227] The Sicilian plants of BOCCONE; but above all, the vaſt treaſure of the ſix firſt volumes of the HORTUS MALABARICUS; with many from works of leſſer note.

After prefixing an inſtructive liſt of the writings of near an hundred botanical au⯑thors, quoted by him in the body of the book, and giving an explanation of terms, there follows a very comprehenſive account of the philoſophy of vegetables; in which the anatomy and phyſiology of plants, from MALPHIGI, from GREW, and from his own experiments; the differences of the parts of vegetables, from JUNGIUS and others, are explained and illuſtrated, with that judg⯑ment and knowledge of the ſubject, and with that conciſeneſs and methodical accu⯑racy, which, I believe, had rarely, if ever, been equalled by preceding writers. This has rendered the introduction to his Hiſ⯑tory, a choice compendium of all that was valuable in the ſcience of his day; nor is the information it conveys ſo far ſuperſeded by any ſubſequent diſcoveries, as to render it, even now, an unintereſting tract. It is not eaſy to refer the modern ſtudent to a [228] more perfect view of the ſtate of this ſci⯑ence near the cloſe of the laſt century, than will here be found; while the work itſelf exhibits the great improvement it had re⯑ceived, ſince the beginning of the ſame pe⯑riod, and to which the author had himſelf contributed in an eminent degree.

The firſt volume was publiſhed in the year 1686, under the following title: "HIS⯑TORIA PLANTARUM GENERALIS: ſpecies hactenus editas aliaſque inſuper multas noviter inventas et deſcriptas complectens; in qua agi⯑tur primò de plantis in genere, earumque par⯑tibus, accidentibus, et differentiis▪ deinde gene⯑ra omnia tum ſumma tum ſubalterna ad ſpecies uſque infimas, notis ſuis certis et characteriſ⯑ticis definita, methodo naturae veſtigiis inſiſtente diſponuntur; ſpecies ſingulae accuratae deſcri⯑buntur, obſcura illuſtrantur, omiſſa ſuppleatur ſuperflua reſecantur, ſynonyma neceſſaria adji⯑ciuntur: vires denique et uſus recepti compen⯑diò traduntur. Acceſſerunt Lexicon Botani⯑cum, et Nomenclator Botanicus, cum indicibus neceſſariis nominum morborum et remediorum." Folio. Vol. I. pp. 984. Vol. II. pp. 985-1944. preter indices. 1688.

[229] In the general arrangement of the ſub⯑ject, according to his own ſyſtem, he has in various inſtances improved the claſſes. At the head of each book or claſs is prefixed a ſynoptical table of all the chapters or ge⯑nera.

In the particular diſpoſition, after prefix⯑ing to each chapter the etymology of the generical name, he gives the character of the genus; and in the enumeration of the ſpecies, quotes at length the ſynonyms of Caſpar BAUHINE, from his "Pinax," and thoſe of John BAUHINE, GERARD, and PARKINSON, from their reſpective hiſtories; ſeldom introducing others, where the plant was known to any of theſe writers.

His deſcriptions of the old plants are taken from the above-mentioned authors. They are commonly abridged, however; and in numberleſs inſtances amended, from his own knowledge of the plants. He fails not to notice from whom they are taken, and has every where diſtinguiſhed the Britiſh plants from the exotics. He has carefully marked all ſuch as he had not had an opportunity of inſpecting himſelf. He adds the places of [230] growth, and times of flowering, and ſub⯑joins ſelect obſervations, from the moſt re⯑ſpectable authorities, relating to the quali⯑ties and various uſes of them.

In the "Hiſtory of Trees," the no⯑bler and more capital parts of the vegetable kingdom, as being dignified by the variety of their uſes in human oeconomy, he has extended his reſearches, and collected, with much aſſiduity, a greater variety of intereſt⯑ing particulars. Mr. RAY has purpoſely avoided entering into nice and critical diſ⯑quiſitions relating to the ſpecies; for, beſides that this would have ſwelled his work to an enormous bulk, it was become leſs ne⯑ceſſary, after the deſcriptions given by John BAUHINE, CLUSIUS, and others, ſo much ſuperior to thoſe of their predeceſſors; and the more curious and critical examiner might be referred to theſe authors, for ample ſcope to his curioſity.

Mr. RAY has deſcribed, in theſe vo⯑lumes, about 6900 plants; including, how⯑ever, in this number, many which modern botaniſts have ſince conſidered as varie⯑ties.

[231] The Addenda to the ſecond volume con⯑tain ſeveral intereſting catalogues; ſuch are thoſe of ZANONI's Hiſtory, conſiſting of new Italian, Swiſs, and Milaneſe plants; thoſe of BREYNIUS; a catalogue of the plants of Virginia, obſerved by Mr. BANIS⯑TER; and a compend of thoſe of Mexico, from HERNANDEZ, who, at the expence of ſixty thouſand ducats, had procured the paintings of 1200 ſpecies, which pe⯑riſhed in a fire of the Eſcurial.

In the preface to the firſt volume, Mr. RAY acknowledges his obligations for aſ⯑ſiſtance received from many of his friends. Among thoſe who had more eſſentially contributed to enrich his work, were, Sir Edward HULSE, Dr. Tancred ROBINSON, Dr. SLOANE, and his near neighbour, Mr. DALE. To theſe he adds, in the ſecond volume, the names of William COURTINE, Eſq of the Middle Temple, Dr. PLUKE⯑NET, Mr. DOODY, and Mr. PETIVER.

There are copies of RAY's Hiſtory, with the date of 1693; but I believe the title-page only to be new, the remaining [232] copies of the impreſſion by Faithorne, fal⯑ling into the hands of Smith and Walford about that time. Foreign writers mention an edition ſo late as 1716; but this I ſuſ⯑pect to be a miſtake, or owing to another transfer of the copies.

After the firſt edition of the "Catalogus Plantarum Angliae" was out of print, Mr. RAY had been exhorted by his friend, Dr. Ralph JOHNSON, to arrange the ſecond ac⯑cording to ſyſtem; but not having ſuffi⯑ciently elaborated his method, at that time, he declined it; and it came out in 1677, in the alphabetical order.

A third edition being wanted, however, after the publication of the "Hiſtory of Plants," he meditated throwing it into the ſyſtematic ſorm; and, in the mean time, put forth, in 1688, "FASCICULUS STIR⯑PIUM BRITANNICARUM, poſl editum Plan⯑tarum Angliae Catalogum obſervatarum." Lond. 8^o. By this little volume, a con⯑ſiderable acceſſion was made to Engliſh botany: ſeveral very rare mountainous or Alpine plants, from Wales; ſome ſcarce ones [233] from Cornwall; ſea plants; new fungi; moſſes, and graſſes, make their firſt ap⯑pearance in this little catalogue.

The "SYNOPSIS," although finiſhed for the preſs ſoon after this "Faſciculus," was not publiſhed, owing to the delay of the printer, till 1690, when it appeared under this title, "SYNOPSIS METHODICA STIR⯑PIUM BRITANNICARUM, in qua tum notae generum characteriſticae traduntur, tum ſpe⯑cies ſingulae breviter deſcribuntur: 250 plus minus novae ſpecies, partim ſuis locis inſeran⯑tur, partim in appendice ſeorſim exhibentur; cum indice et virium epitome." 8^o. pp. 317.

As Mr. RAY had dedicated the "Alpha⯑betical Catalogue" to his great friend and Mecaenas, Francis WILLUGHBY, Eſq ſo he now ſhews the ſame reſpect to Thomas, the only ſurviving ſon of his much-ho⯑noured patron; whom he exhorts to purſue the example of his excellent father, and for whom he pours forth, in the moſt energe⯑tic language, all thoſe ardent wiſhes which gratitude and reſpect for the memory of the father, and love for the pupil, could alone inſpire.

[234] In the preface, Mr. RAY acknowledges the aſſiſtance he received from Mr. BO⯑BART, ſuperintendant of the garden at Ox⯑ford; Mr. DALE, his neighbour, a learned and ingenious apothecary at Braintree; Mr. Matthew DODSWORTH; Mr. Samuel DOO⯑DY, an apothecary in London, memorable for having been the firſt who extended the Cryptogamous claſs; Mr. Thomas LAWSON, of Strickland, in Weſtmorland; Mr. James NEWTON, a diligent and ſkilful botaniſt; Dr. Edward LLOYD, of Oxford; Mr. James PETIVER; Dr. Robert PLOTT; Dr. PLUKE⯑NET; Dr. Hans SLOANE; Mr. William SHERARD, at that time fellow of St. John's College, Oxford; and Dr. Tancred ROBIN⯑SON, to whom Mr. RAY communicated his manuſcript of this work, and for whoſe corrections and additions, he held himſelf eminently obliged.

The Appendix contains a liſt of ſcarce plants, communicated by Mr. BOBART; ſome new plants by Mr. SHERARD; a liſt of thoſe of Jerſey, by the ſame; new and rare ſpecies, with critical obſervations, from Dr. PLUKENET; muſci and rare plants, by [235] Mr. DOODY; emendations and additions, by Dr. Tancred ROBINSON; and a cata⯑logue of thirty-four ſpecies, common both to England and Jamaica, communicated by Dr. SLOANE. In this work, Mr. RAY has thrown the obſervations on the qualities and uſes into the index.

From this time the "SYNOPSIS" became the pocket companion of every Engliſh bo⯑taniſt. It contributed not a little, both to facilitate and improve the ſcience. It dif⯑fuſed the knowledge of ſyſtem; and, by ob⯑liging thoſe who wiſhed for improvement, to attend more minutely to generical cha⯑racters, led to a nicer diſcrimination of both genera and ſpecies.

RAY.

TO this period Mr. RAY had appear⯑ed to the public principally as a na⯑turaliſt; but he now united to this charac⯑ter that of the theologiſt. It is needleſs to ſay, that he ſucceeded in this department, perhaps beyond moſt of thoſe who had be⯑fore written on the ſame ſubject. His firſt publication of this kind, we are told, was [237] originally, and in its outlines, College Exer⯑ciſes only, or Common Places. Theſe he now wrought up, and enlarged into a con⯑venient volume, and truſted it to the care of his friend, Dr. Tancred ROBINSON, who procured five hundred copies to be printed, under the following title: "THE WIS⯑DOM OF GOD MANIFESTED IN THE WORKS OF THE CREATION." 8^o. 1691. It was reprinted the next year. The ele⯑venth edition was publiſhed in 1743; and a twelfth in 1758; and, I believe, ſeveral times ſince: and it has been tranſlated into foreign languages. Theſe are ſufficient teſ⯑timonies of the eſteem with which it was received by the public.

It is not immediately within my plan to enlarge on this work, or to determine whe⯑ther the arguments à priori, or à poſteriori, are beſt calculated to obtain the object of it, "Demonſtration of the Being of a God." "Qui hiſtoriam naturae, naturae etiam Creato⯑rem colit." I may be allowed to obſerve, that Mr. RAY, from that comprehenſive view of nature which his mind embraced, was ſingu⯑larly well qualified to diſplay the manifold [238] wonders of the creation, and the wiſdom of its omnipotent Author. And thus, while his penetrating views enabled him to unfold the various oeconomy and evolutions of na⯑ture to the greateſt advantage, his piety and humility give a force to his reaſonings and deductions, that carries with it a conviction of that great truth he ſo ſincerely wiſhed to inculcate.

The favourable acceptance the public gave to the "Demonſtration," encouraged Mr. RAY to publiſh, the next year, his "THREE PHYSICO-THEOLOGICAL DIS⯑COURSES concerning the primitive Chaos, and Creation of the World. The general Deluge, its cauſes and effects. The Diſ⯑ſolution of the World, and future Confla⯑gration." 8^o. 1692. and 1693. 1713. pp. 456. 1721. 1732. It is embelliſhed with a plate of the Apamaean medal, and three tables of figured foſſils; and is dedi⯑cated to Archbiſhop TILLOTSON.

This work is a convincing proof of the extenſive reading, the various erudition, and multifarious knowledge, of this great and good man. Independent of all the theories [239] it contains, this volume exhibits ſuch an aſſemblage of facts, relating to the ſtruc⯑ture of this globe, to the changes it has undergone, and to the hiſtory of figured foſſils, that it may be read to advantage, even in this age of advanced curioſity, and knowledge in the profeſſed object of this book. Even the faſtidious critic, who is verſed in all the more modern theories, down to the "Epochas of Nature," and thoſe of M. De LUC, and De SOULAVIE, will allow that this volume, when reſpect is had to the time of its publication, muſt have conveyed a large ſhare of intelligence to thoſe who were capable of gratification from diſquiſitions of this nature; and that, with a deference to the opinions of the day, there is yet a freedom of enquiry that diſ⯑tinguiſhes the author, as a friend to true philoſophy, and as a modeſt and candid en⯑quirer after truth, in thoſe points of natural hiſtory, which ſtill continue, and probably long will, to be involved in great obſcurity.

In this year, Mr. RAY wrote ſome "Obſervations on the Planting of Maize inſtead of Peaſe," occaſioned by a pro⯑poſal [240] of Sir Richard BULKLEY, in which he ſays, that he had found the greateſt yield of peaſe to be twenty barrels reaped for one ſown; whereas, from one grain of Indian wheat, he had calculated the pro⯑duce would be upwards of 2000 grains for one. Theſe Obſervations were printed in the Phil. Tranſ. N^o 205. Mr. RAY was not ſanguine in his expectations from the culture of that grain; neither have ſubſe⯑quent trials proved the utility of it in this climate.

The botanical labours of this eminent man were now remitted, at leaſt for ſome time; and we find, that after the publica⯑tion of his "Hiſtory," and the "Synopſis," his exertions were turned into another channel, in which he alſo ſtood unrivalled in his day. It was not botany alone that he raiſed from a drooping ſtate; to zoo⯑logy, conſidered as a ſcience, he might be ſaid to have given birth, in theſe kingdoms; ſince, except what himſelf and Mr. WIL⯑LUGHBY had performed, nothing of im⯑portance on the hiſtory of animals exiſted.

TOPSELL's "Abridgment of GESNER," [241] MOFFAT's "Book on Inſects;" and the ſhort and imperfect eſſays of CHARLETON, in his "Onomaſticon," and of MERRET, in his "Pinax," were almoſt the only Engliſh writers to be conſulted. To aſſert that better helps were wanted, is not to injure, or to degrade thoſe authors. Mr. RAY had been urged by his friends, and particularly by Dr. ROBINSON, to undertake an entire FAUNA ANGLICA, and a hiſtory of Foſ⯑ſils alſo; but age and infirmities began now to oppreſs him, and he thought himſelf in⯑adequate to the attempt. He lived, how⯑ever, to perform more than his fears, or his humility permitted him to hope.

In 1693, he publiſhed his "SYNOPSIS METHODICA ANIMALIUM, QUADRUPE⯑DUM, et SERPENTINI GENERIS; vulgarium notas characteriſticas, rariorum deſcriptiones integras, exhibens: cum hiſtoriis et obſervationi⯑bus anatomicis, perquam curioſis. Praemittun⯑tur nonnulla de animalium in genere, ſenſu, gene⯑ratione, diviſione, &c." Lond. 8^o. pp. 336.

In this volume we ſee the firſt truly ſyſ⯑tematic arrangement of animals, ſince the days of ARISTOTLE; an arrangement which [242] his ſucceſſors in the ſame line have equally applauded, and availed themſelves of. It is profeſſedly the baſis of that method, by which the preſent eminent zoologiſt of this nation, has choſen to convey his learned publications, and by which he has not leſs happily diffuſed a taſte for this ſcience, than he has ſucceſsfully improved its ſtore.

In treating on animals in general, intro⯑ductory to his work, he diſcuſſes ſome im⯑portant queſtions, which had not then ceaſed to agitate the philoſophical world. He controverts, with extreme force of rea⯑ſoning, the ideas of equivocal or ſponta⯑neous generation; the Lewenhoekian hypo⯑theſis; and that of all animals being created from eternity, and only latent in an in⯑volved ſtate. I know not where the reader can ſee theſe queſtions diſcuſſed with equal conciſeneſs and judgment united.

Mr. RAY's Diſtribution of Animals is not wholly founded, as to the grand diviſions, on the Ariſtotelian diſtinctions; though he admits many of them. It is not within my plan to enter on this ſubject; it is ſufficient to obſerve, that Quadrupeds here form two great [243] diviſions, as they are boofed or digitated; the former, as they are whole or cloven; the latter, as they are divided into more, or fewer claws; admitting alſo of ſubdiviſions or genera, from the number of the claws, and in ſome, from the conſideration of the teeth.

At the time when Mr. RAY lived, few people had acquired a taſte for this kind of knowledge, and commerce had not lent her friendly aid, as in later times. What ani⯑mals came under his own inſpection, he has deſcribed with his accuſtomed accu⯑racy; from GESNER and ALDROVAND he borrows his deſcriptions of others; and many later diſcovered ſubjects he drew from PISO and MARCGRAAVE, from CLU⯑SIUS, HERNANDEZ, LAET, and NIEREM⯑BERG.

In the courſe of this work, he has, in va⯑rious inſtances, given the anatomical ſtruc⯑ture, from Dr. TYSON, from the "Pariſian Diſſections," and other works. Through⯑out the whole, he has ſhewn how intimately he was acquainted with the learning of the ancients, and particularly with ARISTOTLE, [244] whom, as the parent of zoological know⯑ledge, he failed not to conſult on all oc⯑caſions, but by no means implicitly to fol⯑low, in his ſubtleties and obſcurities.

On finiſhing the "Synopſis of Quadru⯑peds," Mr. RAY immediately drew up that of the Birds and Fiſhes. This was an eaſier taſk at this time, ſince they are to be conſidered as compends of his preceding labours with his friend, Mr. WILLUGHBY; although there were many things new in both, and that of the Fiſhes was very greatly improved as to the arrangement and method. He informs us, that the addi⯑tions were, the Mexican birds, from HER⯑NANDEZ; ſome deſcriptions of new ſpecies, out of NIEUHOFF; MARTIN's Birds and Fiſhes of Greenland; SIBBALD's Whales; SLOANE's Jamaica Birds and Fiſhes; and ſome from the Leyden Catalogue, by Dr. ROBINSON.

In theſe branches of nature, Mr. RAY again appears as the parent of method. The accurate BRISSON regards RAY and WILLUGHBY, as the firſt true ſyſtematic writers on birds. Theſe works were finiſhed [245] in the year 1693 or 1694, as we learn from Mr. RAY's letters, and from the teſtimony of his friend and neighbour, Mr. DALE. Yet, excellent as they were, ſo ſcanty was the taſte for natural hiſtory at this period, that the manuſcripts lay unpubliſhed in the bookſellers hands, till they were purchaſed by Mr. INNYS, and prepared for the preſs by Dr. DERHAM, who added the figures, and inſerted Mr. BUCKLEY's Birds from Madraſs, and Mr. JAGO's Corniſh Fiſhes. They were publiſhed in 1713, under the titles of "SYNOPSIS METHODICA AVI⯑UM." 8^o. pp. 198. t. 2; and "SYNOP⯑SIS METHODICA PISCIUM." 8^o. pp. 162. t. 1.

In the ſame year, 1693, Mr. RAY became the editor of a tranſlation of "Dr. RAU⯑WOLF's Travels." This phyſician, who was the next after BELON, whom the love of natural hiſtory alone, led to travel into the eaſt, ſpent the years 1573-4-5 in tra⯑verſing Syria, Meſopotamia, Paleſtine, and Aegypt, induced, as he tells us, by his deſire to behold, in the native places, the plants of the Greek and Arabian phyſicians.

[246] His "Travels" having been publiſhed in 1583, in the German language, had hi⯑therto been locked up from the Engliſh reader. Sir Hans SLOANE having, how⯑ever, read them, was induced, in concert with Capt. HATTON, to procure a tranſla⯑tion of them, which was done by Nicholas STAPHORST. This verſion was put into Mr. RAY's hands, to reviſe and correct. He did more; he made a choice ſelection from other authors, who had made the ſame tour, BELON, ALPINUS, Sir George WHELER, &c. and he drew up a Cata⯑logue of the more rare Plants of thoſe countries through which RAUWOLF tra⯑velled; and added liſts of thoſe of Aegypt and Crete. From this circumſtance, the book has gone by the name of "RAY's COLLECTION OF TRAVELS;" and it was reprinted with his own "Obſerva⯑tions," in 1738. RAUWOLF made an "Herbarium," while in the eaſt; which, with his European plants, conſtituted four large volumes. Theſe became the property of Queen Chriſtina, and afterwards, by her means probably, of Iſaac VOSSIUS, who in⯑formed [247] Capt. HATTON, that 400 l. ſter⯑ling had been offered for them. They were purchaſed of his heirs by the univerſity of Leyden; and the late Dr. Frederick GRO⯑NOVIUS conſtructed from them an elegant and learned "Flora Orientalis;" of which he much enhanced the value, by prefixing to it Melchier ADAMS's "Life of RAU⯑WOLF," with large additions of his own.

The "CATALOGUS STIRPIUM IN EX⯑TERIS REGIONIBUS OBSERVATARUM" being out of print, Mr. RAY was induced to give a new edition of it, with ſuch large augmentations, as to make it a new work. He added from CLUSIUS, from the BAU⯑HINES, and other authors, a number of plants growing in thoſe regions through which he paſſed in his tour; and ſo many catalogues from other authors, as to render it a tolerably complete liſt of all the Euro⯑pean plants, not natives of England. As it does not immediately reſpect Engliſh botany, it will be ſufficient to recite the title-page, from which its ſcope may be underſtood:

"STIRPIUM EUROPAEARUM extra Bri⯑tannias [248] naſcentium SYLLOGE. Quas partim obſervavit ipſe, partim à C. Cluſii Hiſtoria; C. Bauhini Prodromo, et Catalogo Baſilienſi; F. Columnae Ecphraſi; Catalogis Hollandi⯑carum A. Commelini; Allorfinarum M. Hoff⯑manni; Sicularum P. Bocconi; Monſpelien⯑ſium P. Magnoli; collegit J. RAIUS. Adji⯑ciuntur Catalogi rariorum Alpinarum et Py⯑renaicarum, Baldenſium, Hiſpanicarum Griſ⯑leii, Graecarum et Orientalium, Creticarum, Aegyptiacarum, aliique: ab eodem." Lond. 1694. 8^o. pp. 445.

In the preface to this work, Mr. RAY, for the firſt time, entered into controverſy; having taken occaſion to throw out ſome ſtrictures on the method of botany pub⯑liſhed by RIVINUS in 1690. It is not enough intereſting at this day to dwell on the nature of it. It is ſufficient to obſerve, that our veteran in ſcience was diſſatisfied with the German, for throwing the trees promiſcuouſly into the claſſes with other plants, and for breaking into the natural orders, for the ſake of agreement in the flower alone. In fact, RIVINUS's method being founded wholly on the flower, to [249] which part RAY had paid but ſmall regard, the ſources of controverſy were endleſs; ſince the fundamental principles of each were totally irreconcileable.

About this time Mr. RAY communica⯑ted "The Provincial Catalogues of Plants," printed at the end of each county, in the edition of "CAMBDEN's Britannia," pub⯑liſhed in 1695 by Mr. GIBSON. His re⯑peated travels throughout moſt parts of England, for the ſole purpoſe of inveſtigat⯑ing the ſubjects of nature, had enabled him to accompliſh more than had been done by any man before his time; and his unqueſtionable ſkill and accuracy, added an authenticity to theſe liſts, which could not eaſily have been derived from any other hand.

To the county of Cornwall Mr. RAY added many other particulars; which, how⯑ever, were not printed, probably becauſe the correſponding circumſtances could not be procured from other counties. Theſe were, "Catalogues of the Sea Fiſh, and Sea Fowl, with the ſynonyms;" ſome account of two or three ſorts of ſtone dug there; of ſea ſand, as manure; an account of the [250] hurlers, and other ſtones; and notices re⯑ſpecting the manners and language of the inhabitants.

Such as are converſant with that ſcience, which was the favourite object of Mr. RAY, muſt be ſenſible that nothing could have happened more conducive to the revival and improvement of it at this juncture, than the circumſtance of its having been taken up by a man of ſuch patient induſtry, capable at the ſame time of giving it all the em⯑belliſhments, and advantages that learning could afford. They will readily grant that his writings and example alone, added more vigour, and brought more diſciples to this ſchool of natural ſcience in England, than all the exertions of foregoing writers.

I cannot confirm and illuſtrate the truth of this poſition more effectually, than by calling to the attention of the curious in this kind of knowledge, the vaſt augmenta⯑tion it acquired, in the interval between the publication of Mr. RAY's "Catalogus Plantarum Angliae," and that of the "Sy⯑nopſis;" and more eſpecially between the time of the firſt and ſecond edition of the [251] latter work; during which, excluſive of the diſcovery of many ſubjects, among what were called the more perfect plants, a new and very extenſive field had been opened, by exciting attention to the leſs perfect (as they were then accounted) and minuter kinds of vegetables, the Fungi, Fuci, Muſci, and Algae, known now by the name of Cryptogamiae. During the firſt of theſe periods, 250 ſpecies had been added to the Engliſh Flora; and the acceſſion in the laſt exceeded that number.

In no part of Europe had the ſame pro⯑greſs been made in the inveſtigation of theſe hitherto much-neglected ſubjects, as in England, during the period above men⯑tioned. This is ſufficiently evinced by comparing the ſecond edition of the "SY⯑NOPSIS" with the contemporary writings of foreign botaniſts.

This ſecond edition of the "SYNOPSIS" was printed in 1696. 8^o. pp. 346. Mr. RAY himſelf had but a ſmall ſhare in the augmentations that were made to this edi⯑tion. His advancing years and infirmities prevented him from making excurſions. His [252] principal auxiliaries are mentioned in the preface; in which, additional to the names in the former "SYNOPSIS," we meet with thoſe of Mr. Edward LLHWYD, Walter MOYLE, Eſq and Mr. William VERNON, fellow of St. Peter's College, Cambridge.

To thoſe who are ſenſible of the obliga⯑tions which the ſcience owes to Mr. RAY, it cannot but be grateful to read, with what ſatisfaction the good man records, in this preface, the progreſs he had lived to ſee his favourite ſtudy make in his own country, and with what delight he augurs and con⯑templates its future improvement. In the ſpace of little more than twenty years, and under his own pen, he had ſeen the Engliſh Flora acquire an acceſſion of up⯑wards of 500 new ſubjects. The "CA⯑TALOGUS PLANTARUM ANGLIAE" of 1670, containing about 1050, and the ſecond edition of the "SYNOPSIS" in 1696, full 1600 ſpecies; and, notwith⯑ſtanding theſe have not all ſtood the teſt of the diſcriminating character of the preſent age, yet, in juſtice to this great man, and his aſſociates, it muſt be acknowledged, [253] that the retrenchments are comparatively few.

With this edition of the "SYNOPSIS," was publiſhed the "DISSERTATIO DE VARIIS PLANTARUM METHODIS BRE⯑VIS;" in which Mr. RAY ſhews, that the ſeparation of plants into claſſes and genera from the fructification alone, muſt be a very gradual and progreſſive affair; that it was not eaſy to exclude the habit from having a ſhare in this diſtribution, ſince there were many plants that were ſel⯑dom or never ſeen in flower by the early botaniſts. He alſo obſerves, that number⯑leſs plants, which agree in the ſtructure of the flower; differ materially in habit, and others vice verſa. And although his own method is principally founded on the fruit, yet he freely acknowledges its imperfections; but thinks the ſame objections hold againſt the flower; which he illuſtrates by ſhewing, in TOURNEFORT's ſyſtem, the uncertainty of the bounds between the Flores infundi⯑buliformes, hypocrateriformes, and the caryo⯑phyllei. If Mr. RAY paid leſs regard to the flower than its importance ſeemed to de⯑mand, it ſeems rather to have ariſen from [254] the principles of his method, than from his want of opportunities of examination, ow⯑ing to his diſtance from botanical gardens, as was alledged by his opponents; a cir⯑cumſtance, however, which he very feeling⯑ly laments in the preface to his "METHO⯑DUS," and elſewhere.

To this is annexed, "EPISTOLA de METHODO PLANTARUM viri clariſſimi D. A. Q. Rivini ad Raium, cum ejuſdem reſpon⯑ſoria, in qua D. Joſ. Pitton Tournefortii, M. D. Elementa Botanica tanguntur."

On the method of RIVINUS, Mr. RAY, as was before noticed, had thrown out ſome ſtrictures in the preface to his "Sylloge," which drew from that author the anſwer here publiſhed, and Mr. RAY's reply; in which our author takes occaſion alſo to defend his method from the objections of TOURNEFORT, who had been unbecom⯑ingly ſevere in ſome animadverſions made in the "Elements of Botany," publiſhed in 1694. TOURNEFORT, however, afterwards did ample juſtice to the merits of our au⯑thor.

The modern botaniſt ſees that all theſe controverſies are become too little intereſt⯑ing [255] to dwell upon at this time. The prin⯑ciples of the Corolliſtae, and the Fructiſtae, as LINNAEUS ſtyles them, can never be aſſimilated, and all attempts to reduce the whole vegetable kingdom into natural claſſes have hitherto failed.

In 1697, he wrote "Some Obſervations on the Poiſonous Effects of a Root eaten inſtead of Parſneps," ſuppoſed to have been that of the Hemlock; but of which Mr. RAY had ſome doubt, alledging, that it was more probably the Cicutaria vulgaris, (Chaerophyllum ſylveſtre, Lin.) See Phil. Tranſ. N^o 231. In N^o 238, he communi⯑cated "Remarks on the Poiſonous Effects of the Oenanthe crocata," too fatally confirmed by later miſtakes of the ſame kind.

In the year 1700, Mr. RAY publiſhed "A PERSUASIVE TO A HOLY LIFE, from the Happineſs which attends it both in this World and in the World to come." Lond. 8^o. Reprinted in 1719. pp. 126. He tells us it was drawn up at the requeſt of his friend, Mr. Edmund Elys, and that it is compoſed on the model of Biſhop WIL⯑KINS's [256] "Treatiſe on Natural Religion." It is wholly of a moral and practical nature, written in a plain, but forcible and argu⯑mentative ſtyle, and is entirely deſtitute of any of thoſe enthuſiaſtic or myſtical opi⯑nions, which ſo highly tinctured the writ⯑ings of many divines of the laſt century. On the contrary, Mr. RAY, ever conſiſtent and rational, although he deduces his prin⯑cipal motives to the practice of virtue, as conducive to happineſs, even in this life, from the precepts of Chriſtianity; yet does not diſdain, particularly in treating on plea⯑ſure, on riches, and the advantages of tem⯑perance, to enforce his arguments by opi⯑nions and apophthegms from the writings of the philoſophers and moraliſts of ancient Greece, and Rome.

RAY.

THE peaceable mind of Mr. RAY could not delight in the contentious field of controverſy; on the contrary, he regretted the occaſions that drew him into it: yet were they not without uſe, ſince they unqueſtionably ſtimulated him to pu⯑rify and correct his own Methodus. This he effected in the year 1698, although at this time much declined in his health, being afflicted with ulcers of the lower extremi⯑ties, the pain of which rendered his nights frequently ſleepleſs, and wholly prevented him from making excurſions to London, as he much deſired, to examine the gardens and herbaria of the curious.

[258] So ſmall, however, was the demand for books in this ſcience, at the entrance of this century, that the London bookſellers were unwilling to riſk the printing of it: and it was finally ſent to Holland, and printed at Amſterdam, under the care of Dr. HOT⯑TON, the botanical profeſſor at Leyden, who ſuperviſed the preſs, and procured 1100 copies to be thrown off, under the title of "METHODUS PLANTARUM EMENDATA ET AUCTA: accedit Methodus Graminum, Juncorum, et Cyperorum ſpecialis." 8^o. pp. 202. 1703. Dr. HOTTON gave a further ſanction to the ſyſtem of his friend; he taught it in his lectures to the pupils of that univerſity, and informed Mr. RAY of the good acceptance it met with on the continent, particularly in Italy. This vo⯑lume was reprinted at Amſterdam in 1710, and at Tubingen in 1733.

In the preface he recapitulates his own progreſs in the formation of his ſyſtem, and dates it from the tables drawn up in 1667 for the uſe of Biſhop WILKINS. He very juſtly reprehends Dr. MORISON, for affect⯑ing to have formed his method entirely [259] from his own obſervations, without acknow⯑ledging the ſmalleſt aid from former wri⯑ters; briefly recites his objections to the methods of RIVINUS, TOURNEFORT, and HERMAN; and defends his own. He eſtab⯑liſhes ſome axioms, to be obſerved in fram⯑ing a ſyſtem of botany. In fact, Mr. RAY's method, though he aſſumes the fruit as the foundation, is an elaborate attempt, for that time, to fix natural claſſes. He eſtabliſhes it as a rule, that no plant is to be ſeparated from its tribe for a ſingle note of difference; but that all are to be aſſimilated, as far as habit will allow. The characters of the genera are, however, highly incongruous; they are taken from vague principles, ſuch as the ſhape of the leaf, colour of the flower, taſte, ſmell, and ſometimes from the ſize of the plant, and other as unſtable diſtinctions.

In this amended edition, Mr. RAY ſtill adheres to the ancient diviſion into trees and herbaceous plants, having dropped the diſtinction of ſhrubs, preſerved in the firſt edition. Here, all herbaceous, and ſhrubby⯑ſtalked plants are divided into twenty-five genera or claſſes; as follow:

• 1. Submarinae.
• 2. Fungi. In the firſt Methodus, theſe two claſſes were formed into one claſs, or ſynoptical table.
• 3. Muſci.
• 4. Capillares.
• 5. Apetalae. Before, in two tables.
• 6. Planipetalae lacteſcentes.
• 7. Diſcoideae. Before, in two claſſes.
• 8. Corymbiferae. Before, in two claſſes.
• 9. Capitatae. Before, in two claſſes.
• 10. Herbae ſemine nudo ſolitario, flore ſim⯑plici perfecto.
• 11. Umbelliferae.
• 12. Stellatae.
• 13. Aſperifoliae.
• 14. Verticillatae. Before, divided into two; Herbaceae, et Fruticoſae.
• 15. Polyſpermae. Formerly, in two claſſes.
• 16. Pomiferae.
• 17. Bacciferae.
• 18. Multiſiliquae.
• 19. Vaſculiferae, Monopetalae. Before, in three claſſes; et Dipetalae.
• 20. Siliquoſae, et Siliculoſae. Formerly, in three claſſes; et Anomalae.
• [261]21. Papilionaceae; ſ. Leguminoſae. Former⯑ly, in four claſſes.
• 22. Pentapetalae. Before, in two claſſes.
• 23. Floriferae, Graminifoliae. Formerly, in four claſſes; et Bulboſis affines.
• 24. Stamineae, Graminifoliae. Before, in three tables.
• 25. Anomalae.

Trees, and Shrubs.

• 26. Arundinaceae.
• 27. Flore a fructu remoto; ſeu Apetalae.
• 28. Fructu umbilicato; ſ. Pomiferae, et Bacciferae.
• 29. Fructu non umbilicato; ſ. Pruniferae.
• 30. Fructu ſicco; non ſiliquoſo, nec umbili⯑cato; et Miſcellaneae.
• 31. Siliquoſae, non Papilionaceae.
• 32. Siliquoſae, Papilionaceae.
• 33. Anomalae.

At this time, the conſideration of Mr. RAY's method is a matter of mere curio⯑ſity; yet, in juſtice to this great man, it muſt be remarked, that his ſyſtem, though leſs artificial than that of CAESALPINE, is [262] much more highly elaborated than that of MORISON: and, though Mr. RAY muſt have taken infinite pains with it, yet is it difficult in practice; ſince the baſes of the claſſes are not uniform. Of the thirty⯑three, however, twelve are nearly com⯑poſed of natural orders. Such are the fol⯑lowing:

• Fungi,
• Muſci,
• Capillares,
• Planipetalae,
• Umbelliferae,
• Stellatae,
• Aſperifoliae,
• Verticillatae,
• Pomiferae,
• Siliquoſae,
• Leguminoſae,
• Culmiferae.

The remaining claſſes are combined of ſubjects leſs connected by habit and ſtruc⯑ture; and are therefore ſubject to more ar⯑bitrary rules, drawn from the conſideration of ſome one, or more parts, in the fructifi⯑tion.

In the "METHODUS Graminum, Junco⯑rum, et Cyperorum ſpecialis," annexed to this book, Mr. RAY's diſtribution reſts princi⯑pally on what may be called the habit of the fructification; all thoſe genera, which [263] in the Linnaean ſyſtem are known by the names of Phalaris, Alopecurus, Dactylis, Agroſtis, Aia, Poa, Briza, &c. being called Gramen ſimply, with the epithets of the old authors annexed, expreſſive of the mode of bearing the parts of the fructification, whe⯑ther in ſpikes, or panicles; as, Gramen tri⯑ticeum; Gramen loliaceum; typhinum; Gra⯑men paniculatum; miliaceum, &c. In this Conſpectus, however, all the ſpecies are introduced, to the amount of two hun⯑dred.

Sixteen years had now elapſed ſince the publication of his "Hiſtory of Plants;" in which interval botany had aſſumed a new face, and experienced a much greater revo⯑lution and acceſſion, than had ever taken place before. Syſtem had been ſtudied, and in ſome meaſure eſtabliſhed, both at home and abroad. An incredible number of new plants had been introduced, from all parts of the world, and cultivated with extreme care in the gardens of Europe. In the mean time, theſe circumſtances had given riſe to a great number of valuable publi⯑cations. The remaining ſix volumes of [264] that ineſtimable work, the "HORTUS MALABARICUS," had appeared: BREY⯑NIUS, HERMAN, TOURNEFORT, PLU⯑MIER, PLUKENET, BOCCONE, COMME⯑LINE, BOBART, CUPANI, VOLKAMER, and RIVINUS, had enriched botany with valuable performances. Theſe large aug⯑mentations to the ſcience induced Mr. RAY, notwithſtanding his advanced years and ill health, to attempt a collection of theſe ſcattered materials, in order to form a ſupplemental volume to his "Hiſ⯑tory;" and his induſtry enabled him to effect his purpoſe. Additional to the aſſiſt⯑ances derived from all theſe printed works, he had acceſs, by the favour of Sir Hans SLOANE, to the MS. of his "Hiſtory of Jamaica Plants" (of which the "Pro⯑dromus" had been publiſhed in 1696) with liberty to ſelect what he thought proper to his deſign.

From the ſame gentleman he enjoyed the benefit of an Herbarium of ſeveral hundred new and undeſcribed plants, collected in Ma⯑ryland, by Mr. VERNON and Mr. KREIG, who had made a voyage thither for the [265] ſole purpoſe of gratifying their taſte in bo⯑tany. Mr. PETIVER freely communicated his ſtores, at that time very ample, though afterwards abundantly more ſo; and Dr. SHERARD engaged, beſides ſupplying more than a thouſand ſpecies himſelf, to take the trouble of inſpecting the whole work before it went to the preſs, and of making ſuch cor⯑rections and additions as he judged proper.

It was the laſt of his works publiſhed in his life-time, and came out in 1704, with the following title:

"HISTORIAE PLANTARUM TOMUS TERTIUS, qui eſt SUPPLEMENTUM duorum praecedentium; ſpecies omnes, vel omiſſas, vel poſt volumina illa evulgata editas, praeter in⯑numeras fere novas et indictas ab amicis com⯑municatas, complectens: cum ſynonymis neceſſa⯑riis, et uſibus in cibo, medicina, et mechanicis." Lond. folio, pp. 666; and the "Dendro⯑logia," pp. 135. App. pp. 137.

The diſtribution is the ſame as that of the two former volumes. In a compilation of this kind, collected from ſo numerous a ſet of authors, and in many inſtances from dried and imperfect ſpecimens, there muſt [266] neceſſarily ariſe a multitude of repeti⯑tions. The author was ſufficiently aware of this; but it was unavoidable. In this volume there are upwards of 11,700 plants enumerated.

The Appendix contains ſeveral catalogues, which muſt have been intereſting to the curious at that time. Father CAMELL, a learned Jeſuit of Manila, who had not only deſcribed, but delineated, a great number of the plants of Luzone, tranſmitted his work to Mr. RAY; and it forms an extenſive part of this Appendix. It muſt have been much regretted, that the Rev. Father had not been furniſhed with books to have en⯑abled him to adapt the ſynonyms; ſince there are few inſtances in which any other names occur, than the Spaniſh, and the in⯑digenous appellations of the natives and Malays.

Mr. RAY then gives a liſt of TOURNE⯑FORT's oriental diſcoveries, from the "Co⯑rollarium;" thoſe of DAMPIER, from New Holland and elſewhere, and of MARTENS's Greenland Plants; of COMMELINE's Rare Exotics; a copious Catalogue of Chineſe, [267] Madraſs, and African Plants, communicated by Mr. PETIVER, of which, thoſe from Ma⯑draſs had been collected by Mr. BROWNE, a ſurgeon at that ſettlement; and laſtly, a liſt of the new, or hitherto very imperfectly deſcribed ſpecies, contained in Mr. PETI⯑VER's Hortus Siccus, amounting to upwards of 800.

An advertiſement had been printed at the end of the firſt volume of Mr. RAY's "Hiſ⯑tory," in 1688, inviting to a ſubſcription for a ſet of figures to the work; and it was propoſed, that thoſe belonging to each tribe or claſs, ſhould be publiſhed in regular ſuc⯑ceſſion; but it did not ſucceed. The ſcheme was again revived, while the Supplement was printing; and, among other of Mr. RAY's friends, Dr. COMPTON, biſhop of London, had given his patronage, and ſtrongly re⯑commended it. Conferences were held with Dr. SHERARD, Sir Hans SLOANE, Dr. RO⯑BINSON, and Mr. PETIVER, relating to it; but it was relinquiſhed as impracticable.

Mr. RAY's infirmities were very preſſing upon him during the later years of his life. [268] In a letter, written in the ſpring of 1702, he informs Mr. DERHAM that he had not been half a mile from his own houſe for four years. Yet, under theſe circumſtances, he wrote his ſupplemental volume to his "Hiſtory of Plants," which, he ſays, had engroſſed almoſt his whole time for two years.

We have now brought Mr. RAY's bo⯑tanical works to a concluſion; but his la⯑bours did not ceaſe here. His active and indefatigable mind prompted him, at the age of ſeventy-five, to begin a work on In⯑ſects; to which he had been encouraged by Dr. DERHAM; and for which he had been accumulating materials during many years. This was intended to comprehend only the Engliſh ſpecies; although, at the ſame time, his friends were wiſhing to engage him to deſcribe the exotics of the London Muſea, which were then beginning to abound in theſe ſubjects.

He had paid ſome attention to the hiſ⯑tory of Spiders, indeed, many years be⯑fore, when intimately connected with Dr. [269] LISTER; but the greater part of his work was drawn up from his own actual deſcriptions, and partly from Mr. WIL⯑LUGHBY's papers, and the contributions of friends, Mr. PETIVER, Mr. DAN⯑DRIDGE, Dr. SLOANE, Mr. MORTON, and Mr. STONEFLEET.

He tells us, that in the later years of his life he had diſcovered 300 kinds of Papilios, diurnal and nocturnal; and knew there were many more. The Beetles, he obſerves, were as numerous, and the Flies not leſs ſo. I mention theſe circumſtances to prove the extenſive knowledge of nature which this extraordinary man poſſeſſed, at an aera when he ſtood ſo nearly alone in theſe branches of ſcience. He did not live to finiſh this work. It was publiſhed by Dr. DERHAM in 1710, in 4^o. pp. 398.

I believe Mr. RAY was the firſt who gave to theſe minuter animals a real and ſcientific diſtribution. He had drawn up a ſhort "METHODUS INSECTORUM," which was publiſhed the year after his death. Of the hiſtory itſelf, it is ſufficient to ſay, that it bears all the characters of that accurate, [270] diſcriminating, and ſyſtematic genius, which guided him in all his reſearches in the field of nature; and that it is every where quoted by the eminent Swede with the higheſt commendations, for the faithful deſcriptions it contains.

Mr. RAY's infirmities and afflictions, painful and grievous as they were, did not, we are told, prevent him from proſecuting his ſtudies till within about three months before his death; which event took place on Jan. 17, 1704-5.

He died at Black Notley, and was buried, as Dr. DERHAM ſays, according to his own deſire, in the church of that pariſh. The writers of the "General Dictionary," in the mean time, inform us, that, ‘"although the rector of the pariſh offered him a place of interment in the chancel of the church, yet he modeſtly refuſed it, chooſing rather to be buried in the church-yard with his anceſtors, where a monument was erected to him,"’ as Dr. DERHAM relates, at the charge of ſome of his friends, with a Latin inſcription; which may be ſeen in the "Ge⯑neral Dictionary," and in Mr. SCOTT's [271] "Remains;" and of which I inſert a copy below^*.

As Mr. RAY did not inherit any pater⯑nal eſtate, and had often refuſed preferment, his circumſtances could never have been affluent; and the legacy of Mr. WILLUGH⯑BY is ſaid to have been the greateſt part of what he enjoyed. His own eſtate, what⯑ever that might be, he ſettled on his wife. [272] He had four daughters, three of whom ſur⯑vived him. ‘"He left a ſmall legacy to the poor of his own pariſh, and five pounds to Trinity College, in Cambridge, to pur⯑chaſe books for the library there. All his collections of natural curioſities he [273] beſtowed on his friend and neighbour, Mr. Samuel DALE, author of the Phar⯑macologia, to whom they were delivered about a week before his death."’

Mr. RAY's poſthumous papers were en⯑truſted [274] by his widow to the care of Dr. DER⯑HAM; who, after publiſhing the "HIS⯑TORIA INSECTORUM," ſelected a number of his letters, and printed them, in 1718, under the title of "PHILOSOPHICAL LET⯑TERS between the learned Mr. RAY and ſeveral of his Correſpondents, natives and foreigners." 8^o. pp. 367.

This collection contains 218 letters; of which, ſixty-eight were written by Mr. RAY himſelf. Among his correſpondents, the moſt frequent were Dr. LISTER, Sir Philip SKIPPON, Dr. Tancred ROBINSON, Sir Hans SLOANE, Mr. LLWYD, Mr. JES⯑SOP, Mr. JOHNSON, and Mr. OLDEN⯑BURGH. The firſt of Mr. RAY's letters bears date in 1667, the laſt in 1705.

The correſpondence of learned and ſcien⯑tific men, ſeldom fails to be a welcome pre⯑ſent to thoſe of ſimilar literature and pur⯑ſuits; for, beſides the perſonal intereſt we take in their concerns, they commonly de⯑lineate, in the moſt faithful colours, the characters of the writers, frequently aſcer⯑tain diſcoveries, and enable their ſucceſſors to trace the progreſs of knowledge in a [275] more intereſting manner than by hiſtorical detail.

As the general ſubject of theſe letters is natural hiſtory, ſo botany bears a prevail⯑ing portion. Beſides numberleſs critical obſervations that occur on particular ſpe⯑cies, we meet with a long catalogue of the rare plants of the north of England, by Mr. LAWSON; Dr. PLUKENET's Obſervations on the firſt edition of the "Synopſis;" thoſe of Dr. PRESTON on various Britiſh Plants; a paper of Thomas WILLISEL's ſpecifying the different kinds of trees, on which, in his travels, he had ſeen the Miſ⯑ſeltoe growing; and a liſt of ſuch exotics as were thought rare at that time in the Chel⯑ſea Garden, and at Fulham.

There is, moreover, among theſe letters, an intereſting paper, written by Mr. RAY himſelf, in anſwer to the queſtion, ‘"What number of plants there are in the world?"’ in which he diſcuſſes the difficulty, or im⯑poſſibility, of gaining ſatisfaction on this point, ariſing from the want of ſufficient bounds between ſpecies and variety. He communicated to the Royal Society ſome [276] remarks on this head, which were printed by Dr. BIRCH, in the third volume of the "Hiſtory of the Royal Society."

Dr. DERHAM meditated writing the life of Mr. RAY; but he appears not to have fully executed his plan. His papers, how⯑ever, were publiſhed by Mr. SCOTT, in 1760, under the title of "Select Remains of the learned John RAY." 8^o. pp. 336. To theſe are annexed three of the Itinera⯑ries, which conſtitute the greater part of the book. They are evidently ſhort notes only, never intended for the public eye. Some of Mr. RAY's devotional pieces ac⯑company this collection; and three letters to Dr. DERHAM; with a Latin letter of advice and inſtructions to his pupils, the Mr. WILLUGHBYS.

There is ſaid to be ſtill extant a manu⯑ſcript of Mr. RAY's, under the title of "Catalogus Plantarum domeſticarum quae aluntur Catabrigiae in hortis academicorum et oppidanorum." In this, he chiefly makes uſe of the ſynonyma of the two BAUHINES, and of GERARD and PARKINSON.

Mr. RAY had the ſingular happineſs of [277] devoting fifty years of his life to the culti⯑vation of the ſciences he loved. Incited by the moſt ardent genius, which overcame in⯑numerable difficulties and diſcouragements, his labours were, in the end, crowned with a ſucceſs, before almoſt unequalled. He totally reformed the ſtudies of botany and zoology; he raiſed them to the dignity of a ſcience, and placed them in an advan⯑tageous point of view; and, by his own inveſtigations, added more real improve⯑ment to them in England, than any of his predeceſſors.

He invented and defined many terms, ex⯑preſſive of ideas before unknown to the na⯑turaliſts of England; and introduced many others, from writers of the beſt note. As he wrote Latin in great purity, and with great facility, he gave his ſubjects all the embelliſh⯑ments that learning could beſtow; and his extenſive erudition, and knowledge of phi⯑loſophy at large, enabled him to add many collateral ornaments, and uſeful obſerva⯑tions, with an aptitude and judgment that has been much applauded.

The extent of his improvements in ſci⯑ence procured him the admiration of his [278] contemporaries, and have juſtly tranſmitted his name to poſterity, among thoſe who have done honour to their age and country. Even learned foreigners have been eloquent in his praiſe. French writers have ſtiled him the "Engliſh TOURNEFORT;" an eulogy that ſufficiently evinced the high opinion they had of his merit. And the late eminent HALLER not only attributes to RAY the merit of improving and eleva⯑ting botanical knowledge, but from his life dates a new aera in the records of the ſci⯑ence.

But Mr. RAY's enquiries were not limit⯑ed to natural knowledge. His Foreign Tra⯑vels and his Itineraries prove, that antiqui⯑ties, polity, government, and legiſlation, at⯑tracted a ſhare of his regard; as his philo⯑logical books are evidences of his attention to language, and of his deſire to improve and illuſtrate his native tongue.

To all theſe endowments he joined an unremitting induſtry and perſeverance in the proſecution of his ſtudies; and, what marks a fortitude of mind as uncommon as it is enviable, his aſſiduity ſeemed to ſtrengthen [279] with his age, and to bid a defiance to the encroachments of infirmity, and the proſ⯑pect of diſſolution. I call to witneſs the magnitude of the attempt, and ſucceſsful iſſue of his exertions, in writing the ſupple⯑mental volume to his "Hiſtory of Plants," and in beginning the "Hiſtoria Inſectorum" at ſo late a period of his life.

His ſingular modeſty, affability, and com⯑municative diſpoſition, ſecured to him the eſteem of all who knew him; and his emi⯑nent talents as a naturaliſt and a philoſo⯑pher procured him many patrons and friends, and preſerved him from that obſcurity, which would otherwiſe probably have been his lot: for, notwithſtanding his learning and probity, as his principles did not accord with thoſe of the times, they were adverſe to his fortune, and he gained no emoluments in the church. He had relinquiſhed his fellowſhip at the commencement of the Bar⯑tholomew act, not, as ſome imagined, from his having taken the Solemn League and Co⯑venant (for that he never did, and often de⯑clared, that he ever thought it an unlawful oath), but becauſe he could not declare, [280] agreeably to the terms of the act, that the oath was not binding on thoſe who had taken it. Hence too, his conſtant refuſal of preferment afterwards, occaſioned him to be ranked, by many, among the nonconfor⯑miſts, although he lived and died in the communion of the church of England. He had ſeen, with deep regret, the diſorders of the commonwealth and the uſurpation, and afterwards, not leſs, the threatening aſpect of the reign of James II.

His ſtrong attachment to the principles of civil and religious liberty, is manifeſted by his animated ſtile, in the preface to his "Synopſis;" where he expreſſes, in glowing terms, his joy and gratitude, for having lived to ſee thoſe bleſſings eſtabliſhed by the Revolution.

The character of Mr. RAY cannot be contemplated by thoſe who have a true re⯑liſh for the ſtudies of nature, without a high ſentiment of reſpect and gratitude; nor by thoſe who conſider the exemplari⯑neſs of his life as a man, and his qualifica⯑tions as a divine, without veneration.

There are two engraved portraits of Mr. [281] RAY prefixed to his works, both from a painting by Faithorne; one by W. Elder, before his "SYLLOGE," in 1693, which ſeems to have been copied for the "ME⯑THODUS EMENDATA," in 1703; and the other by Vertue, in 1713, prefixed to the "Phyſico-theological Diſcourſes." In both theſe, he is repreſented, as Mr. AMES de⯑ſcribes it, in ‘"an oval frame, with hair, whiſkers, band, and canonical habit."’ Theſe engravings repreſent Mr. RAY in the latter ſtage of his life^*.

COWLEY.

IN all times, from VIRGIL and AEMI⯑LIUS MACER of the Auguſtan age, from the ſpurious MACER, and STRABUS the monk of St. Gall, in the twelfth cen⯑tury, to modern times, the beauties of flowers, and the virtues of plants, have been celebrated in verſe. Marcus NAEVIANUS, firſt a phyſician, and then a prieſt, of Flan⯑ders, ſung the qualities of plants in his "Poemation" of 1563; and THUANUS, the great hiſtorian, amuſed himſelf with praiſing the violet and the lily in metre. In our own country, in 1723, George KNOWLES de⯑ſcribed 400 plants of the Materia Medica, in Latin verſe, and didactically applied them to their uſes in medicine.

But to proceed: That England and France, [283] in the ſame age, might not want their bo⯑tanical laureats, COWLEY in the one, and RAPIN in the other, aroſe to celebrate this theme.

COWLEY, after having found reaſons for ſtudying phyſic, ‘"conſidering botany," as we are told by his late eminent biographer, "as neceſſary to a phyſician, retired into Kent, to gather plants."’

Here, he wrote, before the Reſtoration, his "Two firſt Books on Plants;" although they were not publiſhed till the year 1662. The remaining four were added in the edi⯑tion of 1668; and the whole were repub⯑liſhed, with other poems, in 1678. 8^o. pp. 343.

In the firſt book, he celebrates the powers of various medicinal herbs, more eſpecially of thoſe which gave ampler ſcope to his muſe, from antient renown of their virtue, and were yet in frequent uſe, and high eſteem. Such were betony, wormwood, wa⯑ter lily, miſſeltoe, and various others.

In the ſecond, he invokes the goddeſſes Luna, Lucina, Jana, and Mena; and ſings the praiſes of ſimples appropriated to the [284] diſeaſes of the ſex: in which, both antient ſuperſtition, and modern belief, ſupplied his muſe with exuberant ſources of grati⯑fication.

In the third, Flora calls forth all his powers, in the narciſſus, the anemone, the violet, and the tulip, with a variety of other ornaments of the parterre, from the coro⯑nary tribe.

In the fourth, a more numerous ſet of the ſubordinate embelliſhments of the gar⯑den are recorded, in various meaſure; among which, the attributes of the moly, the lily, poppy, ſunflower, ſaffron, and amaranth, attract his muſe with more than ordinary attention.

In the fifth, he celebrates, in heroic mea⯑ſure, the gifts of Pomona, from the native products of England, to the date of the eaſt, and the tuna of the weſt; terminating his poem with near two hundred lines on Columbus, on the Spaniards, on the new continent, and in expreſſing his hopes that, to the devaſtations of conqueſt, will ſoon ſucceed peace, religion, arts, and ſcience.

In the laſt, he diſplays the ſylvan ſcene, [285] from the oak of Boſcobel, to the lowly juni⯑per; and, having conſtituted his druidical monarch the ſovereign of the foreſt, he makes him the oracle for a train of reflec⯑tions, on the uſurpation; the exile of Charles the Second, his reſtoration; and the Dutch war.

His poems are accompanied by notes, illuſtrating the etymology, the names, ſyno⯑nyms, deſcriptions, faculties, and uſes of the plants, confirmed by authorities drawn from claſſical, botanical, and medical wri⯑ters. Of theſe, he profeſſes in his preface, that PLINY among the antients, and FER⯑NELIUS among the moderns, have been his chief reſources. Of botanical authors, GE⯑RARD and PARKINSON are ſparingly men⯑tioned, and they are the principal of that claſs.

Great eminence in ſcience is ſeldom at⯑tainable, unleſs its foundation be laid in a devotedneſs of mind to its object, in the early ſcene of life. COWLEY did not enter on the ſtudy of phyſic, till the middle age of man; and then, as is probable, not with intereſted views towards practice. Hence [286] it may fairly be preſumed, that he ſatisfied himſelf with moderate acquiſition. What was true of the whole, may by fair analogy be applicable to a particular branch of it. He had doubtleſs that portion of knowledge in the materia medica of plants, which may be conſidered as adequate to the uſual de⯑mand.

But, that COWLEY, in his retirement, ſhould obtain an extenſive and critical know⯑ledge of botany, as it ſtood as a ſcience, even in his day, could not be expected. His fervid genius could ſcarcely ſtoop to that patient inveſtigation of nature, by which alone it could be acquired. Neither do the text, nor the notes, manifeſt ſufficient proof of his intimate acquaintance with thoſe au⯑thors of true ſame, among the moderns, through whoſe aſſiſtance the want of that information might, in ſome meaſure, have been ſupplied.

Nevertheleſs, as, in the language of Dr. JOHNSON, ‘"Botany, in the mind of COW⯑LEY, turned into poetry,"’ to thoſe who are alike enamoured with the charms of both, the poems of COWLEY muſt yield [287] delight; ſince his fertile imagination has adorned his ſubject with all the beautiful alluſions that antient poets and mythologiſts could ſupply; and even the fancies of the modern Signatores, of BAPTISTA PORTA, CROLLIUS, and their diſciples, who ſaw the virtues of plants in the phyſiognomy, or agreement in colour or external forms, with the parts of the human body, aſſiſted to embelliſh his verſe. Nor did he fail, by theſe elegant productions, to honour his ſubject, his name, and his country.

I cloſe theſe obſervations by remarking, that poetry, as it ever hath, ſo it ever muſt derive from nature ſome of its moſt pleaſing ſcenes of entertainment. In the vegetable world, the moſt expanded imagination of poetic genius will, even without the aid of fiction, ſo emphatically ſtiled the ſoul of poetry, find a field ſufficiently ample for the diſplay of the brighteſt talents. THOM⯑SON witneſſes this truth, while in him we lament the want of that botanical know⯑ledge, without which, the poet muſt ever be deprived of numberleſs ſources of the [288] moſt beautiful imagery, and ſuch as would add peculiar grace, and the moſt inſtructive power to his muſe.

And, although the talent of the poet hath not often been united to that of the really ſcientific botaniſt, there are not want⯑ing inſtances of this union. I might men⯑tion, ſince the diſcovery of the ſexes of plants, the ode, dedicated to CAMERARIUS, and printed in his "Epiſtola de Sexu Plan⯑tarum;" of which, a tranſlation by Dr. MARTYN, when a young man, may be ſeen in BLAIR's "Botanick Eſſays." Profeſſor Van ROYEN, in 1732, publiſhed an elegant poem "De Plantarum Amoribus, et Connu⯑biis." And CUNO, an ingenious merchant of Amſterdam, in a volume of 256 pages, deſcribed, in 1750, the plants of his own garden in verſe; for which he received the laurel from LINNAEUS, by a new genus in⯑ſcribed to his name.

Whilſt I am now writing, I have the pleaſure of congratulating all thoſe, whoſe love of poetry is aided by a taſte for botani⯑cal ſcience, on a moſt elegant production in [289] our own country. The beautiful diſplay of the principles of the Linnaean ſyſtem in the "Botanic Garden," under the delicate analogy of the "Loves of the Plants," in which the didactic deſign of the author, is ſo happily embelliſhed by Ovidian imagery, as to have given that energy and ornament to the ſubject, which has been hitherto wanting to all ſimilar productions in the Engliſh language.

MERRET.

‘"CHRISTOPHER, the ſon of Chriſ⯑topher MERRET, was born at Winchcombe, in Glouceſterſhire, Feb. 16, 1614. He became a ſtudent in Glou⯑ceſter Hall, in the beginning of the year 1631; two years after which time, he tranſlated himſelf to Oriel College, and took the degree of B.A. in 1634. Af⯑terwards, retiring again to Glouceſter Hall, he applied to the ſtudy of phyſic, and was created doctor in that faculty in 1642. About this time he ſettled in London, and came into conſiderable prac⯑tice, was a fellow of the College of Phyſicians, and of the Royal Society. [291] He died at his houſe, near the chapel in Hatton Garden, in Holborne, near London, Aug. 19, 1695; and was buried twelve feet deep in the church of St. Andrew's, Holborne."’ Thus far Mr. Wood.

The publication which entitles Dr. Mer⯑ret to a place in theſe anecdotes, is, his "PINAX RERUM NATURALIUM BRI⯑TANNICARUM, continens VEGETABILIA, Animalia, et Foſſilia, in hac Inſula reperta." 8^o. 1667. pp. 223.

This is not noticed in the title as a ſe⯑cond edition, although there is one recorded by authors, with the date of 1665. How⯑ever, I ſuſpect it to be a miſtake, as no ſuch edition is quoted by RAY. He dates his book from the College of Phyſicians, and is mentioned by MORISON under the title of "Muſei Herbiani Cuſtos."

Dr. MERRET informs us, that he under⯑took this work at the requeſt of a book⯑ſeller, to ſupply the deficiencies of How's "Phytologia," after that work was out of print; and that it was intended to have been done jointly with Dr. DALE, whoſe death, ſoon after the deſign was formed, [292] threw the whole into his own hands. He ſays, he had purchaſed 800 figures, which JOHNSON had cauſed to be engraved, with which the work was to have been embel⯑liſhed. Why they did not appear, no cauſe is aſſigned; nor do I find any further no⯑tices of them. Dr. MERRET, though un⯑queſtionably a man of learning, taſte, and conſiderable information in natural hiſtory, ſeems to have engaged in it too late in life, to admit of his making that proficiency, which the deſign required. Add to this, that being fixed in London, and cloſely en⯑gaged in the practice of his profeſſion, he was rendered incapable of inveſtigating plants, in the diſtant parts of the kingdom. He however engaged Thomas WILLISEL to travel for him; and he tells us, that WIL⯑LISEL was employed by him for five ſuc⯑ceſſive ſummers. His ſon, Chriſtopher MER⯑RET, alſo made excurſions for the ſame purpoſe; and Mr. Yauldon GOODYER fur⯑niſhed him with the manuſcripts of his grandfather. By theſe aſſiſtances Dr. MER⯑RET procured a large number of Engliſh plants, and a knowledge of the Loci Natales. [293] Nevertheleſs, he was not poſſeſſed of that critical and intimate acquaintance with the ſubject, which might have enabled him to diſtinguiſh, with ſufficient accuracy, the ſpecies from varieties. He ranges the plants alphabetically, according to the Latin names, and has given few ſynonyms, except thoſe of GERARD and PARKINSON; to which, after the example of the writers of the "Hortus Oxonienſis," he has very commen⯑dably annexed the page. He gives the ge⯑neral places of growth, and ſpecifies the particular ſpots, where the rare plants are found.

At the end of the Catalogue, is ſubjoined, a rude diſpoſition of vegetables into claſſes, ſomewhat like that of John BAUHINE. This he hoped to have improved, againſt the time of a ſecond edition, which, pro⯑bably, Mr. RAY's publications ſuperſeded. Then follows a brief Synopſis Etymologica, and a uſeful liſt of the plants as they flower in each month, pointing out the duration of the time. Dr. MERRET has, in this Pi⯑nax, introduced many plants as new, which, on ſubſequent examination, proved to be [294] only varieties; a number of exotics, evidently the accidental offspring of gardens, and many that could never be met with by ſucceeding botaniſts, in the places ſpecified by him. He enumerates upwards of 1400 ſpecies of Engliſh plants; whilſt the accu⯑rate Mr. RAY, only three years afterwards, confines the number to 1050. Neverthe⯑leſs, ſeveral Britiſh plants make their firſt appearance in this Pinax; and Dr. MER⯑RET would probably have ſecured his title to ſome others, if he had not totally omitted to give deſcriptions of thoſe which he in⯑troduces as new.

The zoological part of this Pinax is ex⯑extremely ſuperficial; conſiſting merely of the Latin and Engliſh name, with a refer⯑ence to ALDROVANDUS, GESNER, JOHN⯑STON, and MOUFFETT. The mineralogy is not leſs brief, and imperfect.

Before the publication of this work, Dr. MERRET had printed "A Collection of Acts of Parliament, Charters, Trials at Law, and Judges Opinions, concerning thoſe Grants to the College of Phyſi⯑cians." 4^o. 1660. This became the ba⯑ſis, [295] as Mr. Wood ſays, of Dr. GOODALL's book, printed in 1684.

In 1669, he wrote "A ſhort View of the Frauds and Abuſes committed by Apothecaries, in relation to Patients, and Phyſicians." 4^o. This treatiſe engaged him in a controverſy with the famous Henry STUBBE. It may be preſumed, that all diſcuſſions of this kind, howſoever well meant, can have but little effect in reform⯑ing the abuſes hinted at, while the cuſto⯑mary and legal conſtitution, and polity of phyſic, remain in the preſent ſtate in Great Britain.

In 1662, he tranſlated into Engliſh, "The Art of Glaſs; how to colour Glaſs, Ena⯑mels, Lakes, &c." 8^o. written by Ant. NE⯑RI, accompanied with an account of the Glaſs Droſs. And, in 1686, the ſame work was publiſhed in Latin, with Dr. MERRET's "Obſervations and Notes," equal in extent to the work itſelf. Amſt. 12^o.

Mr. Wood informs us, that he alſo print⯑ed, in one ſheet, 4^o. "The Character of a compleat Phyſician or Naturaliſt."

Dr. MERRET was among the earlieſt [296] members of the Royal Society, after its in⯑corporation; and contributed ſeveral papers, which were printed in the "Philoſophical Tranſactions."

He made experiments on vegetation, in the year 1664; by which he found, that ſquare ſections of the bark, from aſh, and maple, whether ſeparated on three ſides only, or wholly, would firmly unite, if tightly ſecured by plaiſter and packthread.

Experiments on the loſs of weight, which a plant of the Aloe Americana, with eleven leaves, ſuffered by hanging up in the kitchen for five years. In the firſt year it loſt near two ounces and an half; the ſecond upwards of three ounces; de⯑creaſing afterwards nearly in the ſame pro⯑portion. It loſt two of the larger leaves every year, and put forth two new ones every ſpring; from which circumſtance, the Doctor inferred a circulation of the juice.

Experiments on cherry-trees, that, hav⯑ing withered fruit, occaſioned by the ſun being admitted too ſuddenly upon them in March, recovered, by daily watering the roots.

[297] Obſervations on the London granaries. Theſe four papers were all printed in N^o 25, in the ſecond volume of the "Tranſ⯑actions."

In N^o 138, an account of the tin-mines in Cornwall, mundic, ſpar, and Corniſh cryſ⯑tals.

In N^o 142, an account of the art of re⯑fining, in the ſeveral methods, by parting, by the teſt, the almond furnace, and by mercury.

In N^o 223, ſome curious obſervations on the fens of Lincolnſhire; on the animal and vegetable produce: a deſcription of Boſton church, the incroachments of the ſea, and other particulars, which muſt have rendered this paper a very intereſting morſel of natu⯑ral hiſtory. He gives a liſt of ſeveral of the more rare plants growing in the fens.

In N^o 224, a table of the waſhes called Foſdyke and Croſskeys, in Lincolnſhire, ſpeci⯑fying the times of high water, and ſafe paſ⯑ſage over the ſands.

MORISON.

ROBERT MORISON was born at Aber⯑deen, in 1620; was educated in the ſame univerſity; and, in 1638, took the de⯑gree of doctor in philoſophy, equivalent to that of M.A. He firſt applied to mathe⯑matics, and was deſigned by his parents for the theological line; but his taſte for bo⯑tany and phyſic ſuperſeded their intentions. His attachment to the royal cauſe, led him into the army; and he received a dangerous wound in the head, in the battle at Brigg, [299] near Aberdeen. Upon his recovery, he went to Paris, the aſylum of his countrymen. Here he was firſt employed as a tutor to the ſon of a counſellor, Bizet; and, in the mean time, aſſiduouſly applied to the ſtudy of anatomy, botany, and zoology. In 1648, he took the doctor's degree in phyſic at Angers. He became ſo much diſtinguiſhed by his ſkill in botany, that at the recom⯑mendation of M. ROBINS, the king's bota⯑niſt, he was taken into the patronage of the Duke of Orleans, uncle to Lewis XIV. and appointed intendant of his fine garden at Blois, with a handſome ſalary. This eſtab⯑liſhment took place in 1650, and he held it until the death of the Duke, in 1660. Here, we are told, MORISON laid open to the Duke his method of botany; and was liberally encouraged by him to proſecute it. The Duke alſo ſent him into various pro⯑vinces of France, to ſearch for new plants. He travelled into Burgundy, the Lyonnois, and Languedoc; and into Britanny, the coaſts and iſles of which he carefully inveſtigated; and, by theſe journies, enriched the garden with many rare, and ſome new plants.

[300] It was in this ſituation that he became known to Charles II. who, in 1660, on the death of his uncle the Duke, invited MO⯑RISON into England; and, although ſolicited by the treaſurer Fouquet, on the moſt ho⯑nourable and ample conditions, to remain in France, the love of his country overcame all temptations, and he returned to Eng⯑land. Charles II. gave him the title of king's phyſician, and royal profeſſor of bo⯑tany, with an appointment of 200 l. a year, and a houſe, as ſuperintendant of the royal gardens. He was elected fellow of the Royal College of Phyſicians, and acquired much fame for his knowledge of botany. In this ſituation he remained till the year 1669, when, having made an acquaintance with Mr. Obadiah WALKER, of Univerſity College, with the Dean of Chriſt Church, and other leading men of the univerſity, he was, by their intereſt, elected botanic profeſſor at Oxford, Dec. 16, 1669, and incorporated doctor of phyſic the day fol⯑lowing. He read his firſt lecture in the phyſic ſchool in September 1670, and then removed to the phyſic garden, where he [301] lectured three times a week, to a conſider⯑able audience. In this occupation, and in conducting his great work, the "Hiſtoria Plantarum Oxonienſis," he laboured to the time of his death, which was thought to have been occaſioned by a bruiſe, received by the pole of a coach, in croſſing the ſtreet, Nov. 9, 1683. He died at his houſe in Green-ſtreet, Leiceſter Fields, the next day, and was buried in the church of St. Mar⯑tin's in the Fields, Weſtminſter.

SEGUIER ſeems to have placed impro⯑perly among MORISON's works the firſt edition of the "Hortus Bleſenſis," which he gives as publiſhed in the year 1635, when MORISON muſt have been only fifteen years of age. This may have been a typographi⯑cal error; but the book, in fact, was the work of Abel BRUYNER, phyſician to the Duke of Orleans, and was not publiſhed till 1653. MORISON's firſt publication was a ſecond edition of this catalogue, under the following title: "HORTUS REGIUS BLE⯑SENSIS auctus: acceſſit Index Plantarum in Horto contentarum nemini Scriptarum et [302] Obſervationes generaliores, ſeu Praeludiorum pars prior." Lond. 1669. 12^o.

The "HORTUS BLESENSIS" raiſed the author's character, and contributed, as the writer of his life obſerves, to recommend him to the ſtation he afterwards held at Oxford. It contains the rudiments of his method of claſſification. He profeſſes to give a liſt of 260 new plants; but many of them proved to be only varieties, and others, ſuch as were well known before. There were, nevertheleſs, ſome new and rare plants, of exotic, as well as indigenous origin; the latter, ſuch as he had himſelf firſt diſco⯑vered in France.

In this work is alſo given his "HALLU⯑CINATIONES in CASPARI BAUHINI Pina⯑cem, tam in digerendis quam denominandis Plantis; et his Animadverſiones, in tres To⯑mos, Hiſtoriae Plantarum JOHANNIS BAU⯑HINI;" a work which Haller calls "Invi⯑dioſum Opus;" and which, while it proves both the accuracy and diligence of the au⯑thor, muſt be confeſſed to be unbecomingly ſevere on theſe two illuſtrious writers; who, [303] as they did not profeſs to write a ſyſtem, are here too rigidly tried by rules, not in⯑vented when they wrote, and of conſe⯑quence the validity of which they could not have acknowledged.

In a dialogue at the end of the "Hortus Bleſenſis," MORISON teaches, that the ge⯑nera of plants ſhould be eſtabliſhed on cha⯑racters drawn from the fruit, and not on any ſenſible qualities, or ſuppoſed medicinal virtue. He alſo learnedly defends the doc⯑trine, that all vegetables ariſe from ſeed; a propoſition not univerſally allowed; the doctrine of equivocal, or ſpontaneous gene⯑ration, having, at that time, many advo⯑cates among the learned.

Dr. MORISON, during his reſidence in France, in his occaſional journies to Paris, about the year 1658, became familiar in the family of Lord HATTON, then reſident at St. Germains, and whoſe ſecond ſon Charles was much attached to natural hiſtory, and became a voluntary and zealous diſciple of our author. Sixteen years afterwards, Mr. Charles HATTON ſent over, at the author's requeſt, a treatiſe, with the plates already en⯑graved, [304] written by Paul BOCCONE, on plants, diſcovered by him in the ſouthern parts of Europe, principally in Sicily, of which ſome were rare, and ſome new. BOCCONE was ori⯑ginally of Savona, in the Genoeſe diſtrict; and was born in 1633. He became a Ciſtertian monk of Palermo, and was a man of ſingu⯑lar and various erudition in natural hiſtory. He viſited Corſica and Malta; travelled into England, Holland, and Germany; and was for ſome time botaniſt to the Duke of Tuſ⯑cany. He was the author of ſeveral very curious works; and died in 1704. He wrote on foſſils; but his botanical writings have greater originality, and were of high value. MORISON, after having cauſed the ſeven laſt plates to be re-engraved, pub⯑liſhed the work alluded to above, under the following title:

"ICONES et DESCRIPTIONES RARIO⯑RUM PLANTARUM Melitae, Galliae, et Ita⯑liae. Auctore Paulo BOCCONE, panormitano ſiculo, ſereniſſimi magni Etruriae Ducis olim Botanico." Oxon. 1674. 4^o. pp. 96. t. 52. fig. 119.

MORISON prefixed to this work a dedi⯑cation [305] to Mr. HATTON, in which he de⯑fends, not only the doctrine in general, that all plants ſpring from ſeed, but particularly, againſt DIOSCORIDES, and ſome of the re⯑ſtorers of ſcience, among whom were CAE⯑SALPINUS, that all the ferns are furniſhed with flowers and ſeed.

The plants deſcribed and figured in this book, are, moſt of them, ſuch as had not been noticed by foregoing authors. A few of theſe are common to Britain. The figures are ſmall, and neither well deline⯑ated, nor well engraven: but the work had its uſe, as containing ſome plants of Sou⯑thern Europe, not to be met with in any other author; and on this account derives ſome value, to thoſe who are curious in purſuing the hiſtory of plants in the ſexual ſyſtem, as being quoted by LINNAEUS.

As a ſpecimen of his great work, medi⯑tated under the name of "Hiſtoria Planta⯑rum Univerſalis Oxonienſis," MORISON next publiſhed, "PLANTARUM UMBELLIFE⯑RARUM DISTRIBUTIO NOVA, per tabulas cognationis et affinitatis, ex libro Naturae obſervata et detecta." Oxon. 1672. fol. [306] pp. 91. t. 12. The umbelliferous tribe is here divided into nine orders, the genera of which are diſtinguiſhed by the figure of the ſeed, aſſiſted, in ſome of the ſubdiviſions, by the form of the leaf. They are illuſtra⯑ted by figures of 150 different ſeeds.

The author has ſubjoined what he names ‘"Umbelliferous Plants, improperly ſo cal⯑led."’ Such are Valeriana, Thalictrum, Filipendula, Valeriana graeca, Pimpinella San⯑guiſorba; all which are very different, both in character and habit, except the Valerian, from the natural claſs of which he treats.

This ſpecimen excited the attention of the learned, augmented MORISON's patro⯑nage, both abroad and at home; and en⯑couraged him to proſecute with vigour his great work, of which the firſt volume came out under the following title: "PLANTA⯑RUM HISTORIAE UNIVERSALIS OXONI⯑ENSIS, Pars ſecunda; ſeu Herbarum Diſtri⯑butio nova, per tabulas cognationis et affinita⯑tis, ex libro Naturae obſervata et detecta." Fol. 1680. pp. 617. The firſt part of the Hiſtory, on Trees and Shrubs, was never printed. Some have doubted, whether it [307] was ever written; but SCHELHAMMER^* tells us, that he ſaw the whole work perfect in the hands of the author. MORISON him⯑ſelf aſſigns, as a reaſon for publiſhing the Herbaceous Diviſion firſt, the greater mag⯑nitude of the undertaking, ariſing from the vaſt number, and conſequent difficulty of finding proper diſtinctions and characters; and becauſe he was unwilling to leave the moſt difficult and abſtruſe part of his work behind him unfiniſhed, as happened to DE⯑LECHAMP, and John BAUHINE. Unhap⯑pily, however, MORISON's untimely death ſubjected his work to the ſame lot, and did not allow him to finiſh more than nine, out of the fifteen claſſes of his own ſyſtem.

He divides all herbaceous plants into fif⯑teen claſſes, under the following titles:

• 1. Scandentes.
• 2. Leguminoſae.
• 3. Siliquoſae.
• 4. Tricapſulares Hexa⯑petalae.
• 5. Tricapſulares, aliae.
• 6. Corymbiferae.
• 7. Pappoſae Lacteſcen⯑tes.
• 8. Culmiferae.
• 9. Umbelliferae.
• 10. Tricoccae Purgatri⯑ces.
• [308] 11. Galeatae, et Verti⯑cillatae.
• 12. Multiſiliquae, et Multicapſulares.
• 13. Bacciferae.
• 14. Capillares.
• 15. Anomalae.

From an inſpection of this table, it ap⯑pears, that his method is not uniformly founded on the fruit; in fact, much leſs ſo than that of CAESALPINUS; but on the fruit and the habit conjointly; ſince the Corymbiferae, Umbelliferae, and Galeatae, with the Verticillatae, ariſe from the diſpoſition of the flower; the Scandentes, Culmiferae, and Capillares, from the habit: the ſeventh claſs from the qualities partly, and partly from the ſeed. Hence we ſee, that only half the claſſes are founded on the fruit; the fifteenth being truly an heteroclite aſſemblage. His method would have ap⯑proached much nearer to perfection, on his own principles, had he enlarged the num⯑ber of his claſſes; ſince, in ſeveral inſtances, they embrace natural orders, much too diſ⯑tinct to be ranged together. The orders, or ſubdiviſions of the claſſes, are, in ſome inſtances, grounded on differences in the [309] ſeed-veſſel; in others, on the root, habit, and frequently on leſs ſcientific diſcrimina⯑tions. In the conduct of the work itſelf, MORISON makes a ſeparate chapter for each genus. He begins by referring to the antients under each plant; frequently ſub⯑joining the etymology. The generical cha⯑racters, if indeed they can be ſo called, are very vague; and though taken from the parts of fructification, are, too often, aſſiſted by diſtinctions from the root, leaves, and mode of growth. After the generical note, follows a ſynoptical table of the ſpecies, re⯑ferring to the plates. The deſcriptions are ſometimes borrowed from John BAUHINE and others. To moſt of the plants, he af⯑fixes new ſpecific characters, and ſubjoins the ſynonyma of ſeveral authors. He intro⯑duces, at the end of the chapters, the ani⯑madverſions on the BAUHINES, and an ac⯑count of the virtues and uſes of the plants.

The five firſt claſſes only, were publiſhed by the author, who left the four ſucceeding ones finiſhed. Theſe, with the remaining claſſes, were finiſhed and publiſhed, after an interval of nineteen years, by Jacob BO⯑BART. [310] MORISON had the advantage of powerful patronage. He was liberally en⯑couraged by the univerſity, and enabled to embelliſh his work with a numerous ſet of tables, on which are engraven about 3384 plants. The figures are chiefly co⯑pied from other authors. The new figures occur principally in the latter part of this work, and are therefore to be attributed to the care of BOBART. The ſix tables of Moſſes, Fuci, Corallines, and Corals, at the end, are, except the few wooden cuts of GE⯑RARD, the firſt of the kind graved in Eng⯑land, and have great merit as the produc⯑tions of that time. All thoſe of COLUMNA and CORNUTUS are copied in this work. Thoſe engraved by Burghers excel the reſt; and the figures of the graſſes and moſſes are incomparably beyond any other that are to be met with, on the ſame ſcale; the habit being admirably well expreſſed. The re⯑publication of theſe tables, with references to LINNAEUS's writings, would, even at this period, be a benefit to the ſcience.

The third part, or, more properly, the ſecond volume of the "Oxford Hiſtory of [311] Plants," was publiſhed by Jacob BO⯑BART, in fol. 1699. pp. 655. A life of MORISON is prefixed to this volume, and an engraving of him done by White, with Dr. PITCAIRN's Tetraſtic underneath. In the preface, which is ſigned Jacob BO⯑BART, the reader is preſented with a gene⯑ral view of the writers on botany, from THEOPHRASTUS, to the time of MORI⯑SON; enumerating throughout the ſeveral nations of Europe, in a chronological order, the moſt learned authors on the ſubject. The writer then informs us of the patronage and encouragement which MORISON received from the univerſity, to undertake this work; and, after lamenting the untimely death of the author, and expreſſing his grateful ſenſe of the honour he received in being ap⯑pointed to continue the undertaking, he lays before the reader the aſſiſtances he received in the proſecution of it. An interval of near twenty years had given BOBART an opportunity of inſerting a great number of plants unknown to MORISON, from the works of RAY, HERMAN, PLUKENET, the "Hortus Malabaricus," and other works. [312] With reſpect to Engliſh botany, great com⯑munications had been made by SLOANE, PETIVER, DOODY, SHERARD, and others. By theſe means, this volume contains near⯑ly double the number of the former; but the latter part of it proves, too evidently, that it did not receive the finiſhing hand of the original author; ſince it appears in a very abridged form, compared with what MORISON^* himſelf had done.

BOBART.

Jacob BOBART, the continuator of MO⯑RISON's Hiſtory, was the ſon of Jacob, the firſt ſuperintendant of the Garden, upon its foundation in 1632. Both the father and ſon filled their ſtation with great credit to themſelves, and no leſs emolument to the Garden. The elder is ſaid to have been the author of the firſt edition of the "Hortus Oxonienſis," 1648; and his name is joined in the ſecond edition, 1658, as an aſſociate in the work, with Dr. STEPHENS and Mr. [313] BROWNE. Mr. GRANGER relates a humo⯑rous circumſtance in his manners; that ‘"on rejoycing days, he uſed to have his beard tagged with ſilver."’ He died in 1679, at the age of eighty-one; and left, beſides Jacob, another ſon, named Tillemant, who was alſo employed in the Phyſic Garden.

I cannot aſcertain the time of BO⯑BART's death; but from the ſtory related of him by Dr. Grey, in his edition of "Hudibras^*," he muſt have been living in 1704. He had transformed a dead rat into the feigned figure of a dragon, which impoſed upon the learned ſo far, that ‘"ſe⯑veral fine copies of verſes were wrote on ſo rare a ſubject."’ BOBART afterwards owned the cheat; but it was preſerved for ſome years, as a maſter-piece of art. There is a print of the elder BOBART, with a diſtich, dated 1675, by Burghers; which confirms his German origin; but it is very ſcarce^†.

METHOD.

AGREEABLY to my purpoſe, I now proceed to give a conciſe ac⯑count of the riſe and progreſs of what is underſtood by method, ſyſtem, or claſſification of plants, ariſing from agreement in the parts of fructification, independent of any aſſociation from the ſacies externa, or habit of the plant. To this, I ſhall add as brief an hiſtory of another important diſcovery, that of the ſexes of plants; in conſequence of which, ſyſtem itſelf has been carried to a much higher degree of perfection.

There are no traces of what the moderns [315] call ſyſtem, in the writings of the antients; by whom are pre-eminently ſignified, THEO⯑PHRASTUS, DIOSCORIDES, and PLINY. Their knowledge of vegetables was con⯑fined to a few that were uſed in medicine, and in the arts and conveniences of life; and in treating on them, their ſubjects are placed in great and inordinate diviſions, without the ſmalleſt approach to what is now meant by claſſiſication.

THEOPHRASTUS treats his ſubject, in general, philoſophically. In his book "De Cauſis Plantarum," he conſiders the propa⯑gation, culture, qualities, and uſes of Plants in general; but deſcribes very few. In his "Hiſtoria Plantarum," in which are de⯑ſcribed, or enumerated, about 500 ſpecies, he begins with the organization, the gene⯑ration, and propagation of Vegetables. He then treats largely, in his third and fourth books, on Trees. In the fifth, on Timber, and the choice of the beſt. In the ſixth, on Shrubs, thorny Plants, Roſes, and other ornaments of gardens. In the ſeventh, on oleraceous Plants, and wild Plants. In the eighth, copiouſly on Grain of all kinds. [316] And in the laſt, on Gums, Exudations, and the methods of obtaining them.

The object of DIOSCORIDES being ſolely the Materia Medica, he diſcuſſes each ſub⯑ject ſpecifically, and in a ſeparate chapter, dividing the whole into five books; in which, as far as any order takes place, they arrange into aromatic, alimentary, and medicinal plants. His deſcriptions are taken chiefly from colour, ſize, mode of growing, com⯑pariſon of the leaves and roots, with other plants well known, and therefore left unde⯑ſcribed. In general they are ſhort, and fre⯑quently inſufficient to determine the ſpecies. Hence aroſe the endleſs, and irreconcileable contentions, among the commentators. In this manner he has deſcribed near 700 plants; to which he ſubjoins the virtues and uſes. To DIOSCORIDES all poſterity have appealed as deciſive on the ſubject.

PLINY, who treats of plants from the twelfth to the twenty-ſeventh book, inclu⯑ſive, of his "Hiſtory," has drawn his re⯑ſources principally from Grecian authors. He is the hiſtorian of antient botany, and recites the names of ſeveral hundreds, not [317] mentioned by foregoing writers; but many of theſe are unknown. There is no ſcien⯑tific order in the diſpoſition of his ſub⯑ject; and the great value of PLINY's work conſiſts in having preſerved to us the re⯑mains of antient knowledge on the ſubject; and in particular, the application of it to the arts of life, in thoſe remote times.

After the revival of learning in the fif⯑teenth century, the firſt cultivators of bo⯑tany ſtudied plants more in the writings of theſe fathers, than in the book of nature; and were ſolely anxious about extricating the plants of the Materia Medica; ſcarcely adverting to thoſe ſtriking diſcriminations in the general port, mein, or habit, the mode of growing, and other obvious rela⯑tions, which mark the great natural fami⯑lies in the vegetable kingdom: but were con⯑tent to arrange them, ſome, according to the alphabetical nomenclature, others, from the ſtructure of the root, the time of flowering, the places of growth, the ſuppoſed qualities, and uſes in medicine; or from other as un⯑ſtable diſtinctions. With them, as with the antients, there were nearly as many ge⯑nera [318] as ſpecies; and if they gave the ſame common appellation to two, or more plants, they were led to it by ſome rude, external reſemblance; ſuch as, ſize, form of the root, agreement in the colour of the flower; and, in the deſcription of the ſpecies, were fre⯑quently ſatisfied with comparing it to an⯑other plant well known to themſelves, and therefore left undeſcribed in their writings.

This mode of arrangement, though in a ſomewhat improved ſtate, is exemplified above, in the order obſerved by DODONAEUS; and is ſeen in our old Engliſh herbaliſts, GERARD and PARKINSON.

LOBEL, in his Adverſaria, 1570, ſeems to have been the firſt, who attempted to diſ⯑tribute plants into large families, or claſſes, from the general conſent of habit, or exter⯑nal form, and mode of growing. This he has done in an imperfect ſynoptical way; and ſeveral of his families contain natural orders, or claſſes, nearly entire; but fre⯑quently interrupted by great anomalies. His arrangement was not ſufficiently attended to at the time: it was then excellent, and was gradually improved, until we ſee it in [319] its laſt, and beſt form, as exhibited by Caſpar BAUHINE, in his Pinax, 1623; and eſpecially by John BAUHINE, in his Hiſto⯑ria Plantarum Univerſalis, 1650.

As natural characters aroſe from ſimila⯑rity in the general port, or habit of the plant, and from an obvious agreement in the diſpoſition of the ſtalk, leaves, ſtems, and from that of the flower, fruit, and ſeed; ſo, they at length forced themſelves to ob⯑ſervation. Thus, the general habit of all graſſes; the plants with a papilionaceous flower, ſuch as peaſe and vetches; the ſili⯑quoſe plants, ſuch as muſtard, creſſes, tur⯑neps, &c.; the verticillated, as mint, baum, hyſſop, germander, &c.; the umbellated tribe, parſley, carrots, hemlock, angelica; the cone-bearing trees; and ſeveral other tribes, were too ſtriking, not to be ſeen even by a ſuperficial obſerver. But, as theſe conſtitute only a part of the whole, ſo no characters were formed for thoſe plants, which the eye could not immediately refer to ſome of theſe claſſes. Still leſs had any generical agreement, ariſing from uniformity in the fructification, been detected. Had all the ſpecies of plants arranged themſelves under [320] natural claſſes, a natural method would eaſily have followed; but the intermediate links, notwithſtanding the efforts of the moſt ſkilful, are yet unknown. Hence aroſe the neceſſity of artificial ſyſtems, which are now become but too numerous. Some have imagined, that the more pure any artificial ſyſtem preſerves the natural claſſes, the greater is its excellence; but experience does not confirm this idea. Thoſe arrange⯑ments are found to lead more immediately to the plant ſought for, the claſſes and ſubdiviſions of which are ſimple, and drawn each uniformly from the ſame parts of the fructification.

Conrad GESNER, the LINNAEUS of the age in which he lived, is univerſally agreed to have been the firſt who ſuggeſted this true principle of claſſical diſtinction, and generical character, as is manifeſt from va⯑rious paſſages in the Epiſtles of that great man^*. He inſtances the agreement of the Staphiſagria, with the Conſolida; the Scor⯑zonera, with the Tragopogon; the Molucca, with the Lamium; the Dulcamara, with [321] the Solanum; the Calceolus, with the Orchi⯑des: and he expreſsly ſays, that the charac⯑ter ſhould be formed from the flower, and the ſeed, rather than from the leaves. This was in the year 1565. Other paſſages occur, by which it appears, he had the ſame ideas ſo early as 1559. But, perhaps, there is no proof of the importance he gave to theſe parts, more indubitable, than his having been the firſt who delineated them ſepa⯑rately, with the figures of his plants; of which numerous inſtances may be ſeen in the tables publiſhed by SCHMIEDEL.

But GESNER did not live to improve the hints he thus drew from nature; and, what is wonderful, they were neglected by thoſe great luminaries of the ſcience, CLUSIUS, and the BAUHINES. It was reſerved for CAESALPINUS, a man in whom was united an exquiſite knowledge of plants, with a truly philoſophical genius. He had been the diſciple of GHINUS, and was afterwards phyſician to Pope Clement VIII. He de⯑ſcribed, with exquiſite ſkill, the plants of his own country, and left an Herbarium of [322] 768 ſpecies. He extended GESNER's idea, and commenced the period of ſyſtematic arrangement. In his "Libri xvi de Plan⯑tis," publiſhed 1583, he has arranged up⯑wards of 800 plants into claſſes, founded, after the general diviſion of the trees from herbs, on characters drawn from the fruit particularly, from the number of the cap⯑ſules and cells; the number, ſhape, and diſ⯑poſition of the ſeeds; and from the ſituation of the corculum, radicle, or eye of the ſeed, which he raiſed to great eſtimation. The orders, or ſubdiviſions, are formed on ſtill more various relations.

Fabius COLUMNA improved this doctrine of claſſification, in 1616, by extending it to the formation of genera, which CAESALPI⯑NUS had not effected; all his ſpecies being ſeparately deſcribed. COLUMNA, indeed, did not exhibit a ſyſtem; but he ſhewed the way to complete it, by the union of ſpecies under one common name, from ſimilarity in the flower, and fruit; and he invented ſeveral of the terms, now in uſe, to deno⯑minate thoſe parts. This noble invention, [323] nevertheleſs, lay dormant for near a cen⯑tury; and the glory of reviving, and im⯑proving it, was reſerved for Britain.

RAY, and MORISON, both laboured in it at the ſame time; and with them muſt commence the aera of ſyſtematic botany in England. It was an object thought worth contending for, and each of theſe writers had their partizans, who reſpectively be⯑ſtowed the laurel, as they were led by their various motives, or attachments. I ſhall not enter into the merits of their claims, further than to obſerve, that both ſeem to have turned their attention to the ſubject, nearly about the ſame time, and that Mr. RAY had certainly priority in point of publication, if it may be allowed, that the tables which he drew up for Biſhop WIL⯑KINS's "Real or Univerſal Character," which was publiſhed in 1668, contain the outlines of a ſyſtem. And, certainly, theſe rudiments, though haſtily done, as Mr. RAY confeſſes, ſufficiently prove that he had be⯑ſtowed no ſmall attention on the ſubject. That foreign writers have more commonly attributed to MORISON the revival of me⯑thod, [324] may have ariſen from their being leſs acquainted with Biſhop WILKINS's work, which was extant only in the Engliſh tongue. Mr. RAY informs us, in the ſecond edition of his Catalogus Plantarum Angliae, that Dr. WILKINS meditated a tranſlation of his "Univerſal Character" into Latin, with figures, for the uſe of foreigners; and Mr. RAY himſelf performed it: but the death of this good prelate, in 1672, prevented the completion of the deſign. He adds, that his Method, in a more elaborate ſtate, had been delivered into the Biſhop's hands, for the above-mentioned work.

Dr. MORISON exhibited the outlines of his ſcheme in the "Hortus Bleſenſis," the year after the publication of the Biſhop's book, and exemplified it in his "Hiſtory of Plants," in 1680. Mr. RAY did not de⯑tail his till the year 1682, in the "Metho⯑dus," in which he freely acknowledges the aſſiſtance he received from CAESALPINUS, COLUMNA, JUNGIUS, and even from MO⯑RISON's work. On the contrary, Dr. MORISON aſſumes to himſelf the merit of having drawn all his reſources, in the fa⯑brication [325] of his ſyſtem, wholly from na⯑ture, and his own obſervations; preſerving every where the utmoſt ſilence, reſpecting any aſſiſtance derived from former writers. Aſſumptions, which could with difficulty be acceded to, and which drew upon him the cenſures of TOURNEFORT, and other maſters of the ſcience; who were well ac⯑quainted with the fountains of knowledge that were then open to him, and the aſſiſt⯑ances he muſt have drawn from GESNER, CAESALPINUS, and others.

At this diſtance of time, and under the preſent enlightened ſtate of ſcience, the ſyſ⯑tems of RAY, and of MORISON, muſt not be ſcrupulouſly examined. CAESALPINUS laid a foundation-ſtone, on which, if our Britiſh architects raiſed a Gothic ſtructure, their ſucceſſors have improved it to a ſtyle of greater ſymmetry, and elegance.

The introduction of ſyſtem was fortunate for ſcience, as it brought with it, by de⯑grees, the eſtabliſhment of generical cha⯑racters, on a like aſſemblage of eſſential parts in ſeveral ſpecies. As new plants [326] were daily diſcovered in the old continent, and were pouring in from the new, the nomenclature of botany was in danger of being again overwhelmed, with that chaos in which Caſpar BAUHINE found it, when he reduced it into ſome order, by his la⯑borious and incomparable Pinax.

Syſtem enabled botaniſts to refer new ſpe⯑cies to genera already formed, and reſtrained that licence before taken, of giving a new generical appellation to each new plant: for, although in the multitude of methods which followed this diſcovery, plants of the ſame genus, in one ſyſtem, were frequently referable to a different genus in another; yet, with this inconvenience annexed, they were more readily inveſtigated, than under the vague diſtinctions of the older writers.

The reſtoration of ſyſtem, was, in the words of LINNAEUS, the beginning of the golden age of botany; and the revival of it having taken place in England, preſently raiſed up ſeveral learned men among us, who gave new life and vigour to the whole ſci⯑ence. The names of SLOANE, PLUKE⯑NET, [327] SHERARD, and PETIVER, will ever remain illuſtrious in the annals of botanic knowledge.

It alſo turned the attention of the learned on the continent to the ſubject. Rival ſyſ⯑tems were ſoon conſtructed; ſome on the fruit, as the baſis of the claſſes, in confor⯑mity to the ſyſtems of CAESALPINUS, RAY, and MORISON; and others, on the flower. Thus, Chriſtopher KNAUT, in 1687, and HERMAN, in 1690, fixed on the fruit; whoſe ſyſtems were improved by BOER⯑HAAVE, in 1710.

RIVINUS, in 1690, choſe the flower alone; conſidering the number and regula⯑rity of the petals, as the baſe of his claſſical characters; and was followed by RUPPIUS in 1718, and LUDWIG in 1737. TOURNE⯑FORT, who elaborated his method beyond his predeceſſors, in 1694, choſe the figure of the corolla, as the principle of claſſifica⯑tion; and MAGNOL, in 1720, took the ca⯑lyx alone.

If it ſhould be enquired on this occaſion, in what the methods of CAESALPINUS, RAY, and MORISON, differ from the ar⯑rangements [328] uſed before their time, by DO⯑DONAEUS, LOBEL, and John BAUHINE, ſince thoſe alſo are eſtabliſhed on the habit, and in which many of the natural claſſes are tolerably well preſerved; it may be an⯑ſwered in a ſummary way, that habit, even in BAUHINE's order, the moſt perfect of them, is the prevailing principle, without regard to agreement in the parts of fructifi⯑cation, except in thoſe claſſes, where na⯑ture has joined both together: this is a difference much more eſſential than may at firſt be apprehended: and, what is ſtill leſs accurate than a regard to habit alone, ſome of their claſſes (if they are worthy of that appellation, no definitions of them being prefixed,) take their name merely from the mode of growing, as, Scandentes; from the ſtructure of the leaf, Nervifoliae; Rotundi⯑foliae; Craſſifoliae; place of growth, Aqua⯑ticae; and what is ſtill leſs eligible, the aſpect, and ſuppoſed agreement in the qua⯑lities, ſuch are, Malignae; Mollientes; Pa⯑pavera; under all of which, are promiſcu⯑ouſly collected, plants as diſſimilar as poſ⯑ſible, in the ſtructure of the flower and fruit.

SEX OF PLANTS.

TO the revival and eſtabliſhment of method, ſucceeded a diſcovery of the higheſt importance to botanical ſcience; I mean, what is, with great juſtice, called analogically, The doctrine of the ſexes of plants; or, the knowledge that, throughout the vegetable kingdom, the influence of the duſt of the antherae, upon the ſtigma, was neceſſary in order to produce fertile ſeed. By the eſtabliſhment of this fact, not only the phyſiology of vegetables was greatly advanced, but, in the end, practical botany equally improved; ſince, on this foundation has been built that ſyſtem of the great [330] Swede, which is now ſo univerſally followed. Of the riſe and progreſs of this inveſtigation, I proceed to give a conciſe account, before I purſue the ſketch of Britiſh authors.

A vague and indeciſive opinion concern⯑ing the ſexes of plants, prevailed among the antient philoſophers of Greece. We are in⯑formed by ARISTOTLE, that EMPEDO⯑CLES particularly taught, ‘"that the ſexes were united in plants."’ This opinion was a natural conſequence of the doctrine which this philoſopher, in common with ANAXAGORAS, DEMOCRITUS, and PLA⯑TO taught, ‘"that plants were ſentient and animated beings."’ This idea has met with ingenious advocates among the mo⯑derns, who have been induced to favour it, not only from the general analogy exiſting between animals and vegetables, and the difficulty of fixing the limits between them, but from the more ſtriking inſtances of ap⯑parent irritability, and obedience to the action of certain ſtimuli: ſuch are, the gene⯑ral affection plants have for light; the rota⯑tory motion of many towards the ſun; the faculty of others in cloſing the leaves [331] at night, called, not unaptly, the ſleep of plants; and the opening and ſhutting of many flowers, at ſtated times, with equal propriety denominated vigiliae florum; the riſing of the flower of aquatic plants out of the water, every morning during the ſtate of floreſcence, as inſtanced in the Nym⯑phaea, and ſtill more ſignally in the Valliſ⯑neria. To theſe may be added the more remarkable examples in the Mimoſa, and Oxalis ſenſitiva, in the Dionaea muſcipula, the Droſera and the Hedyſarum gyrans, and finally, in the exquiſite irritability of the ſtamina, and antherae, in various ſpecies. EMPEDOCLES, nevertherleſs, though he maintained the doctrine of the ſexes, does not attempt to confirm it by any facts, or reaſonings deduced from the knowledge of the uſes of the ſeparate parts in flowers, but from analogical deduction, founded merely on his general doctrine.

ARISTOTLE, or rather the author of the Books on Plants, which bear his name, com⯑bats the opinions of EMPEDOCLES, and his followers, reſpecting the ſentient and ani⯑mated principle in vegetables; yet it is evi⯑dent [332] he had himſelf no deciſive ideas, or ſpecific knowledge, drawn from nature, re⯑lating to the ſex of plants. He placed it, in ſome inſtances, in the different habit alone, or in other diſcriminations foreign to the conſideration of the flower; and, though he ſhews an inaccurate knowledge of the particular circumſtances of the palm, and the fig-tree, yet he denies, in another place, that either of them produce flowers.

This imperfect idea of the ſex of flowers, in the Date, and even in the Fig-tree, is of high antiquity; being recorded by HERO⯑DOTUS, THEOPHRASTUS, and PLINY. The neceſſity which the antient cultiva⯑tors of the Date-tree were under, of pro⯑moting the action of the male-flowers on the female, which operation held alſo in ſome meaſure in the Fig-tree, the Piſtachia, and the Maſtic, would almoſt neceſſarily ſuggeſt the application of this analogy with the animal kingdom. Nevertheleſs, although the fact was thus obtruded on their ſenſes, inatten⯑tive to the ſtructure of flowers, and igno⯑rant of the offices of the ſeveral parts, they remained unacquainted with the true ope⯑rations [333] of nature in this phaenomenon, though daily preſent to their obſervation.

The antient fathers of botany, and par⯑ticularly DIOSCORIDES, it is true, applied the diſtinction of male and female to many other plants; but it was entirely without regard to true analogy, or diſcrimination of functions in the flower. It was frequently applied to ſuch as carry all the parts of the flower within the ſame calyx, or on the ſame ſtalk; on account of ſtature; greater de⯑gree of fertility; or other marks uncon⯑nected with the fructification. In the diae⯑cious, or ſuch as have the ſtamina, and piſ⯑tils, on ſeparate plants of the ſame ſpecies, the real male plant was, in ſome caſes, de⯑nominated the female; of which the Mer⯑curialis may be mentioned as one inſtance, among ſeveral others.

Excluſive of a numerous ſet of plants, in which the ſtamina and piſtils are ſepa⯑rately placed, either on different parts of the ſame individual, or on different plants of the ſame ſpecies, conſtituting the Monae⯑cious and Dioecious claſſes of LINNAEUS, the [334] following genera, from other tribes, as reci⯑ted below^*, contain ſpecies to which DIOS⯑CORIDES has applied the diſtinction of male and female, from circumſtances having no analogy with thoſe of the Date-tree.

This doctrine of the ſexual analogy be⯑tween plants and animals, made but little progreſs with the literati in botany, upon the revival of ſcience; ſince the firſt of thoſe who mention it, is CAESALPINUS. This critical and learned author notices male and female plants in the Oxycedrus, [335] Taxus, Mercurialis, Urtica, and Cannabis; of which he ſays, the barren plants are males, and the fertile females; adding, that the latter, as is obſerved in the Date-tree, becomes more fruitful by being planted near the males; from thence receiving a genial effluvium, which excites a ſtronger fertility. From this obſervation, it may almoſt be inferred, that he had inſtituted experiments on ſome of theſe kinds; but we do not find that he carried the idea be⯑yond the above-mentioned ſpecies, to vege⯑tables in general.

Adam ZALUZIANSKY, a Poliſh writer in 1592, is ſaid, by ſome, to have diſtin⯑guiſhed the ſexes of plants. I have not ſeen his book; but, from what is found relating to his opinion in other writers, I conjecture that his obſervations, if not wholly taken from CAESALPINUS, do not exhibit any original matter on this ſubject. In fact, no further progreſs was made for near an hundred years after this time; and the ho⯑nour of the diſcovery, ‘"that this ſexual pro⯑ceſs was univerſal in the vegetable king⯑dom, and that the duſt of the antherae [336] was endowed with an impregnating power,"’ is due to England.

Whether the true idea of this proceſs originated with Sir Thomas MILLINGTON, to whom it has been aſcribed, may juſtly admit of a doubt; ſince Sir Thomas has left no written teſtimony on the ſubject; and Dr. GREW's mention of him does not im⯑ply that he actually received the idea from him. Add to this, that Mr. RAY, in the ſummary view of all GREW's diſcoveries, which he has prefixed to his "Hiſtory of Plants," does not once mention Sir Tho⯑mas MILLINGTON's name. Intereſted as we muſt ſuppoſe Mr. RAY to have been, in every diſcovery relating to vegetables, and candid as he was in his general con⯑duct to the learned, it is not likely that he ſhould have failed, in this inſtance, to ren⯑der praiſe where it was ſo juſtly due. When we further recollect, that Dr. GREW had been ſome years engaged in thoſe micro⯑ſcopical experiments, on the anatomy of plants, which have rendered his name eſti⯑mable with all poſterity, that whilſt he was thus employed in ſtudying ſo intimately [337] the organization of vegetables, and had ob⯑ſerved, that in whatſoever parts the flower might be deficient, the attire, (or ſtamina, and apices) is ever preſent, it is not ſtrange that the true idea of its uſe ſhould have been ſuggeſted to him.

Dr. GREW laid his opinion before the Royal Society, in a lecture on the anatomy of flowers, read Nov. 6, 1676; in which he maintained, ‘"That the primary and chief uſe (of the duſt of the apices) is ſuch as has reſpect to the plant itſelf, and ſo appears to be very great and ne⯑ceſſary: becauſe even thoſe plants which have no flower, or foliature, are yet ſome way or other attired, ſo that it ſeems to perform its ſervice to the ſeed as the fo⯑liature to the fruit. In diſcourſe hereof with our learned Savilian profeſſor, Sir Thomas MILLINGTON, he told me, that he conceived that the attire doth ſerve as the male for the generation of the ſeed. I immediately replied, that I was of the ſame opinion, gave him ſome rea⯑ſons for it, and anſwered ſome objections that might oppoſe them."’ He then ex⯑plains [338] himſelf farther, and advances, that this foecundating power was not effected by the actual admiſſion of the farina into the ſeed-veſſel, but by means ‘"of ſubtle and vivific effluvia."’

Mr. RAY admitted the opinion of Dr. GREW, but, at firſt, with all that caution which becomes a philoſopher; as appears in his "Hiſtoria Plantarum," vol. i. p. 18. Nos ut veriſimilem tantum admittimus. He aſſents to it with leſs reſerve in his "Synopſis Stir⯑pium Britannicarum," edit. 1. 1690, p. 28; and in the preface to his "Sylloge Stirpium Europaearum," publiſhed in 1694, we find him producing his reaſons for the truth of it, and yielding his full approbation to it.

In 1695, Rudolph Jacob CAMERARIUS, profeſſor of botany and phyſic at Tubingen, in his "Epiſtola de Sexu Plantarum," ap⯑pears among the early advocates for this analogy; and, being convinced by the argu⯑ments of GREW and RAY, ſeems to have been the firſt who gave ſtability to the whole by experiments. Theſe he made on Maize, the Mulberry, the Ricinus, and the Mercurialis; the three firſt of which he [339] deprived of the ſtaminiferous flowers, and the laſt he ſeparated far from the female, and found, in all, that the fruit did not ri⯑pen. CAMERARIUS, however, very fairly produces alſo, ſome objections againſt the doctrine, founded on experiments, which at this day have little weight, ſince they were made on plants of the Cryptogamous, or Di⯑oecious claſſes; in the laſt of which, it is now known, that ſometimes a flower or two of a different ſex, may be found intermixed with others.

In 1703, Mr. Samuel MORLAND, de⯑ſirous, as it ſhould ſeem, of extending the Lewenhoekian ſyſtem of generation into the vegetable kingdom, produced a paper before the Royal Society, in which he advances—that the farina is a congeries of ſeminal plants, one of which muſt be conveyed through the ſtyle into every ovum, or ſeed, before it can become prolific. Mr. MOR⯑LAND's hypotheſis tended to confirm the general doctrine by exciting curioſity on the ſubject, at a time when Lewenhoek's theory was popular; but was not admiſſible in itſelf, ſince few ſtyles are hollow, or, if [340] perceptibly tubular, not pervious enough to admit particles of the uſual magnitude of the farina.

After this time, ſeveral of the learned on the continent entered into reſearches on this ſubject. M. GEOFFROY, in 1711, in a paper read before the Royal Academy of Sci⯑ences, after having formed a theory by con⯑ciliating GREW's and MORLAND's into one, concludes by aſſerting—that the germ is never to be ſeen in the ſeed, till the fa⯑rina is ſhed; and that if the plant is de⯑prived of the ſtamina, before this duſt is fallen, the ſeed will either not ripen, or will not prove fertile.

It is matter of ſurprize, that the illuſ⯑trious TOURNEFORT ſhould wholly reject the doctrine of the ſexes of plants. So far even from acknowledging this function of the farina, that he held it to be excremen⯑titious. See Iſagoge in Rem Herbariam, p. 70.

Julius PONTEDERA, a ſtrenuous fol⯑lower of TOURNEFORT, a noble Italian of Piſa, illuſtrious for his knowledge of the an⯑tient languages, and antiquities of Italy, and not leſs celebrated for botanical knowledge [341] and literature, combats alſo the notion of this analogy, and uſes of the ſtamina, through the whole ſecond book of his "Anthologia." In the end he rejects the ſexual analogy, and conſiders it as entirely chimerical. But finding all flowers furniſhed with a ſtyle, or tube, he advances, that it ſerves to con⯑vey the air to the fruit, by which, an inteſ⯑tine and fertilizing motion is excited in the ſeed, or ovary.

In 1718, Monſ. VAILLANT publiſhed "Sermo de Structura Florum, horum Diffe⯑rentia, uſuque Partium;" which had been read the year before, at the opening of the Royal Garden. In this diſcourſe, he de⯑ſcribes the burſting of the antherae, in a ſtyle too florid for philoſophical narration. He relates ſeveral of his own diſcoveries on the nature of the farina, and the exploding power of the antherae, and concludes with aſſenting entirely to Dr. GREW's ſentiment, (though without naming him), that im⯑pregnation is performed by means of a ſubtle aura, and not by the tranſmiſſion of the duſt through the ſtyle, alledging againſt it thoſe [342] reaſons I have mentioned, in ſpeaking of MORLAND's opinion.

In England, about the ſame time, Dr. Patrick BLAIR, by his "Botanick Eſſays," contributed greatly to extend the know⯑ledge, and confirm the truth of this ſubject. BRADLEY, FAIRCHILD, MILLER, and others, aſſiſted in the ſame deſign; and, ſince that period, I believe it has met with few oppoſers. One of the moſt formidable was the late learned Dr. Alſton, profeſſor of botany at Edinburgh, from whoſe laboured diſquiſition, the adverſaries to this opinion of the ſex of flowers, may furniſh them⯑ſelves with the moſt cogent arguments, that an intimate knowledge of the ſubject hath enabled a very diligent and learned writer to produce.

The more recent experiments made by the Abbe SPALANZANI, with a direct view to impugn this doctrine, do not appear to have been conducted with that degree of ſkill, and accuracy, which is ſufficient to outweigh the numerous train that may be thrown into the oppoſite ſcale. Even [343] ſome of the Abbe's own experiments ſeem rather to ſtrengthen the opinion he means to overthrow.

Having traced the hiſtory of this impor⯑tant proceſs in the economy of vegetables, to the time of LINNAEUS, I judge it will be unneceſſary, to accompany the reader through a particular detail of authors below this period. In 1732, LINNAEUS founded his ſyſtem on this doctrine; and the addi⯑tional arguments, and experiments, produced by himſelf, his pupils, and followers, have eſtabliſhed the truth of it, to the compleat ſatisfaction of impartial enquirers. Thoſe, however, who wiſh to peruſe the moſt per⯑fect ſummary of all the arguments, and ex⯑periments, in favour of this analogy, are referred to the "Sponſalia Plantarum," writ⯑ten in the year 1746, and printed in the firſt volume of the "Amoenitates Academi⯑cae," and to the "Diſſertation on the Sexes of Plants," written by LINNAEUS in 1760, which obtained the premium of the Academy of Peterſburgh, and has lately been tranſlated into Engliſh by the ingenious and learned poſſeſſor of the Linnaean collec⯑tion. [344] To which may be added, the wri⯑tings of KOELRUTER, in the ſucceeding year, which have not a little tended to confirm the ſubject in queſtion.

It would be unjuſt to the memory of Dr. GREW, to conclude this hiſtory, without remarking, that the reſult of the lateſt, and beſt experiments, have confirmed his idea, ‘"that the farina itſelf is not carried to the rudiment of the ſeed,"’ but, that foecun⯑dation is effected by the effluvia. This will appear, by citing the ſummary view of the doctrine, as exhibited by LINNAEUS himſelf, in the Diſſertation above men⯑tioned.

‘"While plants are in flower, the pollen falls from the antherae, and is diſperſed abroad. At the ſame time that the pollen is ſcattered, the ſtigma is then in its higheſt vigour, and for a portion of the day at leaſt is moiſtened with a fine dew. The pollen eaſily finds acceſs to the ſtig⯑ma, where it not only adheres by means of the dew of the part, but the moiſture occaſions its burſting, by which means its contents are diſcharged. What iſſued [345] from it being mixed with the fluid of the ſtigma, is conveyed to the rudiments of the ſeed."’

I remark before I conclude, that, how juſt ſoever it may have been in a philoſo⯑phical view, to conſider the ſtamina and piſtils, as anſwering to the reſpective func⯑tions of ſex in the animal kingdom, it ſhould not have been forgotten, that in ani⯑mals, this proceſs is voluntary; but that in vegetables, notwithſtanding all that the ingenuity of the antients and moderns have urged in defence of the ſentient principle, we are not yet juſtified in referring this pro⯑ceſs to any other than what we are accuſ⯑tomed to call a mechanical cauſe.

The principle of this it will not be ex⯑pected that I ſhould explain. It may be conjectured, that after a perfect elaboration of the juices in the antherae and ſtigmata, ſome ſpecies of attraction takes place be⯑tween them, perhaps of the electrical kind, ſomewhat like this having been manifeſted in the flaſhings obſervable in ſome flowers in the evenings. The reader will eaſily perceive, that I refer to the appearance firſt [346] ſeen in the Indian Creſſes, (Tropaeolum ma⯑jus) by Elizabeth Chriſtina, the daughter of LINNAEUS, as related in the Swediſh Acts in 1762, and ſince confirmed in the Garden Marigold (Calendela Officinalis), the Orange, or bulbiſerous Lily (Lilium bulbiferum), and the African Marigold (Tagetes patula et erecta), by the obſervations of M. HAG⯑GREN. And, as in the univerſe at large, the phaenomena of electricity are ſenſibly manifeſted to us by particular modifications of the principle occaſionally excited, al⯑though unqueſtionably ever active, ſo, poſ⯑ſibly, the ſame principle may prevail through the whole vegetable creation in the proceſs above mentioned, though un⯑obſerved hitherto, except in theſe inſtances. Be this as it may, that general decorum, which is due to philoſophical ſubjects, ought to have reſtrained that reprehenſible language uſed by Vaillant, and ſome other writers on this ſubject, and even by LIN⯑NAEUS himſelf, which has juſtly diſguſted many readers, and prejudiced the inſtruction they meant to convey.

WILLISEL.

IT is not to the ſons of erudition alone, that botany is indebted for all its diſco⯑veries, and improvements. The love of plants has, not unfrequently, ſeized, with uncommon ardour, the minds of many, on whom the light of learning had not ſhed its influence; and ſpurred them on, in the purſuit of this knowledge, to attainments that have been highly beneficial to the ſci⯑ence. [348] From ſuch, let not the pride of learning withhold that praiſe which is ſo juſtly due. One of the moſt remarkable inſtances of this kind, is well known to thoſe who are converſant with the writings of MERRET, RAY, and MORISON; and I feel regret at not being able to commemo⯑rate the name of Thomas WILLISEL, with ſome of the circumſtances of his life; ſince I am uninformed of the time, and place, both of his birth, and of his death. This induſtrious man ſeems to have devoted much of his life to the inveſtigation of Eng⯑liſh plants; and, as he lived at a time when Britiſh botany was yet imperfect, he added largely to the ſtock of new diſcoveries. He was employed by Dr. MORISON, ſoon after his eſtabliſhment at Oxford, to collect rare Engliſh plants; and Dr. MERRET informs us, as hath been noticed, that he travelled five ſummers at his expence, into the dif⯑ferent parts of England, to make collections for his "Pinax;" which appears to have been greatly enriched with many of the moſt rare ſpecies, by the labours of WILLISEL. [349] I believe he was once ſent into Ireland by Dr. SHERARD. Mr. RAY was benefited by his reſearches; and, if I do not miſtake, he accompanied that celebrated naturaliſt in one of his tours. The emolument ariſing from theſe employments was probably a⯑mong the principal means of his ſubſiſt⯑ence.

His knowledge was not confined to the vegetable kingdom; ſince Mr. RAY in⯑forms us, that ‘"he was employed by the Royal Society in the ſearch of natural ra⯑rities, both animals, plants, and mine⯑rals; for which purpoſes he was the fit⯑teſt man in England, both for his ſkill and induſtry."’

In the letters of Mr. RAY, there occurs an obſervation made by WILLISEL, of the various trees on which he had found the Miſſeltoe growing. I enumerate them be⯑low^*.

PLOTT.

Dr. Robert PLOTT, eminent for being the firſt who ſketched out a plan for a na⯑tural hiſtory of England, by exemplifying it in that of Oxfordſhire and Staffordſhire, although not profeſſedly a writer in the botanic line, cannot be omitted in a work of this kind.

He was born at Borden, near Sitting⯑borne, in Kent, and educated at Wye, in the ſame county; entered a ſtudent in Magda⯑len Hall, in 1657; and, in 1671, took the degree of doctor of laws. He became fel⯑low of the Royal Society, and was made one of the ſecretaries in 1682. In the ſame year he was conſtituted the firſt keeper of the Aſhmolean Muſeum, and profeſſor of chymiſ⯑try: all which places he kept till 1690; having alſo, in 1687, been appointed Mow⯑bray herald extraordinary, and regiſter to the earl marſhal, or court of honour, then newly revived, after having lain dormant from the year 1641. He died April 30, 1696. There is a whole length portrait of [351] him, the laſt of the right hand group, in the Oxſord Almanack for the year 1749.

Dr. PLOTT was a man of various erudi⯑tion, but is at this time beſt known for his natural hiſtories of Oxfordſhire, and of Staf⯑fordſhire. The firſt of theſe was publiſhed in 1677, in folio; and again in 1705, with the author's corrections and additions, by his ſon-in-law, Mr. Burman, vicar of New⯑ington, in Kent. The natural hiſtory of Staffordſhire, in 1679, in folio, and re⯑printed in 1686. In each of theſe volumes, he records the rare plants of the county, deſcribes the dubious ones, and ſuch as he took ſor nondeſcripts, and figures ſeveral of them. To theſe works the Engliſh botaniſt owes the firſt knowledge of ſome Engliſh plants; and this circumſtance juſtly entitles him to a place in this work^*. He con⯑ducted the publication of the Philoſophical Tranſactions during part of his ſecretary⯑ſhip to the Society, and wrote the follow⯑ing papers:

[352] A Paper on the Formation of Salt and Sand from Brine of the Pits in Stafford⯑ſhire. Printed in N^o 145.

On Perpetual Lamps, in imitation of the ſepulchral lamps of the antients. N^o 166.

On the Incombuſtible Cloth made of the Aſbeſtos. Ib.

A Hiſtory and Regiſter of the Weather at Oxford during the year 1684. N^o 169.

On the Black Lead of Cumberland. N^o 240.

On the beſt Time for felling Timber, which, with the antients, he adviſes to be performed in the Autumn.

On an Iriſh Giant, nineteen years of age, and meaſuring ſeven feet ſix inches in height. N^o 240.

A Catalogue of Electrical Bodies. N^o 245.

NATURAL HISTORY OF COUNTIES.

I have before obſerved, that Dr. PLOTT was the firſt author of a ſeparate volume on Provincial Natural Hiſtory; in which, it is but juſtice to add, that, with due allowance for the time when he wrote, he has not [353] been excelled by any ſubſequent writer. It were to be wiſhed, that more examples of the like kind might be adduced; but there are few exactly of the ſame ſcope. After Biſhop GIBSON, in his edition of CAM⯑DEN, printed in 1695, had inſerted the provincial liſts of plants drawn up by Mr. RAY, ſeveral writers of county hiſtories have, either from their own knowledge of the ſubject, or by the aid of friends, inſerted catalogues of the more rare plants in their reſpective works. As theſe form, in an eſpecial manner, a part of Engliſh botany, it is incumbent upon me to enumerate them.

The firſt after CAMDEN, is "The Na⯑tural Hiſtory of Lancaſhire, Cheſhire, and the Peak in Derbyſhire." Oxford, 1700. fol. By Charles LEIGH, M.D. The au⯑thor takes into his catalogue the maritime plants, with the others, and briefly recites the virtues, and the medicinal claſſes, to which the ſubjects belong. He ſubjoins his conjectures on the food of vegetables, and conteſts the opinion of Dr. WOOD⯑WARD, [354] that plants are nouriſhed by the earthy principle alone.

"An Eſſay towards a Natural Hiſtory of Weſtmorland and Cumberland, wherein an account is given of their ſeveral mi⯑neral and ſurface productions." By Tho⯑mas ROBINSON, rector of Ouſby, in Cum⯑berland. 1709. 8^o. The ſcope of this vo⯑lume principally takes in the foſſils of theſe northern counties. The author has been mentioned before, as a correſpondent of Mr. RAY. He here enumerates profeſ⯑ſedly the plants not mentioned in the Sy⯑nopſis of that author, amounting to about twenty; of which, however, ſome were only varieties.

"The Natural Hiſtory of Northampton⯑ſhire, with ſome account of the Antiqui⯑ties." By John MORETON, A.M. F.R.S. rector of Oxendon, in the ſame county. Lond. 1712. fol. This is a work of me⯑rit. In the liſt of plants, ſeveral occur ad⯑ditional to thoſe noticed by RAY; even ſome of the moſſes are not forgotten. The author treats largely on figured foſſils, of [355] which his book contains many elegant plates.

Of "the Natural Hiſtory and Antiqui⯑ties of Surrey, begun in the year 1673, by John AUBREY, Eſq. F.R.S.; pub⯑liſhed by Dr. RAWLINSON, in 5 vol. 8^o. Lond. 1719;" I can only recite the title.

In the "Natural Hiſtory of Cornwall," by William BORLACE, A.M. F.R.S. Ox⯑ford, 1758, we meet with a very brief liſt, containing about thirty-eight land plants, and twenty fuci, with ſome ſcattered remarks on the qualities and uſes. Among the rare plants are the Verticillate Knotgraſs, the Roman Nettle, the Gunhilly Heath, and the Corniſh Pennywort; of which laſt there is a very indifferent figure in tab. 29. f. 6. Under the article Sun-dew, (Droſera) there is a curious and intereſting obſervation made by Dr. BORLACE, in which he aſſerts, that the well-known pernicious quality of that vegetable, in producing the rot among ſheep, where it abounds, does not ariſe from any cauſtic power in the vegetable, but from an inſect, which lays its eggs, and feeds on the [356] plant. From his account, this inſect ap⯑pears to be the Dropſy Worm of Dr. TY⯑SON, or the Hydra Hydatula of LIN⯑NAEUS.

"The Natural Hiſtory and Antiquities of Northumberland, and of the North Bi⯑ſhopric of Durham, lying between the Tyne and Tweed." By John WALLIS, M.A. 2 vol. 4^o. Lond. 1769. The eighth chapter of the firſt volume treats on the vegetable productions of this tract, with the various medicinal and oeconomi⯑cal uſes.

In the "Hiſtory and Antiquities of the Counties of Weſtmorland and Cumber⯑land," by Joſeph NICHOLSON, Eſq. and Richard BURN, LL.D. 2 vol. 4^o. 1777, the reader will meet with ſome obſervations on the natural hiſtory interſperſed; but the botaniſt will find but little intereſting in his way.

From CAMDEN, from theſe hiſtories, and other reſources, Profeſſor MARTYN has compiled an abridged liſt of all the rare plants, digeſted in the order of the coun⯑ties, which is intended for the uſe of the [357] travelling botaniſt See the "Plantae Can⯑tabrigienſes." Lond. 1763; from p. 44-144.

WHELER.

As I do not ſtrictly confine myſelf to ſuch writers, as have diſtinguiſhed them⯑ſelves by their diſcoveries in the indigenous botany of Britain, alone, I cannot therefore omit to mention ſo eminent a man as Sir George WHELER. He was the ſon of Col. WHELER, of Charing, in Kent; and was born in 1650, at Breda, his parents being there in exile with the royal family. At the age of ſeventeen, he became a com⯑moner of Lincoln College, Oxford; and, be⯑fore he took any degree, went on his tra⯑vels. He ſpent near two years in France and Italy; and, in 1675, travelled into Greece and Aſia Minor; from whence he returned in November 1676. He was knighted before he took his maſter of arts degree, which was conferred upon him in 1683, in conſideration of his learning, and in return for a preſent of antiquities col⯑lected in his travels. He afterwards took [358] ſome valuable preferments in the church; was created doctor of divinity in 1702; and died Feb. 18, 1724.

In 1682, was publiſhed, "A Journey into Greece, by George WHELER, Eſq. in company of Dr. SPON, of Lyons; in ſix books; with four tables of coins, and many other ſculptures." Fol. pp. 483.

Theſe gentlemen travelled with PAUSA⯑NIAS in their hands, by whoſe means they corrected, and explained, ſeveral of the an⯑tiquities and traditions of Greece. The pri⯑mary objects of theſe learned travellers were, to copy the inſcriptions, and deſcribe the antiquities and coins of Greece and Aſia Mi⯑nor, and particularly of Athens, where they ſojourned a month. Theſe travels are highly valued for their authenticity, and are replete with ſound and inſtructive erudition to the medalliſt and antiquary.

Mr. WHELER appears, on all occaſions, to have been attentive to the natural hiſtory of Greece, and particularly to the plants, of which he enumerates ſeveral hundreds in this volume, and giv [...] the engravings of ſome. Theſe catalogues ſufficiently evince [359] his knowledge of the botany of his time. He brought from the Eaſt ſeveral which had not been cultivated in Britain before. Among theſe, the Hypericum olympicum (St. John's Wort of Olympus) is a well-known plant, introduced by this learned traveller. RAY, MORISON, and PLUKENET, all ac⯑knowledge their obligations for curious plants received from him.

After Sir George WHELER entered into the church, he publiſhed "An Account of the Churches and Places of Aſſembly of the Primitive Chriſtians; from the Churches of Tyre, Jeruſalem, and Con⯑ſtantinople, deſcribed by Euſebius, and ocular Obſervations of ſeveral very an⯑tient Edifices yet extant in thoſe Parts: with a ſeaſonable Application." Lond. 1689.

The Rev. Granville WHELER, of Otter⯑den Place, Kent, and rector of Leak, in Not⯑tinghamſhire, who died in 1770, was the third ſon of Sir George WHELER, and be⯑came his heir. He diſtinguiſhed himſelf as a gentleman of ſcience, and a polite ſcholar. He was the friend and patron of Mr. Stephen [360] GRAY; who, jointly with him, contributed to revive the ſtudy of electricity in England. Let me be allowed to add, that I wiſh to mention the name of this gentleman with gratitude, from the recollection of that en⯑couragement which I perſonally received from him in my purſuits of natural hiſtory, at a very early period of life; and which was of ſuch a nature, as ſeldom fails to ani⯑mate the minds of the young, to exertion and improvement.