HUNTIA A Journal of Botanical History

Volume 11 Number 2 2002

Hunt Institute for Botanical Documentation Carnegie Mellon University

Pittsburgh Huntia publishes articles on all aspects of the history of botany and is published irregularly in one or more numbers per volume of approximately 200 pages by the Hunt Institute for Botanical Documentation, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213-3890.

Editor Scarlett T. Townsend Book Reviews and Announcements Editor Charlotte A. Tancin Associate Editors Gavin D. R. Bridson T. D. Jacobsen Angela L. Todd Frederick H. Utech James J. White Designer Lugene B. Bruno

External contributions to Huntia are welcome. Please request our “Guidelines for Contributors” before submitting manuscripts for consideration. Editorial correspondence should be directed to the Editor. Books for announcement or review should be sent to the Book Reviews and Announcements Editor.

We have eliminated page charges. Hunt Institute Associates receive Huntia as a benefit of membership; please contact the Institute for more information.

Subscription rate is $60.00 per volume. Orders for subscriptions and back issues should be sent to the Institute.

Printed and bound by Allen Press, Inc., Lawrence, Kansas.

Copyright © 2002 by the Hunt Institute for Botanical Documentation All Rights Reserved

ISSN 0073-4071 Huntia 11(2) 2002 Sebastian Vaillant’s 1717 lecture on the structure and function of flowers

Paul Bernasconi and Lincoln Taiz, transl.

Abstract The impact of the 18th-century French botanist 1993, p. 28). Among those seated in the audience Sebastian Vaillant on plant systematics in general, and were about 200 medical students from the on Linnaeus in particular, has been underappreciated university. The opportunity to give the opening by students of the history of botany because his most remarkable piece of writing, a lecture given at the Royal lecture had arisen when the regular professor Garden in 1717, has never been translated into English. for the course, Antoine de Jussieu (1686–1758) The topic of the lecture was the sexual function of (Fig. 1), who was also director of the Royal flowers and the importance of the floral organs in plant Garden and Vaillant’s boss, had asked Vaillant, identification. Because of its suggestive and flamboyant style, the lecture brought Vaillant considerable notoriety who was seventeen years his senior and whose and helped gain acceptance for the sexual theory of plant primary job was to maintain the herbarium and reproduction. In this translation, we try to capture some serve as “Assistant Demonstrator,” to lecture in of Vaillant’s flair for colorful language that was to make his place while he traveled in Spain. To the an indelible impression on the young Linnaeus and exert such a strong influence on the sexual system of largely self-taught Vaillant, the son of a poor classification that he eventually devised. farmer and former army surgeon (Stafleu and Cowan 1986) who lacked de Jussieu’s academic credentials and family connections, it was a Introduction splendid opportunity, and he intended to make On the morning of 10 June 1717, Sebastian the most of it (Westfall [ca.1994]). Vaillant (1669–1722) strode into the large Despite Vaillant’s lack of university training, auditorium at the Royal Garden of Paris at he was well qualified to deliver the address, 6:00 a.m. confident that his lecture opening having studied for many years under the great the annual course on botany would be a zinger. Tournefort (Westfall [ca.1994]). Joseph Pitton The occasion coincided with the opening of the de Tournefort (1656–1708) (Fig. 2) had been a Royal Garden at a new location on the banks of professor of botany at the Royal Garden from the Seine, and the large hall was filled with about 1688 until his untimely death in 1708 when 600 people from all ranks of society (Schiebinger he was accidentally crushed against a wall by a passing carriage. In fact, Vaillant had been next in line to be appointed professor at the Royal Syngenta Biotechnology, Inc. P.O.B. 12257, Garden, but he graciously deferred to a close 3054 Cornwallis Rd., Research Triangle Park, friend, Antoine-Tristan Dainty D’Isnard (1663– NC 27709-2257 U.S.A. [PB] 1743). Due to illness, D’Isnard relinquished Department of Molecular, Cellular, and the post in 1709 after only a single year. This Developmental Biology, Sinsheimer Laboratories, time Vaillant was bypassed for the job, and the University of California, Santa Cruz, CA 95064 ambitious young de Jussieu took over as professor U.S.A. Email: [email protected] [LT] when he was only 24 years old (Tjaden 1976). 97 98 Huntia 11(2) 2002

through Tournefort’s generous support that he had originally obtained his position at the Royal Garden. As it turned out, Vaillant died before completing this work, which was published posthumously by his good friend and mentor, Herman Boerhaave (1668–1738), Chair of Medicine and Botany, University of Leiden. For his lecture topic that morning, Vaillant had chosen a subject he knew would be well received by the adolescent male students sitting in the audience: the sexual function of flowers. By 1717, the idea that plants reproduced sexually and that flowers contained the sexual organs of plants, although still being debated, was no longer new. The British physician Nehemiah Grew (1641–1712) had been the first to publicly suggest the notion in 1684, and the noted botanist John Ray (1627–1705) had immediately embraced it. The discovery of hermaphrodism in snails by J. J. Harder (1656–1711) in 1682 had allowed Grew to make the case for hermaphrodism in flowers by analogy. Ray supported Grew’s sexual hypothesis in his Historia Plantarum (1686) by Figure 1. Antoine de Jussieu, top portion of the engraving citing numerous examples of dioecious plants, by W. Evans after a painting by Thévenin. Plate for R. J. Thornton’s New Illustration of the Sexual System of Carolus such as date palms and spinach, in which the von Linnaeus …, 1807, pt. 2, [pl. 2]. Courtesy of Hunt male and female flowers reside on different Institute for Botanical Documentation. plants. Then, in 1694, the German physician Tournefort’s major contribution to botany Rudolph Camerarius (1665–1721) provided had been the concept of genus. In his Institutiones the first clear experimental evidence in support Rei Herbarai (1700) he had defined 22 classes of of the sexual theory. Working with dioecious flowering plants based primarily on the structure and monoecious (i.e., plants with male and of the corolla and 698 genera using the fruit as female flowers on the same individual) species the main taxonomic criterion. Other parts of exclusively, he showed that when the female the flower and vegetative body were given much flowers were isolated from the “dust” of their less weight in Tournefort’s classification scheme. male counterparts, they either failed to develop At the time of his opening lecture at the Royal seeds or produced infertile seeds. His results Garden, Vaillant was preparing his own magnum were published in the form of a letter to a opus, the Botanicon Parisiense, in which he planned colleague, titled De Sexu Plantarum Epistola, by to introduce a new system of plant classification, the Tübingen Academy. Unfortunately, news a forerunner of the Linnaean sexual system, of Camerarius’s experimental demonstration that was strongly at odds with those of his great of plant sexuality was slow to diffuse to the master and benefactor. His acerbic critique of outside world because of the journal’s very his former mentor’s classification system placed limited circulation. By the early 1700s, however, Vaillant in an awkward position, since it was the sexual theory was accepted widely by the Bernasconi & Taiz: Sebastian Vaillant’s 1717 lecture 99 best-informed botanists of the time, even those who were unaware of Camerarius’s work, with the exception of a few notable holdouts. To his dying day, Tournefort rejected the sexual theory of flowers and considered pollen to be merely a waste product, probably in deference to the opinion of his own mentor, the renowned Marcello Malpighi (1628–1694).1 To the general population, unaware of the recent developments in botany, the idea of sexuality in plants would have been a shocking and somewhat disturbing revelation. As pointed out by Rousseau (1970), society in early-18th- century France was quite puritanical and marked by an emphasis on good manners and refinement among the higher social classes. Publicly referring to sexual organs by name, and expounding on their functions, was simply not done in polite company. Applying sexuality to plants, unless it was couched in the driest possible terms, would have bordered on the indecent, all the more so since most flowers are hermaphroditic, a difficult concept for the contemporary layperson to grasp and accept. But Vaillant had entered the arena of polite society through the back door and seemed to relish his role as iconoclast. Besides, he Figure 2. Joseph Pitton de Tournefort, engraving by J. Hopwood. Plate for R. J. Thornton’s New Illustration of the knew that the students in the audience, chafing Sexual System of Carolus von Linnaeus …, 1807. Courtesy of at the strictures imposed by their elders, would Hunt Institute for Botanical Documentation. respond enthusiastically to anything with radical content, especially concerning the taboo subject The pride of place given the sexual organs in of sex. What he did not know, however, was Linnaeus’ classification system was anticipated in that the student who was to get the most out of his university thesis, titled Praeludia Sponsaliorum his lecture was not even in the audience on that Plantarum, written in 1729. In this thesis Monday morning in Paris. He was living in the Linnaeus waxed poetic on the theme of plant isolated village of South Råshult in Sweden, an “nuptials” and did not shrink from using a term imaginative and romantically inclined ten-year- — genitalia — normally reserved for the sexual old boy named Carl von Linné (1707–1778) (Fig. organs of animals: 3), whose love of flowers had already earned him This sun affords such joy to all living things that the nickname, “little botanist.” words cannot express it; the black-cock and the Linnaeus generally is credited with developing wood-grouse can be seen to mate, the fish to play, why all animals feel the sexual urge. Love the “sexual system” of plant classification, in even seizes the very plants, as among them both which the stamens or male organs of the flower mares and feminae, even the hermaphrodites, hold were used to determine the class and the pistils or their nuptials, which is what I now intend to female organs were used to determine the order. discuss, and show from the genitalia of the plants 100 Huntia 11(2) 2002

pointed out by Julius von Sachs (1832–1897) (1906), Linnaeus’ immediate acceptance of the sexual theory was not based on the evidence (he appears not to have been familiar with Camerarius’ Epistola), but on the philosophical conviction that the universality of sex among living organisms was such a beautiful and elegant theory, it must be true. Besides being a brilliant observer of the natural world, Linnaeus also responded to nature emotionally and sensually. He was an avid admirer of the classic poets, especially Virgil and Ovid, and throughout his career he sprinkled his scientific writings with classical allusions: “With his playful imagination, Linnaeus was always ready to clothe the facts of natural history in gracious mythological robes” Figure 3. Carl von Linné, engraving by T. Woolnoth (Lindroth 1983). Indeed, it was Linnaeus’ strong after a wax model by C. F. Inlander, 1773. Plate for R. J. Thornton’s New Illustration of the Sexual System of Carolus literary tendencies that made him particularly von Linnaeus …, 1807. Courtesy of Hunt Institute for susceptible to Vaillant’s vivid metaphors, Botanical Documentation. especially Vaillant’s penchant for eroticizing themselves which are mares, which feminae and plant sex in highly charged poetic language. which hermaphrodites. Thus Vaillant may have been Linnaeus’ literary How did this very proper young man, as well as scientific mentor, emboldening the the son of a Lutheran minister, dare to write young Swede to apply his own brand of romantic so innocently and exuberantly about plant prose to plant reproduction — borrowing terms “nuptials” and “genitalia”? Linnaeus first and phrases to describe the flower, including the became acquainted with the sexual theory of famous “nuptials” metaphor, that Vaillant had flowers as a student in high school through his already introduced and made palatable in his physics instructor at the Gymnasium at Växiö, lecture 12 years earlier. Dr. Johan Rothman (1684–1763). Rothman had But had Linnaeus actually read Vaillant’s fostered Linnaeus’ botanical interests by tutoring original lecture before writing Praeludia? him privately on the classification system of In Praeludia, Linnaeus states that he did not Tournefort. He also provided Linnaeus with a even become acquainted with Vaillant’s ideas copy of his own synopsis of Vaillant’s Discours sur until 1729 through a commentary in Acta la Structure des Fleurs. Perhaps Rothman wished Eruditorum (Leipzig, 1719). We now know this to instruct Linnaeus in the sexual theory but to be incorrect — either a lapse of memory considered him too young to read Vaillant’s on Linnaeus’ part, or, less charitably, a ploy titillating treatment of it. to obscure the influence of Vaillant on his From the start, Linnaeus considered Vaillant’s own writing style. Exactly when Linnaeus use of sexual structures as taxonomic criteria read Vaillant’s original lecture is not known. to be far superior to Tournefort’s corolla-based However, as a university student, Linnaeus system of classification, and he later applied had devoured the botanical literature “with an it to his own sexual system.2 However, as almost superhuman enthusiasm” both at Lund, Bernasconi & Taiz: Sebastian Vaillant’s 1717 lecture 101

where he spent his first year, and at Uppsala. microscopist Claude-Joseph Geoffroy (1685– According to Gunnar Eriksson (1983, p. 65), 1752) (Fig. 4). Never one to shy away from Abstracts, commentaries, and shorter paragraphs, confrontation, Vaillant seized the opportunity together with tabular arrangements of plant of his inaugural lecture at the Royal Garden to classification systems then in use, fill several poke fun at Geoffroy for his lack of originality thick volumes of those of his papers which have and scientific errors.A s the younger son of the survived, and even so we must assume that a certain amount of evidence of his industry wealthiest apothecary in Paris, Geoffroy had has been lost over a period of more than two enjoyed the benefits of private instruction from centuries. The examination of this mass of his father, an extended botanical tour of the manuscripts … and the dating and marshalling south of France, and a university education at of the papers in relation to his later scientific output, are among the most pressing and the Académie des Sciences under Tournefort’s immediate tasks of Linnaean research. supervision. From the outset, Vaillant may have felt resentful that Geoffroy had not had Given Linnaeus’ voracious appetite for the to struggle to attain his position as Vaillant botanical literature during his student days, it had. Moreover, Geoffroy had been a chemist, seems reasonable to suppose that he would have and was somewhat uncomfortable in his role as sought out Vaillant’s original lecture at the very associate botanist (Sturdy 1995, p. 332). Upon first opportunity. Rothman had read the original being promoted to that position, he was asked in order to write his synopsis, and he could have to present a botanical lecture to the academy, told Linnaeus where to find it. Further sifting which he did on 11 November 1711. It was though Linnaeus’ notebooks from this period probably this lecture, titled “Observations on may establish when he first came into direct the Structure and Function of the Principle contact with Vaillant’s prose style. In any case, Parts of Flowers,” that most irritated Vaillant, we believe that the full extent of Linnaeus’ debt for in it Geoffroy presented the ideas of many to Vaillant, both scientifically and literarily, other botanists, including Grew and Samuel has not been sufficiently appreciated among Morland (1625–1695) as though they were his biologists because, until now, Vaillant’s 1717 own, and worse, appropriated whole passages lecture has not been available in English, and it from Camerarius’s De Sexu Plantarum Epistola is difficult to obtain in the original. Thus few without once citing the author, giving the people have had the opportunity to read it in its impression that Geoffroy had performed entirety and note the similarities to Linnaeus’ Camerarius’ experiments on maize and dog’s writings. mercury (Plantefol 1965; Prévost 1965). The Besides entertaining and enlightening his latter was a clear violation of academy etiquette audience about the sexual theory of plants, and no doubt would have seriously damaged his Vaillant had another agenda as well that morning career had it been brought to light. Although at the Royal Garden. Those of us who labor in no one raised the issue at the time, in 1715 the fields of academe are well acquainted with Geoffroy seized the opportunity to exchange his departmental conflicts: clashing personalities, post as associate botanist with that of associate angry words, bruised egos, hallway gossip, chemist and henceforth restricted his research complaints lodged to the chair, or failing and lectures to chemical subjects. that, to the dean. Vaillant seems to have Although Vaillant in his lecture tweaks taken a particular dislike of his colleague and Geoffroy for his liberal borrowing from the immediate predecessor as associate botanist at works of other scientists, Vaillant never actually the Royal Academy of Sciences, the chemist and accuses Geoffroy of plagiarizing Camerarius. 102 Huntia 11(2) 2002

Figure 4. Farina [pollen grains] of flowers as observed by the microscope, published by [Claude-Joseph] Geoffroy in the year 1711, engraving. Plate for R. J. Thornton’s New Illustration of the Sexual System of Carolus von Linnaeus …, 1807, pt. 1. Courtesy of Hunt Institute for Botanical Documentation. Bernasconi & Taiz: Sebastian Vaillant’s 1717 lecture 103

Had Vaillant been familiar with Camerarius’s in the audience, the numerous unflattering Epistola — and it seems likely that he would references scattered throughout the lecture got have been since Geoffroy apparently was well back to him, resulting in a mini-scandal that aware of it six years earlier — he hardly could probably enhanced Vaillant’s popularity among fail to recognize Camerarius’ experiments, the students even further. The matter was which Geoffroy had presented as his own. If finally taken up by the RoyalA cademy, and in indeed Vaillant knew about the plagiarism, it a letter to that esteemed body Vaillant publicly is likely that he could have ruined Geoffroy’s apologized for any offensive remarks: scientific reputation by bringing it to the At Leiden, in 1718, a discourse appeared on attention of the academy. We can infer either the structure of flowers, their differences and that Vaillant was unaware of the plagiarism, or the uses of their parts, recorded by the students if he was aware of it, he pulled his punches. If in botany and published without my consent. I generally reject anything that might offend the latter is correct, Vaillant might have regarded Academicians, whom I always have considered his characterization of Geoffroy as one who as my friends and highly deserving of the esteem “echoes” the views of others as restrained and and consideration that everyone has for their mild compared to what he could have said. In merit (Rousseau 1970). Geoffroy’s defense, by the early 1700s, ideas The explanation was somewhat disingenuous. about plant sexual reproduction were being On 25 January 1718, Vaillant had written a widely discussed by botanists, and Vaillant was letter to the British botanist, William Sherard as indebted to other botanists as was Geoffroy. (1659–1728), clearly encouraging him to move Vaillant never mentions Camerarius in his own forward with the publication of the lecture: lecture. Will my poor little Discours be printed soon, and Besides being critical of Geoffroy’s separately or with other works? Mr. Boerhaave appropriation of the ideas of others, Vaillant also has informed me that you had given it to him, regarded his preformationist notions about plant that he had read it with pleasure, and wished reproduction (Geoffroy was a spermist who to publish it in Latin as well as French, but saw some difficulty in doing so in the same elegant believed that the pollen transmitted the embryo and energetic language as mine. But I hold these physically into the egg) as absurd. Vaillant was fine words as pure compliments which irritate also a preformationist, but he was decidedly an more than they please (Tjaden 1976). ovist, believing that during fertilization, the Moreover, Boerhaave had consulted with pollen contributed only a “volatile spirit” or Vaillant and had even given him an opportunity “breath” to the material of the egg.3 to make corrections to the manuscript before it As Vaillant no doubt anticipated, his lecture was published (Ramsbottom 1963). Vaillant had did indeed cause a sensation. Much to the in fact made a number of corrections that were chagrin of Antoine de Jussieu, upon his incorporated into the final version of the lecture, return from Spain the students clamored for which was published in Leiden in 1718. We Vaillant to continue lecturing, which he was obtained the published version of the lecture on apparently allowed to do with de Jussieu’s microfilm from the British Library. The edition reluctant approval. Vaillant took some flak from which the microfilm was made was part of for his pointed criticisms of Tournefort and Sir Joseph Banks’ (1743–1820) personal library, Geoffroy. Tournefort, being deceased, could which is now in the British Library, and bears his hardly defend himself, and attacking his ideas stamp on the verso of the Latin title page. in public probably was considered in bad taste. Whether or not Geoffroy was actually present 104 Huntia 11(2) 2002

Finally, a few comments about the About the translation organization of the discourse. Vaillant wastes Our primary objective throughout has no time in getting to the point, stating at the been to try to capture the spirit and flavor outset that the flower is the most essential part of Vaillant’s prose without sacrificing meaning of the plant. Next, he devotes several pages or accuracy. Occasionally we have had to to the terminology and functions of the floral modify punctuation and sentence structure in organs. Most of the anthropomorphic sexual order to preserve the rhetorical impact for a imagery for which the lecture is famous occurs modern, English-speaking audience. Citations, in this portion of the discourse, including the plant names, and editorial notes that were use of vernacular terms in comparing the anthers present in the original as footnotes have been with the testicles of animals. His use of the term incorporated into the text of the translation “flower” for the corolla alone — following the within parentheses. Words appearing in brackets example of Tournefort — is unfortunate and have been added for clarity, typically to indicate leads to a considerable degree of confusion the modern term for the structure being throughout the text. Following his lively indicated. Two dictionaries were consulted treatment of plant reproduction, Vaillant slows throughout: Dictionnaire de l’Academie Française the tempo with somewhat tedious expositions (1694) and Antoine Furetière’s Dictionnaire of the calyx and the corolla, subjects sufficiently Universel (1727). dry and devoid of erotic content as to dull the Vaillant assumed that his audience would memory of the first part of the talk. This may recognize all of the various people referred to have been a ploy, a prudent strategy on the in his lecture, even those he does not identify part of Vaillant to minimize the reaction to by name. Some of these references are relatively the more sensational material that preceded straightforward, such as Tournefort and it, and ensure polite applause at the end of the Geoffroy, while others are more difficult to lecture. Next he gives a preliminary outline of determine. We have done our best to associate his general scheme of plant classification, based names with all the individuals referred to, but largely on the numbers and positions of stamens some of the identifications are speculative. and petals. The French text of the lecture appears after The last two paragraphs of the discourse the reference section of the translation. The text represent a return to the ebullient and combative retains the even page numbers of the original. spirit of the introduction. Vaillant argues for a The odd page numbers were used for the Latin more natural system of plant classification based text of the lecture, which is not reproduced on the reproductive structures of the flower. He here. The text is a type facsimile from a photo also pokes fun at the followers of Tournefort as facsimile of the microfilm. they attempt to identify plants without proper understanding of the significance of floral structure. Doubtless the students in the audience would have taken particular delight in this final coup de grâce to the Old Order of plant systematics. No wonder the “little botanist” in Sweden was so enthralled. Bernasconi & Taiz: Sebastian Vaillant’s 1717 lecture 105

l e c t u r e on the structure of the f l o w e r s, their differences and the use of their parts Given for the Opening of the Royal Garden of Paris, the Tenth Day of the Month of June 1717 and the definition of Three New Types of p l a n t s, araliastrum, sherardia, and boerhaavia. With the Description of Two New Plants, Belonging to the Latter Type,4 By sebastian vaillant Demonstrator of Plants of the Royal Garden in Paris Figure 5. Sebastian Vaillant, engraving by A. Tardieu after a portrait by J. Houbraken. Courtesy of Hunt Institute for Recorded by the Students in Botany Botanical Documentation.

Gentlemen, Flowers, in the strictest sense, should be Since among all the parts that characterize regarded as the organs that make up the different plants the ones we call flowers are, without sexes of plants, since one sometimes finds question, the most essential, it seems appropriate these organs naked, as in the Typhe or Masse to discuss them with you at the outset, even more d’eau (Typha palustris), the Limnopeuce Cordi so because botanists in general have provided us (Histor.1505), the Potamogeito affinis Graminifolia with rather confused ideas about them. aquatica, Raii (Hist.I 1905), and in some species Perhaps the language I am going to use for of Ash, etc. The corolla or petals (Petala), which this purpose will seem a little novel for botany, immediately surround these organs in the plants but since it will be filled with terminology where they are present, are designed to cover that is perfectly proper for the use of the parts and to protect them. But since these corollas are that I intend to expose, I believe that it will be the most beautiful and conspicuous part of the more comprehensible than the old fashioned complex structure that we call flower, and since terminology, which — being crammed with imagination, love and admiration are limited incorrect and ambiguous terms better suited in most of the human race and stop precisely for confusing the subject than for shedding at this corolla, humanity pays no attention to light on it — leads into error those whose the remaining parts, ignoring their names and imaginations are still obscured, and who have uses. For convenience, I will call these corollas a poor understanding of the true functions of “flowers” regardless of their structure, their most of these structures. colors, or whether they surround the organs of 106 Huntia 11(2) 2002 both sexes, or contain only one or the other, or only female organs and others that surround some parts that belong to one or the other, as both sexes, the tension or swelling of the male long as the shape of the petals is not identical to organs occurs so rapidly that the lips of the bud, the shape of the leaves, assuming that leaves are giving way to such impetuous energy, open present on the plant.6 with astonishing speed. In that moment, these Based on this principle, I call the organs for enthusiastic organs, which seem to think only reproduction that are devoid of petals naked about satisfying their violent desires, abruptly flowers, false flowers, or flowerless flowers, and discharge in all directions, creating a tornado those that are covered by them true flowers.7 of dust which expands, carrying fecundity One can see at the very outset that I everywhere; and by a strange catastrophe they completely ignore the staminate flowers or those now find themselves so exhausted that at the captious flowers without flowers — damned race very moment of giving life they bring upon — which seem to have been created or invented themselves a sudden death. to challenge the greatest experts and to drive Nor does the scene end there. As soon as this younger botanists to despair. Once rid of these sport has ended, the lips of the flower approach nuisances, the latter find themselves proudly each other with the same speed as they came able to enter the vast Kingdom of Flora, and to apart, returning the bud to its original shape. decide as Masters on all matters concerning the One would never suspect that the flower had parts of flowers. suffered any violence unless one had witnessed If that author who has contributed the most it, or unless one noticed the frail corpses of to Flowerism8 had followed my example, he those valiant champions, which remain for wouldn’t have argued on several occasions that some time displayed on the tip, where, like so it is very difficult to determine what should be many weathervanes, they serve as toys for the called leaf (or if one wants to avoid ambiguity Zephyrs. — petal) and what should be called calyx. He All these mechanisms can be observed easily would less often have confused the latter with in the Parietaire,11 at the shepherd’s hour,12 that the former, or, more often, the former with is to say the morning, the time at which the the latter. different sexes of plants ordinarily engage in From my definition of the true flower [i.e., their frolic. And if the flowers are unwilling to reproductive organs surrounded by a corolla], perform while being observed, one can force one can easily understand that it should be in them to by gently prodding them with the tip full bloom, because, when still a bud, the corolla of a needle; for as long as the flower has reached, not only completely surrounds the reproductive as we say, a competent age, it is sufficient that we organs, but also conceals them so perfectly that pull the lips apart slightly, the hampes or filaments one can consider the bud as a nuptial bed,9 since of the stamens, initially bent or arched, become it is usually only after they [the reproductive upright in a violent effort, immediately enabling organs] have consummated their marriage one to discover what happens in all its particulars that they are permitted to show themselves; in this type of amorous exercise. or if the bud happens to open slightly before This precipitousness and vigor are a far they are through, it opens completely only cry from the behavior of the stamens of the after they have left each other. The opposite flowers that bear both sexes. The vast majority happens to the flowers that have only one sex, of these act almost imperceptibly, but one has and the reason for that is obvious.10 But if on to assume that the more slowly they move, the the same plant one finds flowers surrounding longer the duration of their innocent pleasures. Bernasconi & Taiz: Sebastian Vaillant’s 1717 lecture 107

Furthermore, on some plants, the subtle flower its flower [corolla] and the real flower [corolla] will give obvious signs of life, even if only barely for its calyx and why he did not recognize what touched. Such, for example, are the stamens of he called “pyramidal tube” in the Malvacea; or the “Figuier d’Inde” (Opuntia), the ones from “fringed tube” in the Azedarach or “sheath” Helianthemum, etc. in the Rapuntium, in the Legumes, in the The organs that constitute the different sexes plants with florets [tubular corollas of florets of of plants are of two principal kinds: Stamens Compositae], in those with half-florets [ligulate and Ovaries. corollas of florets in Compositae], and in the The stamens, which I call male organs, and ray flowers [Compositae]; he did not recognize, which the famous author of the Institutiones as I was saying, that what he sometimes called Rei Herbarai calls the vilest and most abject “tube” and sometimes “sheath” is nothing else in plants,13 are actually the noblest, since they but these tails [filaments] perfectly joined and correspond to those in animals that serve for the intimately united: an accident that they have multiplication of the species. These organs, I in common with the petals of some flowers, say, are composed of a head and a tail, or, if one which, because they have a fleshy and succulent wants to stick with the usual terms, of summits texture or are too compressed against each other [anthers] and filaments. in the calyx, stick together so well as to form These heads [anthers], which one could monopetalous flowers [corollas] rather than plausibly call testicles — not only because they polypetalous flowers [corollas]. often have the same shape but also because The region in which these male organs have they perform the same function, are in all their origin is not always the same in different the complete plants composed of a double flowers. Ordinarily, it is at the base of the casing or pair of membranous capsules, which embryo of the fruit16 as long as it is contained essentially consist of two compartments full of within the flower [corolla], be it that the flower dust particles, which, for each given species of [corolla] has several petals or only one, as long plant, have a well-defined shape, as has been as the latter has slits that go all the way to its observed by Grew, Malpighi, Tournefort, and, center. Sometimes also, these organs originate after them, the author14 of the “Observations on from the waist17 of the embryo [carpel], as in the structure and use of the principal parts of the Nenufar-blanc (Nymphaea alba major). If the the flowers” (Memoires de l’Ac. R. des Sc. ann. flower [corolla] is above the embryo [ovary], [Mém. Acad. Roy. Sci. (Paris)] 1711 p. 210). whether it be with a calyx or polypetalous, the The tails or filaments, which serve to attach same organs originate either from the head of the and support the testicles, and which are, strictly embryo [ovary] or from the claw18 of the petals speaking, just the sheaths of their spermatic or from the empty spaces left between them or, ducts,15 are either simple, as in the Graminae, finally, also from the internal surface of the part Cyperacea, Crucifers, Umbellifers, and others, of the calyx that crowns the embryo. or branched, as in Ricin, Laurel, etc. They are But when the flower is composed of a single discrete and separated from each other in the piece with shallow slits, whether containing the flowers of the above mentioned plants, but, in embryo [ovary] or supported by the embryo others such as in most Malvacea, Cucurbitacea, [ovary], these organs almost always are born and Legumes, etc., one finds them so intimately from the internal walls of the flower [corolla], welded together that they form a single body. and I do not know of any exception to this rule, This fact explains why M. Tournefort mistook except for the Cabaret (Asarum) where they form the stamen of the “Houx-frelon” (Rufeus) for a necklace under the stigma19 of the style20 and 108 Huntia 11(2) 2002 in the Aristoloche, or above the ovaries in the of where they are placed. Clear proof that the European Pied de veau (Arum), but the flowers flower [corolla] is uniquely constructed for the [corollas] of these two last types are entire and preservation of the sexual organs, rather than without lobes. Regarding the flowers [corollas] for the preparation of the sap, which serves as that are made to contain only the male organs, the primary nourishment of the embryonic one can readily conceive that these organs can fruit, which obtains its nourishment only from only be attached at the concavity of the flowers its support or pedicel, which also supports the [corollas]. whole mass of the flower.24 Since the tails [filaments] of the testicles Returning to the styles — which, before [anthers] are of the same nature as the petals, it and since Malpighi, no one has sufficiently often occurs that in some species of flowers of the distinguished from the body of the ovary, and polypetalous type, they disguise themselves as which from time to time have been called petals so as to form those pleasant monsters that other vague names, such as tufts in the Saffron one cultivates with great care under the name of flower (Crocus), crests in the Oseille (Acetofa), “double flowers,” in which one finds few if any leaves in the Flambe (Iris), nails in the Passiflore testicles [anthers]. Those cruel step-mothers21 (Granadilla), capitals in the poppy (Papaver), devour them while still in their crib, appropriating filaments in corn, etc. — these organs were all their nourishment for themselves. But these given the sole occupation of discharging the gluttonesses do not stop there. Being equally the filth and excrements from the young fruit and enemy of all sex, after they defeat the one they the seed embryo, and were never meant to be immediately attack the other, and by starving it equated with the pistil, this famous war horse, little by little, finally cause it to languish and die. for which, on several occasions, these styles That is why all the seeds are aborted and a viable were given the honor of being mistaken. These one is a rare find among the unfortunate fruits of styles, as I was saying, which I compare to the these superb flowers. tubes described by Fallope in that they transmit The ovaries, which Malpighi calls “matrices”22 to the small eggs, not the dust particles [pollen and which the author23 of the Institutiones Rei grains] ejaculated on them or on their stigmas by Herbarai and his partisans, without rhyme the testicles or heads (as a believer in the visions or reason, sometimes call “pistils” and other of Leeuwenhoek and of Hartsoeker would times “chalices,” are the female organs of the have it25), but rather the vapor or volatile spirit plants. Their use is too well known to warrant emitted by these dust particles [pollen grains], elaboration and their shapes too diverse for us which goes on to fertilize the eggs. For, I believe, to give a description here. Suffice it to say that Gentlemen, one must be persuaded that in the the seeds, that are true eggs, are nourished animal it is neither the male matter nor these there until they reach maturity, and be aware so-called little worms or seminal animals that that I separate these organs into belly and neck, act upon the female and fertilize her, because or if you prefer, into body and style. The even Malpighi himself, after hearing a report body or belly, which is the lower part of the from a modern anatomist (M. Dionis, 1715. p. ovary, far from being always inside the flower 32226), admitted that the fetus is found in the [corolla], is often just its support, as in the eggs of the frog and those of the hen prior to Pomiferes, Umbellifers, and in most Liliacea, copulation, just as it is also very certain that the Cucurbitacea, etc. In contrast, the styles, which germ is found in the seed of a plant that hasn’t crown and terminate the body, never fail to be been fertilized, and it forms a continuous tissue contained within the flower [corolla], regardless with their parenchyma. Thus, it can be only this Bernasconi & Taiz: Sebastian Vaillant’s 1717 lecture 109

volatile spirit, for which the grosser matter serves introduction of the dust grains [pollen] into the simply as a vehicle. And since nature always acts cavity of the ovaries, one must then explain how according to uniform laws, one must conclude these same dust particles [pollen grains], chosen that what happens on this occasion in animals, among so many others, can enter the eggs in the must also happen in the same way in plants.27 ovary that has only one compartment, as for Following this principle, it was quite futile example the one in the Primevere, in which the that this zealous “Leeuwenhoeckist”28 strained eggs are piled up on a placenta, located in the his eyes searching in the styles of plants for visible ovary like a fruit of Alkengi is in the bladder, or conduits for the transport of an imaginary germ the candle holder is in a lantern. Because then, to each egg; and that he assured us contrary to one of only two things has to happen: either the truth that if one would simply take the time these particles break the egg shell in order to get to open the pistils (a favorite term under which inside, or, taking a longer road, they insinuate he confounds the styles and ovaries) one would themselves between the eggs, infiltrate the recognize very distinctly that they are open placenta, and finally enter the eggs. Do these always at their extremity, and pierced more or routes seem natural and practicable? less obviously down to their bases. Perhaps someone will raise the same objection We might have taken his word for it if it in regard to the ideas I have advanced touching weren’t for the fact that most of the proofs this vapor, this volatile spirit, or — if I dare he gives with a little too much self-assurance to use the term from Genesis — this breath,29 contradict him. Examine the styles of the which, exiting from the dust particles [pollen Potiron (Melopepo), which, because of their large grains], vivifies, animates, and, with the aid of size, would fit his idea the best, and you’ll see the nourishing juice, develops these miniature whether they truly are as he describes them or, plants, or the germs of their little eggs. But my on the contrary, whether we find them perfectly rebuttal is ready, and here it is. Since the styles closed at their ends and filled, throughout their are only an extension of the body of the ovary, length as well as in the belly of the ovary, with a which, like the stalk, is a sheath composed of succulent pulp, which couldn’t without extreme two types of pipes — the ones bringing the difficulty permit the slightest grain of dust to alimentary sap and the others, called tracheids, intrude into the ovary. which, according to Malpighi, fulfill the As for the Pomme de Calvil (Erythromelon function of lungs in plants — it is therefore magnum parifiacum J.B.L.14), since its styles are easy for this breath to insinuate itself by means very pointed and as slender as the Melopepo ones of the latter, which terminate at the surface of are thick, there is no doubt that their openings the stigma, the surface of which lacks the skin and canals have no reality; and if one observes that covers the body of the styles. It is, I assert, slits or cavities or holes at the ends of some very easy for this breath to travel through the of the styles, they are there only to increase tracheids to the base of the placenta, emerging the surface to allow a greater quantity of dust from the bottom of the ovary and entering the particles [pollen grains] to be received; a similar placenta’s spongy body. From there the breath role is played by the spongy and grainy heads, diffuses through the umbilical cords to each of the horns, the filaments, the tassels, the crests, the little germs with their radicles positioned the plumes, the hairs, and the velvety surface at the hole in the egg shell, and which are one can see on some styles. connected to their umbilical cords through But even if one concedes the existence of which they receive both breath and food. these imaginary conduits and the possible But let us not torture our brains and reproach 110 Huntia 11(2) 2002

Nature by trying to grasp this last line of tincture that their sap has extracted from the dust reasoning! For who can imagine that a prism particles [pollen grains] that spilled unto them.37 with four faces becomes a Pansy; a narrow roll, From this, one must conclude that no dust particle the Borage; a kidney, the Daffodil; that a cross [pollen grain] has entered, either in the folds or can metamorphose into a maple; two crystal in the eggs, since, if it is true that they entered, balls intimately glued to each other, a Grande one couldn’t lose sight of them, because of their consoude, etc.?30 These are nevertheless the indigo color and also because of the sheer number shapes favored, in these diverse plants, by their of them needed for all these eggs overloading these lowly little embryos.31 And who wouldn’t fly folds on every side. into a rage at these mothers, who give birth to so Moreover, the public must be grateful to that many beautiful children for the sole pleasure of skilled scientist38 for: casting them out without any resources, leaving 1. Having made precise observations in his the task of saving just a few of them to the caprice Laboratory that suppressing the dust particles of Lady Luck?32 For one sees flowers with up [fungal spores — confused with pollen to twenty-five or thirty stamens (as in most grains] was sufficient to abort the fruits, to stone fruits), yet only one egg. Such destruction cause fruit-drop in grapes, and to induce of germs!33 For that’s what I suspect from the blight, scald, burn, and ergot in wheat, he prodigious number each head expels, and by the succeeded in avoiding the bucolic error of number left within the head, from which these attributing these annoying events to cold nestlings never fly away. This does not include rains, coolness of the soil, frost, thick and germs from sterile flowers, which, because they stinking fogs, and finally sunburns — all must be transported by air to the fertile flowers, deadly, it has been said — which, after having all fly off together, whether by their natural stilled the sap, pinched, strangled, cauterized, weightlessness or by the sharp and sudden jolt and torn the vascular styles, altered and totally they receive from the strong contraction of their destroyed the texture and the substance of capsule. In contrast, those from flowers bearing these delicate embryos, causes them in the both sexes, finding themselves adjacent to the end to perish miserably. object of their desire, are virtual legless cripples34 2. Having observed that eggs laid by hens living compared to the others. Enervated by the long a celibate and chaste existence must (as in the and sweet exhalation of their prolific breath, case of fruits that haven’t been fertilized by they remain partially hidden in their opened the all-powerful grain of dust) be smaller, less capsule or stuck to the sides of the styles — linger full and less tasty than the others, henceforth there and dry out with them. people take great care to give these chaste But before leaving the dust [pollen], I must hens some good males in order to have report here an observation, which, it seems to me, excellent eggs.39 will suffice to topple the ingenious system that I return to the different sexes of plants. Since prides itself in making the dust fly without getting everyone in the whole world knows40 that they a single grain in our eyes.35 Let’s examine closely are not always assembled in the same flower Papaver Orientale hirsutissimum, flore magno (Cor. and that to the contrary, one is often separated J.R.Herb 1236). If, after the flower has bloomed, from the other, either on the same individual or one opens the ovary transversally, or from top to on different plants, I thought it convenient to bottom, one will find that the folds of its placenta establish three types of flowers: Males, Females and the little eggs that cover them, are white, and Androgynous (or hermaphrodite), names despite the fact that the necks are soaked with the that a sweet and officious Echo41 (The author42 Bernasconi & Taiz: Sebastian Vaillant’s 1717 lecture 111 of the observations on the structure and the several; for in the absence of a method, even use of the main parts of the flowers) cared to the greatest Masters have often been mistaken repeat43 (at least the first two) in front of a Royal about flowers. Assembly in order to transmit them to posterity, One knows whether the calyx is in a single as well as some details that he did not report so piece (even though it does not appear to be, faithfully, since he believed them to be simply a having slits all the way to its base) if when one case of the fabled crow dressing itself up with the pulls on one of its lobes, it resists and tears rather feathers of a jay.44 But as it would displease God than detaching itself cleanly from the pedicel. if I were to take away from him these details and One will know it even better if one observes envy even the smallest of the pretty things he the calyx persisting after the flower has fallen harvested here and there from various authors45 off; for the multi-pieced calyces, being merely to augment his observations, I abandon them to contiguous, stuck to, or articulated, so to speak, him with a light heart. The other details I take with the pedicel, normally fall off before the directly from pure Nature, the only book one flower — as in the Papaver, the Chelidoine, etc. must peruse in order to avoid making mistakes — or at the same time or immediately after it, by trying to impress others. as in the case of Ranunculus and the Crucifers. The male flowers,46 which modern botanists In contrast, single-pieced calyces wear out rather call sterile or false flowers, are the ones that contain than detach from their support, with which only the male organs that I discussed above. they are continuous, being simply prolongations The females, which the same botanists call and extensions of them. Thus one would “knotted flowers” or fruit flowers, contain only henceforth place among this last sort of calyx the ovary or the styles which, as I have already those of Telephium, Helianthemum, Androfaemum, mentioned, are the upper portion of the female Hypericum, Ascyrum, Ruta, Paeonia, Linum, organ. Alfinum,etc., which have sometimes been passed Finally, the androgynous or hermaphrodite off as multi-pieced calyces. flowers, to which they did not give a name, are If the calyx crowns the ovary or the embryo the ones in which both sexes are found together. of the fruit, which are the same thing, it is I pass now to the calyxes, which, not being invariably made of a single piece and makes a an essential part of the flower, are not found in single body with this embryo. Therefore, the all of them. I distinguish between flowers with calyces of Circaea and Chamaenerion, said to calyx or complete flowers, and flowers without be multi-pieced, are actually made of a single calyx or incomplete flowers. piece. It is usually understood that the calyx is to the One also should note that a calyx is a single flower [corolla] as the flower [corolla] is to the piece when the flower is a single piece; and reproductive organs, meaning that it functions one rarely sees multi-pieced calyces other than primarily as an envelope, especially when it is the plants I have already named, which are the composed of several pieces, for one can find Crucifers, true species of Ranunculus, Papaver, some among the single-pieced calyces that are Glaucium, Corchorus, Chelidonium, Hypecoon, so short that they can’t be used for more than a Leontopetalon, Epimedium, Christophoriana, and in clasp47 or connection for the base of the flower, plants whose ovaries open like a valise, that is to to adjust it and hold it in place. say from one end to the other or from a single This being said, Gentlemen, I would like side, regardless of whether this ovary is single or now to give you an easy way to tell whether complex. Then the color of their calyces, which the calyx is composed of a single piece or of until now have been mistaken for their flowers, 112 Huntia 11(2) 2002 is similar to the color of the petals of these same the fruits, they are always composed of a single flowers. This is what one remarks in Aconitum, piece, and are therefore simple extensions of Delphinium, Nigella, Aquilegia, etc. their pedicels, even though they are often If one asks why some flowers lack a calyx, claimed to be composed of several pieces. the answer is that since they, as well as the Such are the flowers of Beta, Acetosa, Atriplex, outer covering of their ovaries, are of a thick or Spinacia, Mercurialis, Kali, Veratrum, Amaranthus, fleshy constitution, as in most Liliace, Pulsatilla, Potamogeton, etc. etc., they have no use for these calyces since The opposite occurs in the polypetalous they are, by their nature, proof against all incomplete flowers, which wither and drop eventualities. Moreover, the Creator, whose off either before or at the same time as the infinite wisdom blazes and evokes wonder in stamens, leaving the ovary naked, as in Tulip, even His smallest works, gave well-defined Lilium, etc. calyces to only three types of flowers: 1) To When the flower is complete and its calyx those that are too slight or too delicate, as in multi-pieced, the flower [corolla] is invariably Papaver, Ciste, etc., which would not be able multi-pieced as well. But if the calyx is single- to survive even the most minor injuries caused pieced, and the flower appears to be similarly by the weather without this type of overcoat; single-pieced, then in order to pronounce justly 2) To those whose petals are too short and too one must have recourse to the origin of the narrow, leaving organs analogous to those that stamens, for if they originate from the wall of the modesty expressly commands to cover, exposed flower [corolla], it is a sure sign that the flower and naked.48 These organs would become faded [corolla] is monopetalous, as in the case of the and worn out before having fulfilled their duty, great Gentiane, whereas if they exit immediately as in the flowers of Helleborus niger, Aconitum, from the base of the ovary, it is a sign that the Nigella, etc.; 3) And finally, He provided them flower is polypetalous. Therefore it follows that to those whose fall would have been followed by the flower of theFicoides is polypetalous, despite the ruination of the ovaries, such as those that being placed in the ranks of the monopetalous — being arranged around, and weakly attached flowers (Mem de l’Acad R. des Sc. Ann. 1705, to, some sort of an axis, as in the Aviferes plants p. 239). or Labiae, in the Borraginae, in some Malvacae, In male flowers, as well as in hermaphrodites, etc. — would have become detached at the least the number of testicles or stamens is of no disturbance if they couldn’t support themselves small assistance in discriminating between or lean against the calyx; or being made of monopetalous and polypetalous flowers, the the lightest tissue, such as Geranium or Malvae former usually having as many testicles as they etc., would have died of heat or cold exposure have slits, as in the Rubiacees, Borraginee, without the shelter provided by these ramparts, etc. Sometimes they have fewer, as in Veronica, which are very often double in the Malvae. Ligustrum, and some species of Jasmine, etc., and After having given you the means to I do not hide the fact that the flowers ofSyrax, distinguish between single-pieced calyces and Cotyledon major, Arbutus, Vitis Idea, Erica, Acacia, multi-pieced calyces, I am now going to explain Mimosa, Inga, and some other Legumes have how one can discern monopetalous flowers from more stamens than slits. On the contrary, the polypetalous flowers. vast majority of polypetalous flowers, whether If the flowers [corollas] are incomplete or they are borne above the ovary or they contain without calyx, if they survive the fall of the it, whether they are complete or incomplete, stamens to grow and serve as an envelope to have more testicles than petals. The flower Bernasconi & Taiz: Sebastian Vaillant’s 1717 lecture 113 of Balsamina, for example, has five testicles skin of their support, they are always pierced versus four petals, the Hippocastanum, seven at their base. And if this were not the case, versus five,Cardamindum and Acer, eight versus how would they let the ovary or its style pass five, the Crucifers, six versus four, sometimes through? Nevertheless, it has been emphatically more (which is very rare), but never less. The claimed (with a method all too overblown) that flowers of Herba Paris, Geum, Saxifraga, Sedum, the flower of Androface is not pierced, and that Anacampferos, Salicaria, Onagra, Chamaenerion, those of the small Centauree, Plantain, Polygala Geranium, Ruta, Fabago, Tribulus, Fraxinella, and Chevrefeuille are closed at their bases, even Caryophyllus, Lychnis, Myosotis, some Alfine, all though these diverse flowers have a calyx. the Legumes Papillionacea, Oxycoccus, Azedarach Here then, Gentlemen, is the general idea that and Oxys consistently have more testicles than one must have about the structure of flowers, petals. Harmala has fifteen testicles versus five their differences, and the uses of their parts. petals. And if from among the prodigious Before moving to the demonstration of the remainder of these kinds of flowers one excludes genera, I will faithfully establish their character the Umbellifers and a few other genera, in which according to the method that I would have we find the testicles and petals in equal number, presented to the public, along with my Herbal the flowers of all the other genera have, so to of Paris and Environs, had my poor health speak, legions of stamens.49 permitted.51 For to pretend, like a celebrated Regarding hermaphroditic flowers without author,52 that the majority of the genera can be calyces, I observed four types with respect to established solely on the basis of the ill-defined the number of stamens compared to the number structures of the two types of parts he used of slits. The first type has less of the former and [corolla and fruit], and by certain similarities he more of the latter. The second has an equal imagined they have with well-known things to number of both. The third has twice as many which he compares them — is truly a mockery. testicles as slits. And the fourth type has even And if one follows a method based only on such more male organs than the third type. vague and fleeting principles, one soon becomes In the first type we have the flowers of disgusted. Valeriana, Valerianella, Blitum, Alchimilla, Orchis, Finally, nowadays one sees more than a few Elleborine, Calceolus, Limodorum, Ophris, Nidus imitators53 of the latest genre of books on plant avis and several other Liliaceas. identification who are dazzled by its flashy In the second type we have Rhubarb, tinsel — that is, by its beauty and the large Beta, Atriplex, Herniaria, Parietaria, Polygonum, number of figures,54 three quarters of which Fagopyrum, Kali, Amaranthus. are useless — and who are persuaded by the Of the third type I know only the flower of authentic testimonies of the author that this is Knawel or Alchimilla gramineo folio, majore flore an excellent method, and that other methods (J.R. H50850). are impractical, and that this is the only method Finally, among the flowers of the fourth type, with any utility. One watches these gentlemen, we mostly have the flowers ofTithymalus. full of self-confidence, as they dare to step boldly One should not end, Gentlemen, without through this field bristling more with brambles making the observation that when the and thorns than with portraits of flowers and monopetalous flowers that are associated with fruits. Hey, who wouldn’t cringe at the sight of an ovary are not continuous extensions of the all their mistakes! 114 Huntia 11(2) 2002

Notes to embrace his beloved Bride and surrender his gifts to her….” 1. For more detailed treatments of the history of the 10. That is, the flower must open before the sexes can sexual theory in plants, see Sachs (1906, pp. 376- come together. 444), Morton (1981, pp. 232–286), Farley (1982), 11. Parietaria, a small stingless member of the Urticaceae Schiebinger (1993, pp. 11–39), and Delaporte with explosive stamens (Mabberley 1986). Vaillant (1982). was among the first to observe explosive stamens, 2. In the introduction to his Disquisitio de Sexu although he misunderstood their function. It Plantarum, written in 1760, Linnaeus reserves was Joseph Kölreuter who established the role of special praise for Vaillant as a discoverer of the explosive stamens in insect pollination. sexual system: “Rud. Jac. Camerarius, and 12. according to the Dictionnaire de l’Academie Française other authors, have explained a great number of (1694), “shepherd’s hour” refers to the “most particulars; but no one has done more than Vaillant, favorable time for love.” Furetière’s Dictionnaire the great French botanist, who in an academical Universel (1727) concurs. oration, published by Boerhaave, discovers an 13. Tournefort regarded pollen as a waste product, and accurate knowledge of the fact, although he has stamens as excretory organs. not demonstrated it by his arguments.” In the next 14. Geoffroy. paragraph, Linnaeus states that “From that time, 15. Here Vaillant compares the filaments of the stamen that is, from the year 1718, many have labored to to spermatic ducts, suggesting that he believed they promote this opinion, especially the author of the were conduits for the pollen to enter the anther. Sexual System, who believes he has, in a number 16. By “embryo of the fruit” Vaillant refers to the of different publications, clearly and decisively ovary, following the practice of Tournefort. established the truth of it….” It is clear from this 17. Since elsewhere Vaillant uses the terms “body” or passage that Linnaeus regarded Vaillant’s lecture as “belly” for the ovary, “waist” probably refers to the a watershed event in the history of botany, and that middle of the ovary. he saw himself as Vaillant’s scientific heir. 18. Presumably, “claw” refers to the base of the petal. 3. Vaillant’s views in this respect are similar to those 19. Vaillant uses the word “pavillon” for stigma, which of Nehemiah Grew (1682), who thought that literally means “horn” or “bell.” pollen falling upon the outer surface of the ovary 20. Vaillant uses the term “trompe,” as in “trompes de “touches it with a prolific virtue.” Fallope,” or “Fallopian tubes.” For clarity, the term 4. The second part of the Discours describing “style” is used instead of the more literal “tube.” Araliastrum, Sherardia, and Boerhaavia was not 21. Vaillant considers double flowers to arise from included in the translation. sterile filaments disguised as petals, which he 5. John Ray’s Historia Plantarum (1686–1704). rhetorically likens to “cruel step-mothers” who, 6. Vaillant’s use of “flower” to denote the corolla being “the enemy of all sex,” consume not only follows Tournefort’s equation of the corolla with the male anthers, but the female ovaries as well the flower. Tournefort had no separate word for — while they are still in their cribs! According “corolla,” and he regarded the calyx as an organ to Tournefort, the function of petals was to separate from the flower. provide nourishment to the growing fruit and 7. Here Vaillant seems to apply the term “flower” seed. Reversing this function, Vaillant personifies to both the reproductive organs and the corolla, the petals of double flowers as gluttoness step- resulting in the nonsensical term “flowerless mothers who deprive the anthers and ovaries of flowers” for flowers devoid of petals. vital nutrients. However, there may be another 8. Presumably, Tournefort is being referred to here. hidden meaning behind this emotionally-charged 9. This metaphor is the presumed inspiration for the rhetoric. Vaillant may be indirectly attacking the famous passage in Linnaeus’ Praeludia Sponsaliorum “asexualists” (those opposing the sexual theory), Plantarum, written in 1729 when he was 22 years who objected to the idea of sex in plants on moral old: “The actual petals of the flower contribute grounds (see examples in Schiebinger (1993)). nothing to generation, serving only as Bridal Note that Vaillant initially characterizes the Beds, which the great Creator has so gloriously double flowers as being derived from the male arranged, adorned with such noble Bed Curtains structure but changes their gender to female in the and perfumed with so many sweet scents, that the metaphor to make his point. We can infer that his Bridegroom there may celebrate his Nuptias with calculated use of such a metaphor connotes a level his bride with all the greater solemnity. When the of misogyny that was appreciated by his mostly bed is thus prepared, it is time for the bridegroom male 18th-century French audience. Thus, in Bernasconi & Taiz: Sebastian Vaillant’s 1717 lecture 115

the guise of presenting a botanical description of 31. Literally, the text reads “embryos with powdery double flowers, Vaillant may have been launching a feet” (pied poudreux). According to the Dictionnaire subliminal attack on asexualists by comparing them de l’Académie Française (1694), the expression is a to sex-hating women. derogatory term meaning “person of little value.” 22. Womb. Furetière’s Dictionnaire Universel (1727) gives a 23. Tournefort. similar definition. However, it is probably also 24. Here Vaillant disagrees with the Tournefortian a metaphorical reference to pollen. Despite his notion that the petals provide nourishment to the rejection of the idea that the pollen grain enters the growing fruit and seed (Greene 1983, p. 946). ovary physically, Vaillant describes pollen grains as Instead, Vaillant argues that the petals function if they were embryonic plants. This suggests that he in protecting the sexual structures, while it is the regarded the “breath” that comes from the pollen as pedicel that provides nourishment to the growing representing the all-important essence of the plant fruit and seed. that determined its final shape and appearance. 25. antony Leeuwenhoek (1632–1723) was the first 32. again Vaillant uses the metaphor of a cruel, to observe spermatozoa with the microscope. negligent mother or step-mother (see Note 21) Nicolas Hartsoeker (1656–1725) drew the famous to describe floral development, in this case the illustration of a “little man inside the sperm” or shedding of pollen by the anthers. Does this homunculus. However, it has recently been pointed indicate a psychological quirk of Vaillant’s? Or out that Hartsoeker was only speculating how the does it reflect a topical issue in French society homunculus might be positioned inside the head of in the early 18th century? Note that in both a sperm and that he never claimed to have actually instances Vaillant feminizes the stamen. Flowers seen it. In fact, Hartsoeker eventually abandoned have traditionally been associated with women preformationism altogether. See Hill (1985, pp. throughout history. Perhaps this metaphor indicates 178–179) and Pinto-Correia (1997, pp. 78–79). a strong subconscious tendency to think of flowers 26. Pierre Dionis, a surgeon, was the anatomy as a whole as essentially female structures, despite demonstrator at the Jardin du Roi from 1673 to making the scientific point that the stamens are 1680. The reference refers to Dionis’ Dissertation sur male structures. la Génération de l’Homme (1698). After some initial 33. Germs in this context refers to pollen grains, even hesitation, Dionis accepted the ovist doctrine, though both the Dictionnaire de l’Academie Française stating that the idea of the mingling of the two (1694) and Furetière’s Dictionnaire Universel (1727) sperms was “not generally accepted by all the definegermes as young germinating plants. This anatomists.” use of the term “germes” to describe pollen is 27. In Specimen Academicum de Oeconomia Naturae (1749), reminiscent of the spermist view of the pollen Linnaeus expands on the theme that Nature uses as the source of the embryo, which is surprising the same concepts for various organisms. The fact considering Vaillant’s strong ovist bias. Vaillant that animals reproduced sexually, and therefore may have conceived of the pollen grain as a type plants must as well, was the central heuristic of embryonic plant that did not germinate itself, concept employed by Linnaeus to support the but provided the “breath of life” to the egg. sexual theory (Larson 1967) Alternatively, he may simply have taken poetic 28. Refers to Geoffroy, who claimed that the pollen license. grain contained the embryo, which somehow made 34. at the end of Louis XIV’s reign in 1715, France its way to the seed where it was hatched. was in financial ruins, having been weakened by 29. “And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the a series of military disasters and lean agricultural ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath years. Vaillant’s use of “legless cripples” as a of life; and man became a living soul.” Genesis metaphor here was intended to shock, but was 2:7. At first glance, the appeal to Genesis might probably drawn from an unpleasant reality, the seem calculated to elicit support for the sexual all too familiar sight of amputees — war veterans theory from the devout members of the audience. — begging on Paris sidewalks. However, in this case, God’s function as the source 35. Vaillant is using a play on words here: “Dust” of the breath of life is provided by a pollen grain! refers both to pollen and the expression “jeter la Hence, Vaillant’s hesitancy in making the analogy: poudre aux eyes” (“to throw dust in one’s eyes”), “if I dare to use the term from Genesis….” In equivalent to “to pull the wool over one’s eyes.” In exercising poetic license, Vaillant is flirting with other words, Geoffroy is throwing dust in our eyes blasphemy. by proposing that pollen is able to physically enter 30. The shapes refer to the shapes of the pollen grains. the ovary when it fertilizes the egg. 116 Huntia 11(2) 2002

36. Herbal of Valerius Cordus (1515–1544) (Cordus 1561). Camerarius by name, and it is not clear whom he is 37. In fact, the purple coloring of the styles after acknowledging as the originator of the idea. pollination results from production of a pigment 44. Vaillant seems to be in error here: the fable by Jean (anthocyanin) by the cells of the style, not extraction de la Fontaine to which he refers is about a jay that of the “tincture” from the pollen grains. However, dresses up in peacock feathers. Vaillant is correct that no pollen grains are found 45. It is odd that Vaillant himself does not cite Camerarius in the cavity of the ovary. The pollen tube, which at this point. It seems unlikely that he would have delivers the sperm from the stigma to the micropyle been unfamiliar with the Epistola by this time. By of the ovule, wasn’t discovered until 1823 by the failing to cite Camerarius, Vaillant is arguably guilty Italian microscopist, G. B. Amici [1784–1860]. of the same sin of omission as Geoffroy. Indeed, 38. Denis Dodart (1634–1707) is most likely the Julius von Sachs in 1875 has criticized Vaillant’s scientist being referred to here. Dodart was among lecture in much the same way that Vaillant criticized the first (1676) to identify rye grains infected with Geoffroy’s: “Vaillant …can only have the credit of the ergot fungus as the cause of St. Anthony’s Fire an eloquent description of what was then accepted” (see Stroup (1990, p. 175)). Prior to this discovery, (1906). Vaillant’s main contribution to botany, the appearance of the large, blackened grains in like that of Linnaeus, was not the discovery of sex cereal heads had been blamed on sandy soils and in plants, as both men wanted to claim, but the cold, windy, damp weather followed by a period recognition of the central importance of the sexual of high temperatures — conditions which, in structures as taxonomic criteria. fact, encourage the spread of the disease. Dodart’s 46. Here Vaillant uses the term “flower” in the modern discovery helped to prevent future outbreaks sense, which includes the sexual structures. of St. Anthony’s Fire, accounting for Vaillant’s 47. although “douille” in modern French refers to statement that “…the public must be grateful….” “cartridges,” in Furetière’s Dictionnaire Universel However, Vaillant seems to be somehow confusing (1727) it is defined as the tubular part of a halberd the infection of grain and grapes by fungal spores or pike, here translated as “clasp,” in which the with the fruit drop associated with the absence of wooden handle was inserted. pollination. He implies that Dodart reported that 48. Linnaeus (1749) makes a similar observation in “suppressing the dust” results not only in fruit the following passage: “Moreover, it is pleasant drop but also in the crop diseases, ergot and blight. to remember that the genitalia are exposed for This confusion reflects a basic misunderstanding everybody to see in the Plant Kingdom, while of the significance of Dodart’s work, as well as an these same organs, considered as almost shameful inability to distinguish between pollen grains and in the Animal Kingdom, are almost always hidden fungal spores. However, Vaillant was not alone in by Nature. When intercourse happens in the Plant this error, and many scientists and natural historians Kingdom, it is a great thing to see what great continued to confuse fungal spores with pollen pleasures it brings to the spectator, whose senses are grains well into the early 19th century (see, for already primed by the most beautiful colors and the example, Goethe (1820)). most delicious perfumes.” 39. Dodart’s Mémoires pour Servir à l’Histoire des Plantes 49. This use of stamens as taxonomic tools in these (1676) compared observations on seed germination to paragraphs anticipates the system of Linnaeus. studies of chicks in the egg (cited in Stroup, 1990). 50. John Ray. 40. an exaggeration no doubt designed to squelch any 51. Tournefort had published a flora of the Paris region lingering resistance to the sexual theory. in 1698. Vaillant had long planned to introduce 41. In Greek mythology, a mountain nymph who, his new sexual system of classification in his own according to Ovid’s Metamorphoses, offended the flora of Paris,Botanicon Parisiense (Herbal of Paris goddess Hera by talking too much. Hera punished and environs). According to J. Rousseau (1970): Echo by depriving her of speech other than the “In 1721, feeling that death was imminent and ability to repeat the last words of another. that he would not have time to finish hisBotanicon 42. Geoffroy. It is interesting that Vaillant describes him Parisiense, the result of 36 years of labour, he gave as “sweet and officious.” Does this betray a certain his notes and the plates … to Booerhaave to insure affection for Geoffroy, despite the satirical tone? Or their publication, knowing that his work would was Vaillant trying to deflect criticism that he was never appear if left in the hands of his immediate attacking Geoffroy personally? colleagues. When this was done, and the sale of his 43. It was Camerarius (1694) who first distinguished personal herbarium guaranteed, he was at peace; he between monoecious, dioecious, and hermaphroditic died content on May 21, 1722, leaving a widow and flowers. However, Vaillant never mentions no children.” Tjaden (1976) presents an alternative Bernasconi & Taiz: Sebastian Vaillant’s 1717 lecture 117

scenario for the circumstances surrounding the Eriksson, G. 1983. Linnaeus the botanist. In: T. publication of Botanicon Parisiense and argues Frängsmyr, ed. 1983. Linnaeus, the Man and His that Vaillant did not anticipate his untimely Work. Berkeley. Pp. 63–109. death. However, in this revealing sentence of his Farley, J. 1982. Gametes and Spores. Baltimore. Royal Garden lecture, Vaillant already seems to Furetière, A., H. Basnage de Beauval and J.-B. Brutel de understand that he will not be able to complete the la Rivière. 1727. Dictionnaire Universel, new. ed. 4 project in his lifetime. Could this consciousness of vols. The Hague. the nearness of death, and therefore the heightened Goethe, J. 1820. Verstäubung, Verdunstung, importance of the occasion at the Jardin du Roi Vertropfung (Pollination, volatilization, and for establishing his reputation in the history of exudation). In: botany, have emboldened him to “pull out all the J. Goethe. 1817–1824. Zur Naturwissenschaft stops” in order to deliver a lecture that would be überhaupt, besonders zur Morphologie (Natural remembered and talked about long after his death? science in general: Morphology in particular). 2 vols. If so, he succeeded beyond his dreams, for it is Stuttgart and Tübingen. Vol. 1, no. 3. Pp. 285–304. his lecture, not the Botanicon Parisiense, for which [See also: Mueller, B., transl. 1952. Goethe’s Vaillant is principally remembered. Botanical Writings. Honolulu. Pp. 105–114.] 52. Tournefort. Greene, E. L. 1983. Landmarks of Botanical History, 53. The French word “brocheurs” had several Part II. F. N. Egerton, ed. Stanford. meanings: 1) book-binders or book publishers; 2) Grew, N. 1682. Anatomy of Plants, Part II. London. people who add items to a pre-existing list, i.e., Hill, K. A. 1985. Hartsoeker’s homunculus: A corrective compilers or collectors; 3) according to Furetière’s note. J. Hist. Behav. Sci. 21: 178–179. Dictionnaire Universel (1727), the verb brocher refers Larson, J. L. 1967. Linnaeus and the natural method. Isis to those who write hastily without giving proper 58: 304–320. care and attention to detail. It is unclear which of Lindroth, S. 1983. The two faces of Linnaeus. In: these meanings Vaillant meant to convey, and there T. Frängsmyr, ed. 1983. Linnaeus, the Man and His are logical problems with each of the definitions. Work. Berkeley. Pp. 1–62. Vaillant seems to be referring to individuals Linnaeus, C. 1729. Praeludia Sponsaliorum Plantarum. who seek to apply Tournefort’s system of plant Uppsala. classification to their own studies. Hence our choice Linnaeus, C. 1760. Disquisitio de sexu plantarum, of the word “imitators.” ab Academia Imperiali Scientiarum Petrapolitana 54. Tournefort’s Institutiones Rei Herbarai (1700) was praemio ornate. In: C. Linnaeus. 1785–1790. beautifully illustrated. Amoenitates Academicae. 10 vols. Erlange. Vol. 10. Pp. 100–131. Linnaeus, C. 1749. Specimen Academicum de Oeconomia Naturae Submittit I. J.Biberg (Uppsala References 1749). Uppsala. Mabberley, D. J. 1986. The Plant–Book. New York. [Anonymous.] 1694. Dictionnaire de l’Academie Morton, A. G. 1981. History of Botanical Science. Française. Paris. London. Camerarius, R. 1694. De Sexu Plantarum Epistola. Pinto–Correia, C. 1997. The Ovary of Eve. Chicago. Rudolphi Jacobi Camerarii, Professoris Tubingensis, Plantefol, L. 1965. Les conditions du plagiat ad Thessalum, D.Mich. Bernardum Valentini, par Geoffreoy le Jeune des résultats publliés Professorem Giessensem, Academieae Caesareo- antéeieurement par Camerarius. Compt. Rend. Leopoldinae Naturae Curiosorum. Tübingen. Séances Acad. Sci. 261: 2,039–2,044. Cordus, V. 1561. Annotationes in Pedacii Dioscoridis Prévost, A–M. 1965. Rapprochement entre l’Epistola Anazarbei de materia medica libros (Herbal of de sexu plantarum de R,J, Camerarius (1694) Valerius Cordus, 1515–1544). C. Gesner, ed. et les Observations sur la strucure et l’usage des Strasbourg. principlales parties des fleurs de Geoffroy le Jeune. Delaporte, F. 1982. Nature’s Second Kingdom, transl. Compt. Rend. Séances Acad. Sci. 261: 2,045–2,048. A. Goldhammer. Cambridge, Massachusetts. Ramsbottom, J. 1963. S. Vaillant’s Discours sur la Dionis, P. 1698. Dissertation sur la Génération de structure des fleurs (1718). J. Soc. Bibiogr.N at. Hist. l’Homme. Paris. 4: 194–196. Dodart, D. 1676. Mémoires pour Servir à l’Histoire des Ray, J. 1686–1704. Historia Plantarum. 3 vols. London. Plantes. Paris. Rousseau, J. 1970. Sébastien Vaillant: An outstanding 18th–century botanist. In: P. Smit and R. J. Ch. V. 118 Huntia 11(2) 2002

ter Laage, eds. 1970. Essays in Biohistory. Utrecht, Tjaden, W. L. 1976. Sebastien Vaillant’s Flora of Paris, Netherlands. Pp. 195–228. [Regnum Veg. 171.] Botanicon Parisiense, 1727. J. Soc. Bibliogr Nat. Sachs, J. von. 1906. Geschichte der Botanik (History of Hist. 8: 11–27. botany, 1530–1860), transl. H. E. F. Garnsey, rev. Tournefort, J. 1700. Institutiones Rei Herbarai. 3 vols. I. B. Balfour. Oxford. (Reprint, English ed. 1890, Paris. Oxford; German orig. ed. 1875, Munich.) Vaillant, S. 1718. Discours sur la Structure des Fleurs …. Schiebinger, L. 1993. The private lives of plants. In: Leiden. (Microfilm.) L. Schiebinger. 1993. Nature’s Body: Gender in the Vaillant, S. 1727. Botanicon Parisiense (Herbal of Paris Making of Modern Science. Boston. Pp. 11–39. and environs). Leiden and Amsterdam. Stafleu, F.A. and R. S. Cowan. 1986. Taxonomic Westfall, R. S. [ca.1994]. Sebastien Vaillant. In: Catalog Literature, ed. 2. 7 vols. 1976–1988. Utrecht. Vol. of the Scientific Community in the 16th and 17th 6. Pp. 634–636. Centuries (http://es.rice.edu/ES/humsoc/Galileo/ Stroup, A. 1990. A Company of Scientists. Berkeley. Catalog/catalog.html). Sturdy, D. J. 1995. Science and Social Status, the Members of the Academie des Sciences, 1666–1750. Suffolk,U K. Bernasconi & Taiz: Sebastian Vaillant’s 1717 lecture 119

[Title page] d i s c o u r s messieurs, sur la structure des Comme entre les parties qui caracterisent les f l e u r s, Plantes, celles qu’on appelle Fleurs, sont, sans leurs differences et l’usage contredit, des plus essentielles, il est a propos de de leurs parties; vous en entretenir d’abord; d’autant plus que tous Prononcé a l’Ouverture du Jardin Royal de Paris, les Botanistes ne nous en ont donné que des idées le Xc. Jour du mois de Juin 1717. assez confuses. et Peut être que le langage dont je me servirai a l’etablissement ce sujet, semblera un peu nouveau en Botanique; mais comme il sera rempli de termes tout a fait de trois nouveaux genres de convenables a l’usage des parties que j’ai a ex- p l a n t e s, poser, je croi qu’on l’entendra beaucoup mieux que l’araliastrum, l’ancien, lequel êtant farci de mots impropres & la sherardia, equivoques, plus propres à embroüiller la matiere, la boerhaavia. qu’a l’eclaircir, jettent dans l’erreur ceux dont Avec la Description de deux nouvelles Plantes l’imagination encore offusquée, n’a aucune bonne notion des veritables fonctions de la pluspart de rapportées au dernier genre,[a] ces mêmes parties. Par Les Fleurs, absolument parlant, ne devroient sebastien vaillant, être prises que pour les organes qui constituent Demonstrateur des Plantes du Jardin Royal à Paris. les differents sexes des Plantes, puisqu’on trouve [image] quelque fois ces organes nuds, a leide, 4 comme dans la Typhe ou Masse d’eaua; le Chez pierre vander Aa, Limnopeuce Cordib; le Potamogeito affinis Marchand Libraire, Imprimeur de l’Université & de la Graminifolia aquatica, Raii;c dans quelques Ville. especes de Fresnes &c. Et que les tuniques ou MDCCXVIII. petalesd qui les environnent immediatement dans les plantes ou ils se manifestent, ne sont destinées [aSince the characterization of the three new qu’a les couvrir & a les defendre. Mais comme types of plants, etc., was not included in ces tuniques sont ordinairement ce qu’il y a de the translation, that portion of the Discours plus beau & de plus apparent dans le composé is not shown here.] auquel on a donné le nom de Fleur, & que c’est precisement là que se borne la curiosité, l’amour Pag. 2 d i s c o u r s & l’admiration de presque tout le genre humain Sur la Structure des Fleurs, leurs differences, & qui ne fait nulle attention au reste dont il ignore l’usage de leurs parties; prononcé a l’ouverture & le nom & l’usage; ce sont ces tuniques que par du Jardin Royal de Paris, par M. Vaillant, preciput, j’appellerai Fleurs, de quelque structure, Demonstrateur des Plantes, le xe. Jour ju mois & de quelque couleur qu’elles puissent être, soit de Juin 1717. qu’elles entourent les organes des deux sexes reünis, soit qu’elles ne contiennent que ceux de Recueilli par les Etudians en Botanique. l’un ou de l’autre, ou seulement quelques parties dépendantes de l un [sic] des deux, pourveû toute 120 Huntia 11(2) 2002

fois que la figure de ces tuniques ne soit pas la même pied de plante, il se rencontre des Fleurs même que celle des feuilles de la plante, supposé qui n’entourent que des organes feminins, & qu’elle en porte. d’autres ou se trouvent les deux sexes: la tension Sur ce principe, je nomme Fleurs nuës ou ou le gonflement des organes masculins de celle- Fauffles Fleurs, ou si l’on vent, Fleurs ef- ci, se fait si subitement, que les lobes du bouton, fleurées, les organes de la géneration qui sont cedant a leur impetuosité, s’ecartent ça & là avec denuéz de petales, & vraies-Fleurs, ceux qui une celerité surprenante. Dans cet instant, ces en sont revestus. fougueux qui semblent ne chercher qu’a satisfaire L’on voit par ce premier debut, que je sape leurs violents transports, ne se sentent pas plustôt entierement les Fleurs à Etamines ou ces libres, que faisant brusquement une décharge gé- captieuses Fleurs sans fleur, race maudite, qui nérale, un tourbillon de poussiere qui se repand, semble n’avoir été créee ou inventée que pour en porte partout la fecondité; & par une étrange imposer aux plus habiles, & désoler absolument catastrophe ils se trouvent tellement épuisez, que les jeunes Botanistes, lesquels en étant debaras- dans le, même instant qu’ils donnent la vie, ils sez, se trouvent d’abord en êtat d’entrer tête levée se procurent une mort soudaine. dans le vaste empire de Flore, & de decider en Maîtres sur toutes les parties des Fleurs. 8 Ce ne’st pas encore là que se termine la scene. Si celui de tous les Autheurs qui a le plus A peine ce jeu a-t-il cessé, que les levres ou lobes donné dans le Fleurisme, s’y étoit pris de la sorte, de la fleur se raprochant l’un de l’autre, avec la il n’auroit pas avancé qu’il eft bien difficile de même vitesse qu’ils s’en êtoient écartéz, lui font determiner en plusieurs reprendre sa premiere forme; Et on auroit peine à comprendre, si l’on ne l’avoit veû, qu’elle eût aTypha palustris. bHistor. 150. cHist. I. 190. fouffert la moindre violence, ou si l’on en voioit dPetala. encore des marques certaines par les chetives carcasses de ces vaillants Champions qui la lui 6 rencontres ce qu’il faut appeller les feuilles (ou pour ontfaite, & qui restent quelque tems arborées sur eviter l’ambiguité, les petales) de la fleur, & ce son faite, ou comme autant de girouettes, elles qu’il faut nommer le calice de la même fleur, & il servent de joüet aux Zephyres. n’auroit pas si souvent pris celui-ci pour celle-là, Tout cette mechanique se peut aisement remar- & encore plus souvent, celle-là pour celui-ci. quer sur la Parietaire, a l’heure du Berger, c’et De la maniere que je viens de definir lavraye- à dire le matin, temps ou les differents sexes des Fleur on entend bien qu’elle doit estre épanoüie; plantes prennent ordinairement leurs êbats. Et si car lors qu’elle n’est encore qu’en bouton, non ces Fleurs ne vouloient pas agir de gré pendant seulement ses tuniques entourent immediatement qu’on les observe, on peut les y forcer en les aiguil- les organes de la génération, mais elles les cachent lonnent doucement avec la pointe d’une épingle; aussi si exactement qu’en cet estat on la peut car pour le peu qu’on en souleve un des lobes regarder comme leur lict nuptial, puisque ce n’est quand elles ont pour ainsi dire, l’age competent, ordinairement qu’aprés qu’ils ont consommé leur les hampes ou filets des étamines, d’arcuez ou mariage, qu’elle leur permet de se montrer; ou si cambrez qu’ils sont, venant a se dresser comme elle s’entrouvre quelque peu pendant qu’ils en sont par un effort violent, on découvre aussi-tôt ce aux prises, elle ne s’epanoüit tres-parfaitement qui se passe de plus particulier dans cette espece que lors qu’ils se sont quittez. Le contraire arrive d’exercice amoureux. aux Fleurs qui ne contiennent qu’un sexe, & la Il s’en faut bien que les étamines des plantes raison en est évidente. Mais s’il arrive que sur un qui ne portent que des fleurs ou les deux sexes Bernasconi & Taiz: Sebastian Vaillant’s 1717 lecture 121

sont reunis, n’agissent avec tant de precipita- les Umbelliferes & autres; ou bien elles sont tion & de vigueur. Dans le plus grand nombre, branchuës, comme dans le Ricin, le Laurier leur action est presque insensible; mais il est a &c. Elles sont distinctes & separées les unes des presumer qne plus elle est lente, plus longue est autres dans les fleurs des susdittes plantes; mais la durée de leurs innocents plaisirs. Ce n’est pas dans certaines, comme sont celles de la pluspart qu’on en voit qui, sur certaines plantes, tantque des Malvacées, des Cucurbitacées, des Le- la fleur subsiste, donnent encore au moindre gumineuses &c. on les trouve si intimement attouchement, des signes de vie bien marquées. soudées ensembles, qu’elles ne font qu’un seul Telles sont par exemple; les étamines du Figuier corps, D’ou est venu que M. Tournefort a pris les d’Indea; celle d’Helianthemum &c. Etamines du Houx-frelon,a pour la fleur même, & la veritable fleur pour un calice, & qu’il n’a aOpuntia. pas reconnu que ce qu’il appelle tuïau piramidal dans les plantes Malvacées; tuïau frangé dans 10 Les organes qui constituent les differents sexes l’Azedarach, gaine, dans le Raputium, des plantes, sont deux principaux. Sçavoir les Etamines & les Ovaires. aRuscus. Les Etamines que j’appelle organes mas- culins & que le celebre Autheur des Institutions 12 dans les plantes Legumineuses, dans celles de Botanique, regarde comme les parties les plus à fleurons, dans celles a demi-fleurons, & viles & les plus abjectes dans les végetaux; quoi dans les radiées; il ne s’est pas apperceû, dis-je, qu’elles soient veritablement des plus nobles: que ce qu’il appelle tantôt tuyau, tantôt gaine, puisqu’elles repondent a celles qui dans les n’est autre chose que ces queûës parfaitement masles des Animaux servent a la multiplicatin jointes & intimement unies; accident qui leur est de l’espece; C’elles-là, dis-je, sont composées de commun avec les petales de quelques fleurs, qui testes & de queûës, ou si l’on veut s’entenir aux pour être d’une consistence charnuë & succulente, termes ordinaires, de sommets & de filets. ou qui estant trop comprimez les uns contre les Ces testes, qu’a juste titre, on peut appeller autres dans le calice, se collent si bien ensemble testicules, non seulement parce qu’elles en ont qu’ils forment des fleurs monopetales au lieu de souvent la figure, mais aussi parce qu’en effet polypetales. elles en font l’office, sont, dans toutes les plantes L’endroit d’ou les organes masculins tirent complettes, de doubles cartouches ou des capsules leur origine, n’est pas toûjours le même dans membraneuses, qui essentiellement ont deux loges toutes sortes de fleurs. Ordinairement c’est de la pleines de poussieres, dont les granules prennent base de l’Embrion du fruit lors qu’il est contenu ordinairement dans chaque espece de plante une dans la fleur, soit qu’elle ait plusieurs petales ou forme déterminée, comme l’ont observé Mrs. Grew, qu’elle n’en ait qu’un, pourveû que les decoupures Malpighi, Tournefort, & aprés eux, l’Autheur de celui-ci s’etendent jusque vers son centre. des observations sur la structure & l’usage Quelquesfois aussi, ces organes partent des reins des principales parties des fleurs. Memoires de l’Embrion, comme dans le Grand Nenufar- de l’Ac. R. des Sc. ann. 1711. p. 210. blanc.a Si la fleur porte sur l’Embrion, qu’elle Les queûës ou filets, qui servent d’attaches & soit a calice & polypetale, ces mêmes organes des supports aux testicules, & qui ne sont propre- sortent, ou de la teste de l’Embrion, ou de l’ongle ment que les gaines de leurs vaisseaux sperma- des petales, ou des espaces vuides qu’ils laissent tiques, sont ou simples, comme dans les plantes entr’-eux; ou enfin de la surface interne de la Graminées, les Cyperacées, les Cruciferes, partie du calice qui couronne l’Embrion. 122 Huntia 11(2) 2002

Mais quand la fleur est d’une seule piece de- veut, en corps & en trompes. coupée peu profondement, soit qu’elle contienne Le corps ou la panse, qui est la partie l’Embrion ou que l’Embrion la foutienne; ces inferieure de l’ovaire, bien loin d’être toûjours organes naissent presque toûjours des parois renformée dans la fleur, comme par exemple, interieurs de la fleur; & je ne sçache pas qu’ils dans les plantes cruciferes, n’en est souvent s’ecartent de cette regle, si ce n’est au Cabaretb ou que le support, comme dans les Pomiferes, dans ils forment un collier sous le pavillon de la trompe, les Umbelliferes, dans la plus part des Lili- ainsi que dans l’Aristoloche & au dessus des acées, des Cucurbitacées & c. Au lieu que les Ovaires des Pieds de veauc d’Europe; mais les trompes qui la couronnent & la terminent, en fleurs de ces deux derniers genres sont entieres & quelque endroit qu’elle soit placée, ne manquent sans lobes. A l’égard des fleurs qui ne sont faites jamais d’être contenues dans la fleur. Preuve que pour contenir les seuls organes masculins, évidente que la fleur est uniquement faite pour on conçoit assez que ces organes ne peuvent être la conservation des organes tant de l’un que de attachez que dans la concavité de ces fleurs. l’autre sexe, & nullement pour la préparation des Comme les queûës des testicules tiennent tout sucs qui doivent servir de premiere nourriture a a fait de la nature des petales, il arrive fort souvent l’embrion du fruit, qui n’en tire que de son sup- que dans quelques especes de certains genres a port ou pedicule qui est aussi celui de toute la fleurs polypetales, elles se travestissent en petales masse de la fleur. même pour former ces agréables monstres Pour revenir aux trompes qu’avant & depuis Malpighi personne ne s’est avisé de bien distinguer aNymphaea alba major. bAfarum. cArum. de la panse de l’ovaire, & qu’on ne nous designe de fois à autres que sous des noms 14 qu’on éleve avec tant de soin sous le nom de fleurs doubles & parmi lesquelles on ne rencontre que 16 vagues, comme de houpes dans le Safran;a peu ou point du tout de testicules: ces marâtres d’aigrettes dans l’ozeille;b de feüilles dans la les devorant, pour ainsi dire des le berceau, en Flambe;c de clous dans la Fleur de Passion;d de s’appropriant toute leur nourriture. chapiteaux dans le Pavot;e de filets dans le Mais Mais ces gloutonnes n’en demeurent pas là. &c. & aux quelles on ne donnoit pour toute accu- Egalement ennemies de tout sexe, apres s’être pation que, le soin de décharger les jeunes fruits & défaites de l’un, elles attaquent aussitôt l’autre; les embriones de graines, de leurs ordures ou excre- & l’affamant peu à peu, le font enfin mourir en ments, quoiqu’on ne laissat pas d’ailleurs, de les langueur. De là vient que ses semences avortent faire aller de pair avec le pistile ce fameux Cheval & qu’il est rare d’en trouver de bonnes dans les de bataille pour lequel on leur faisoit l’honneur de infortunéz fruits de ces superbes fleurs. les prendre en plusieurs occasions. Ces trompes, Les Ovaires, que Malpighi nomme Matrices, dis-je, que je compare a celles de Fallope, en ce & que l’Autheur des Institutions de Botanique & qu’elles transmettent aux petits œufs, non pas les ses Partisans appellent a tort où a travers, tantôt grains de poussiere même qu’éjaculent sur elles, pistiles & tantôt calices, sont les organes feminins ou dans leurs pavillons, les testicules ou som- des plantes, L’usage en est trop connue pour m’y ments, comme le veut un Sectateur des visions arrêter, & leurs figures trop diverses pour en faire de Leeuwenhoek & d’Hartsoeker, mais seulement ici la description. Il suffira de dire, que les semences la vapeur, ou l’esprit volatile quì se dégageant des qui sont de veritables œufs, s’y nourrissent jusqu’a grains de poussiere, va feconder les œufs. Car, je leur parfaite maturité, & de Vous avertir que je croi, Messieurs, qu’on doit être persuadé que dans divise ces organes en panse & en coû, ou si l’on l’animal, ce n’est ni la matiere du masle, ni ces Bernasconi & Taiz: Sebastian Vaillant’s 1717 lecture 123

pretendus vermisseaux ou animaux seminaires, siere, de se glisser dans l’Ovaire. qui operent dans la femelle l’œuvre de la féconda- A légard de la Pomme de Calvilb, comme tion, puisque le même Malpighi, au rapport d’un ses trompes sont fort pointuës & aussi deliées a Anatomiste moderne,f a reconnu que le Fœtus proportion que celles du Potiron sont épaisses, se trouve dans les œufs des Grenoüilles & dans il est hors de doute que leurs ouvertures & leurs ceux des Poules avant la copulation, comme il canaux ne sont pas plus réels; Et si l’on remarque est tres-certain que le germe se rencontre dans les des fentes, des cavitez, ou des fosses au bout de semences des Plantes quì n’ont point êté fecondées, certaines trompes, elles n’y sont pratiquees que & avec le parenchyme desquelles ce germe ne fait pour en etendre la surface & recevoir une plus qu’un continu. Donc, ce ne peut être que cet esprit grande quantité de poussiere; a quoi servent volatil auquel la matiere grossiere sert simplement pareillement les têtes fongueuses & grenuës, les de vehicule. Or la nature agissant toûjours par cornes, les filets, les houpes, les aigrettes, les pa- des Loix uniformes, on doit conclure que ce qui naches, les poils, le velouté &c. que l’on rencontre se passe en cette occasion dans les Animaux, se sur diverses troupes. doit passer de même dans les Vegetaux. Mais quand on lui passeroit l’existence Suivant ce principe, il êtoit fort inutile que ce de ces pretendus conduits, & la possibilité de zelé Leeuwenhoeckiste se fatiguat tant les yeux l’intromission des grains de poussiere jusque dans a chercher dans les trompes des plantes des la capacité des Ovaires, en concevroit-on mieux conduits sensibles pour charier dans chaque œuf par ou ces mêmes grains predestinez entre tant un germe imaginaire; & qu’il asseûr ât d’autres, pourroient penetrer dans les œufs d’un Ovaire qui n’auroit qu’une cavité, comme par aCrocus. bAcetosa. cIris. dGranadilla. ePapaver. exemple, celui de la Primevere, ou les œufs sont fM. Dionis Edit. 1715. p. 322. amoncelez sur un placenta, situé dans l’Ovaire a peu prés comme un fruit 18 contre la verité, que pour le peu que l’on se veuille bien donner la peine d’ouvrir les aMelopepo. bErythromelon magnum Parisia- pistiles (terme favori sous lequel il confond les cum J. B. L. 14. trompes & les Ovaires) on reconnoîtra tres- distinctement qu’ils sont toûjours ouverts 20 d’Alkekengi l’êt dans sa vessie, ou une bobeche a leur extrémité, & percéz plus ou moins dans une lanterne. Car alors, il faudroit qu’il sensiblement jusqu’a leur bases. arrivât necessairement de deux chose l’une, ou On l’en auroit peû croire sur sa parole, si la que ces grains cassassent la coque des œufs pour plus part des preuves qu’il en donne avec un peu se pouvoir nicher deffous, ou que prenant une trop d’asseûrànce ne le demantoient pas. Qu’on route plus longue, ils se coulassent entre ces œufs, examine un peu les trompes du Potirona qui par qu’ils perçassent le placenta pour l’enfiler, & de leur énorme grosseur devroient le mieux quadrer a la passer dans les œufs. Ces routes paroissent elles son idée, & l’on verra si elles sont veritablement naturelles & bien pratiquables? telles qu’il depeint, & si au contraire, on ne les Peut être me fera t-on la même objection a trouve pas exactement bouchées a leur extremité l’egard de ce que j’ai avancé touchant cette vapeur, [sic] & remplies dans leur longueur, de même que cet esprit volatile, ou si j’ose me servir du terme la panse de l’Ovaire, d’une substance pulpeuse de la Genese, de ce soufle, lequel sortant des & succulente, qui ne sçauroit, sans de tres-grandes poussieres, va vivifier, animer, & a l’aide du suc difficultez, permettre au moindre grain de pous- nourrissier, developer ces racourcis des plantes, ou les germes de leurs petits œufs. Mais la reponse est 124 Huntia 11(2) 2002

toute preste, la voici. Les trompes n’êtant qu’un son sein d’ou il n’est pas toûjours necessaire que prolongement de la panse de l’Ovaire qui est une ces grains de poussiere denichent; si ce ne sontceux envelope composée de même que les tiges, de deux des fleurs steriles; car ces derniers devant être sortes de tuyaux, sçavoir de ceux qui charient chariez par l’air sur les fleurs fertiles, s’envolent les sucs alimenteus, & de ceux qu’on nomme tous, soit par leur secheresse & legereté naturelle; trachées, lesquelles, selon Malpighi, font dans soit par la rude & brusque secousse qu’ils reçoivent les plantes, les fonctions de poulmons, il est aisé de la forte contraction de leur capsule; Au lieu que a ce soufle de s’insinuer par ces derniers vais- ceux des fleurs ou se rencontrent les deux sexes, seaux qui se terminent a la surface des pavillons, pour se trouver tout portes sur l’objet desiré, sont laquelle surface est denué de la peau qni recouvre en comparaison des autres, de vrais cûs de jatte, le corps des trompes; il est, disje, aisé a se soufle qui aprés s’être énervez par de longs & doux de passer des trachées, d’abord dans la base du écoulements de leur soufle prolifique, restent en placenta qui perce le fond de l Ovaire [sic], partie dans leurs capsules beante, ou se qui s’en ensuite le long de son corps spongieux, & delà se accroche aux trompes, y demeure & se desseiche distribuer parles cordons umbilicaux, jusque dans avec elles. chaque petit germe qui presente sa radicule au Mais avant que de sortir de la poussiere, il faut trou de la coque de l’œuf avec lequel s’abouche le que je rapporte une observation qui seule suffit, cordon umbilical, pour recevoir de ce cordon & le ce me semble, pour culbuter le systeme ingenieux soufle & la nourriture. de celui qui a tant pris de plaisir à la faire voler Qu’on épargne de tortures a son esprit, & de sans qu’il m’en soit entré le moindre grain dans les reproches à la nature, en s’en tenant a ce dernier yeux. Qu’on examine bien le Papaver Orien- raisonnement! Qui est-ce qui pouvoit s’imaginer tale hirsutissimum, flore magno. Cor. J. R. qu’un prisme a quatre faces devint la Penséea; Herb. 17. si aprés que la fleur de cette plante est un rouleau étranglé, la Bourrache; un rein, la épanoüie l’on en ouvre l’ovaire transversalement, Jonquille; qu’une croix se peut metamorpho- ou de base en haut, on trouvera que les feüillets de son placenta & les petits aViola species. 24 œufs qui les couvrent, sont blancs, quoique les 22 fer en Erable; deux boules de cristal étroite- trompes soient cependant toutes imbibées de la ment collées l’une & l’autre, en Grande teinture que leur suc a tiré des grains de poussiere consoude &c.? Ce sont cependant là les figures qui s’y sont épanchez. D’ou l’on doit inferer qu’il qu’affectent dans ces diverses Plantes leurs n’en entre aucun grain, ni dans ces feuillets, ni Embrions aux pieds poudreux. Et qui est-ce dans les œufs: car s’il êtoit vrai qu’il y en entrât, qui ne déchaineroit pas contre des méres, qui on ne pourroit les y perdre de veûë, tant a cause n’engendreroient tant de si beaux Enfans que pour de leur couleur d’Indigo; que par la quantitê le plaisir de les perdre par aprés sans ressource, & qu’il en faudroit pour la multitude d’œufs dont ces confier au caprice du hazard, le soin d’en sauver feüillets sont chargez de part & d’autre. seulement quelques uns. Car enfin, l’on voit Au sur plus, le public doit être obligé a cet habile des fleurs qui aiant jusqu’a vingt cinq ou trente Physicien, 1˚. De ce qu’ayant reconnu par des obser- étamines (comme la pluspart de celles des fruits vations tres-exactement faites dans le Cabinet, que la à noyau) ne contiennent cependant qu’un seul seule suppression des poussieres êtoit capable de faire œuf. Que de germes detruits! c’est ce que je laisse avorter les fruits, couler la Vigne, nieller, échauder, a supputer parle prodigieux nombre que chaque brusler & ergoter les Bleds, il l’a si heureusement sommet en expulse, où par ce qui en reste dans tiré de cette erreur rustique, qui lui faisoit attribuer Bernasconi & Taiz: Sebastian Vaillant’s 1717 lecture 125

tant de facheux evenements, aux pluïes froides, a ernes nomment Steriles où Fausses-fleurs, la fraicheur de la terre, a la gelée, aux broüillards sont celles qui ne contiennent que les organes épais & puants, & enfin a des coups de Soleil, tout masculines dont j’ai parlé. meurtiers, disoit-on, qui aprés avoir engourdi la Les Femelles, que ces mêmes Botanistes seve, pincé, étranglé, cauterisé, & déchiré ses vais- appellent Fleurs noüées, où Fleurs à fruit, ne seaux, alteré & detruit totalement la tissure & la renferment que l’ovaire ou seulement les tromps substance de ces delicats Embrions, les faisoient a la qui, comme j’ai desja dit, sont les parties su- fin miserablement perir. perieures de cet organe feminin. 2˚. De ce que ne s’êtant point encore ap- Et les Fleurs Androgynes où Hermaph- perceû que les œufs des Poulles qui vivent dans rodites auxquelles ils n’ont point donné de nom, le celibat & la continence, doivent (a l’instar des sont enfin celles ou les deux sexes se trouvent fruits qui n’ont pas été engrossez de ce tout-puis- conjointement. sant grain de poussiere,) être moins gros, moins Je passe aux calices qui n’estant point des pleins, & moins bons a manger que les autres; parties essentielles aux fleurs, ne se rencontrent il prendra d’oresnavant un grand soin de donner pas aussi dans toutes. Ainsi je nomme les unes de bons masles à ces chastes femelles, afin d’avoir Fleurs à calice, où Fleurs complettes, & les d’excellents œufs. autres, Fleurs sans calice où Fleurs incom- Je reviens aux differents sexes des Plantes. plettes. Comme tout le Monde sçait qu’ils ne se trouvent On entend assez que le calice est a la fleur, pas toûjours rassemblez dans une même fleur, & ce que la fleur est aux organes de la géneration; qu’au contraire, l’un est souvent separé de l’autre, c’est a dire qu’il lui sert principalement d’envelope, tantôt sur le même individu, tantôt sur des pieds surtout lors qu’il est de plusieurs pieces: car entre disserents, j’ai creû a cette occasion les calices d’une seule piece, il s’en voit de si courts, qu’ils ne peuvent servir que de doüille & 26 devoir établir de trois sortes de fleurs, sçavoir d’emboiture a la partie inferieure de la fleur, pour de Masles, de Femelles & d’Androgines ou l’assujetir & l’affermir en place. Hermaphrodites; noms qu’un doux & officieux Echoa a bien voulu repeter (au moins les deux a l’Autheur des observat. sur la structure & premiers) dans une Royale assembleé, pour les l’usage des principales parties des fleurs. transmettre par avance a la posterité ainsy que quelques autres particularitez qu’il n’a pas si 28 Cela posé, il s’agit presentement, Messieurs, fidellement rapportées; quoy qu’on ne lui en de Vous donner des expedients pour connoître eût pas fait plus de mystere, croyant bonnement au premier coup d’œil si le calice est d’une seule qu’il n’appartenoit qu’au Corbeau de la fable, de piece ou de plusieurs; car faute de Methode, les se parer des plumes du Geay. Mais a Dieu ne plus grands maîtres s’y sont souvent trompez ainsi plaise que je veüille revendiquer ces particularitez qu’a l’egard des fleurs. si defigurées & lui envier la moindre de toutes On connoît que le calice est d’une seule¸ piece les jolies choses qu’il a butinées par ci par la dans (bien qu’il ne le paroisse pas, êtant decoupé les autheurs pour en grossir ces observations; on jusqu’a sa base) si en tirant un de ses lobes, lui abandonne de bon cœur les unes & les autres il fait resistance, & se déchire plûtôt que de se pour s’en tenir a la pure nature, seul livre qu’il détacher nettement du pedicule. On le connoîtra faut feüilleter pour n’être pas trompé & pour n’en encore mieux, si l’on s’apperçoit que ce calice imposer à personne. subsiste après que la fleur est tombée; car les Les Fleurs Masles que les Botanistes mod- calices de plusieurs pieces n’êtant que contigus, 126 Huntia 11(2) 2002

collez, ou articulez, pour ainsi dire, avec le pe- l’épreuve de tout évenement. Et que le Createur dicule, tombent ordinairement, ou avant la fleur, dont l’infinie sagesse éclate & se fait admirer comme au Pavot, a la Chelidoine &c. où en jusque dans ses plus petits ouvrages, n’en a donné même temps, ou immediatement après, comme de bien marquez qu’a trois sortes de fleurs. 1°. a à la Renoncule & aux plantes cruciferes. cellez qui pour être trop minces & trop delicates, Au lieu que les calices d’une seule piece, s’usent comme au Pavot, au Ciste &c. n’auroient peû plûtôt que de se détacher de leur support ou ils sans cette espece de surtout, resister aux moindres sont continus, n’en êtant proprement que des injures du temps, 2°. a celles qui pour avoir des prolongements & des expansions. Ainsi on petales trop courts & trop étoits, auroient exposé rangera doresnavant parmi cette derniere sorte de a nud des organes analogues à ceux que la pudeur calice, ceux de Telephium, d’Helianthemum, veut absolument que l’on cache, lesquels se seroi- d’Androsaemum, d’Hypericum, d’Ascyrum ent fletris & usez avant que de pouvoir servir. de Ruta de Paeonia de Linum, d’Alsine Telles sont les fleurs de l’Elleborus niger, de &c. qu’on veut nous faire passer pour calices de l’Aconitum de la Nigella &c. 3°. Enfin il en plusieurs pieces. a pourveû tout de celles dont la cheûte auroit in- Si le calice couronne l’Ovaire ou l’Embrion dubitablement été suivie, de la perte des Ovaires, du fruit, ce qui est la même chose, il est hors de qui pour se trouver composez & tres foiblement doute, qu’il est d’une seule piece, & qu’il ne fait attachez autour d’une espece d’Axe, comme dans qu’un corps avec cet Embrion. Donc les calics de les Plantes Aviferes ou Labiées, dans les Bor- Circæa & de Chamænerion qu’on dit être de raginées, dans une partie des Malvacées &c. se plusieurs pieces, ne sont que d’une seule. seroient dètachez au moindre ébranlement, s’ils On doit encore compter que le calice est d’une n’eussent été appuïez ou addossez d’un calice; ou seule piece, lorsque la fleur l’est aussi: Et on ne qui pour être d’une étoffe fort legere, comme au voit guere de calices a plusieurs pieces qu’aux Geranium a la Mauve &c, auroient bientôt peri plantes que j’ai desja nommées qui sont les par trop de chaud ou trop de froid, sans l’abry de Cruciferes, aux vrayes especes de Renoncules, ce rempart, qui le plus souvent est double dans au Pavot, au Glaucium, au Corchorus, au les plantes Malvées. Chelidonium, a l’Hypecoon, au Leontopet- Après vous avoir donné des moyens ponr bien alon, a l’Epimedium, a la Christophoriana demesler les calices d’une seule piece d’avec ceux & a quelques unes dont l’Ovaire s’ouvre en va- de plusieurs pieces, je vais vous dire presentement comment on peut discerner les fleurs monopetales 30 lise c’est a dire d’un bout a l’autre, & d’un seul des polypetales. côtê, soit que cet ovaire soit simple où composé; Et alors la couleur de leurs calices, qui jusqu’a 32 Si les fleurs sont incomplettes ou sans calice qu’elles present, ont été pris pour leurs fleurs, est sem- subsistent, s’accroissent, & servent d’envelope au blable a celle des petales de ces mêmes fleurs. fruits apres la cheûte des étamines, il est constant C’est ce qu’on remarque dans l’Aconitum, le qu’elles ne peuvent estre que d’une seule piece, Delphinium, la Nigella, l’Aquilegia &c. & par consequent que de simple prolongements Si l’on demande pourquoi toutes les fleurs de leurs pedicules, encore qu’on nous les donne n’ont point de calice, on repondra que celles qui la plûpart pour des corps composez de plusieurs sont d’une consistence épaisse, ou charnuë, ainsi pieces. Telles sont les fleurs deBeta, d’Acetosa, que les teguments de leurs ovaires, comme en la d’Atriplex, de Spinacia, de Mercurialis, de plûpart des Plantes Liliacées, a la Pulsatilla Kali, de Veratrum, d’Amaranthus, de Pota- &c. n’en avoient que faire, êtant de leur nature a mogeton &c. Bernasconi & Taiz: Sebastian Vaillant’s 1717 lecture 127

Le contraire arrive aux fleurs polypetales celles des plantes cruciferes, six contre quatre, incomplettes, lesquelles se fletrissent & tombent quelque fois plus (ce qui est fort rare) mais jamais ou avant, ou en même temps que les étamines, moins. Les fleurs d’Herba Paris, de Geum, laissant l’ovaire a nud: comme celles de Tulipa, de Saxifraga, de Sedum, d’Anacampseros, de Lilium &c. de Salicaria, d’Onagra, de Chamaenerion, Quand la fleur est complette & que son calice de Geranium, de Ruta, de Fabago, de est de plusieurs pieces, la fleur l’est indubitable- Tribulus, de Fraxinella, de Caryophyllus, ment aussy. Mais si le calice estant d’une seule de Lychnis, de Myosotis, de quelques Alsine, piece, la fleur paroissoit l’être pareillement, de toutes plantes Legumineuses papilionacées, de alors pour prononcer juste, il faut avoir recours l’Oxycoccus, de l’Azedarach & d’Oxys, ont a l’origine des étamines: car si elles partent des toutes une fois plus de testicules que de petales. parois de la fleur, c’est une marque asseûrée Celles d’Harmala en ont quinze contre cinq; Et qu’elle est monopetale, comme celle de la grande si du restant prodigieux de ces sortes de fleurs, on Gentiane: au lieu que si elles sortent immediate- en excepte seulement celles des Umbelliferes & de ment de la base de l’ovaire, c’est signe que la fleur quelque peu d’autres genres, dans lesquelles on est polypetale. Donc il faut rapporter la fleur de rencontre les testicules & les petales en nombre Ficoides parmi les polypetales quoiqu’on l’ait égal, les fleurs de tous les autres genres en ont misea au rang des monopetales. pour ainsy dire, des Legions. Dans les fleurs masles, ainsi que dans les Her- A l’egard des fleurs monopetales Hermaph- maphrodites, le nombre des testicules ou étamines, rodites dépourveûës de calice, j’en ai remarqué n’est pas d’un petit secours pour débroüiller les de quatre sortes par rapport au nombre de leurs monopetales des polypetales; les premiers n’ayant testicules compare a celui de leurs découpures. communement qu’autant de testicules que de Dans la premiere sorte on trouve moins de ceux-ci découpures: comme dans les fleurs des plantes & plus de celles-la. Dans la seconde, le nombre Rubiacées, Borraginées &c. Quelquefois elles des uns & des autres est égal. Dans la troisiéme, en ont moins, comme les fleurs deVeronica, de on compte une fois plus de testicules que de de- Ligustrum, de quelques especes de Jasmin &c. coupures; Et dans la quatriéme sorte, le nombre Et je ne sçache guere que celles de Styrax, de de ces organes masculins est encore plus grand que Cotyledon major, d’Arbutus, de Vitis Idæa, dans celles de la troisiéme. d’Erica, d’Acacia, de Mimosa, De la premiere sorte, sont les fleurs de Va- leriana, aMem, de l’Acad. R. des Sc. ann. 1705. p. 239. 36 de Valerianella, de Blitum, d’Alchimilla, d’Orchis, d’Elleborine; de Calceòlus, de 34 d’Inga, & de quelques autres plantes Legumin- Limodorum, d’Ophris, de Nidus avis, & de euses, qui aient plus d’étamines que dêcoupures. plusieurs autres plantes Liliacées. Au lieu que le plus grand nombre des fleurs De la seconde sorte, sont celles de Rhabar- polypetales, tant celles qui portent sur l’Ovaire, barum, de Beta, d’Atriplex, d’Herniaria, de que celles qui le renferment, soit qu’elles soient Parietaria, de Polygonum, de Fagopyrum, complettes ou incomplettes, ont plus de testicules de Kali, d’Amaranthus &c. que dc petales. La fleur de Balsamina, par De la troisiéme je ne connois encore que la exemple, a cinq testicules contre quatre petales; fleur de Knawel ou d’Alchimilla gramineo celle d’Hippocastanum, sept contre cinq; celle de folio, majori flore J. R. H. 508. Cardamindum & de l’Acer, huit contre cinq; 128 Huntia 11(2) 2002

Enfin entre les fleurs de la quatriéme pluspart de ces Genres soient établis seulement & derniere sorte, sont surtout les fleurs de par rapport à une structure bien ou mal entenduë Tithymalus. des deux sortes de parties dont il s’est servi, & a Il ne faut pas finir, Messieurs, sans vous certaines ressemblances qu’il s’est imaginé quelles faire observer que lorsque les fleurs monopetales ont avec dés choses connuës auxquelles il les qui sont accompgnées de l’ovaire, ne sont pas des compare, c’est en verité se expansions continuës de la peau de leur support, elles sont toûjours percées dans leur fond. Et si cela 38 moquer. Et pour le peu qu’on suive une methode n’êtoit, comment voudroit-on qu’elles donnassent qui ne roule que sur des principes si vagues & si passage a cet ovaire ou a ses trompes? On nous dit passagers, on en est bientôt dégouté. pourtant positivement, (dans une methode un peu Aussi ne voit on que quelques brocheurs de trop ventée) que la fleur de l’Androsace, n’est nouveaux genres qui êtant êbloüis de son riche point percée; Et que celles de la petite Centaurée, clinquant, je veux dire, de la beauté & de la du Plantin, de Polygala & du Chevrefeüille, multitude de ses figures dont les trois quarts sont sont fermées dans leur fond, bien que ces diverses inutiles; Et persuadez par les temoignages au- fleurs soient a calice. thentiques de l’autheur, que cette methode est Voila, en général, Messieurs, l’idée qu’il faut excellente, qu’il n’est guere possibile d’en se former de la structure des fleurs, de leurs dif- reduire d’autres en pratique, Et que c’est la ferences, & de l’usage de leurs parties. seule qui se puisse accommoder a l’usage; Avant que d’en venir a la demonstration des on ne voit disje que ces Messieurs, qui, pleins de Genres, j’en établirai toûjours le caractere con- confiance, osent marcher de pied ferme dans ce formement a la methode que j’aurois déja donnée champ encore plus herissé de Ronces & d’Epines, au public, ainsy que mon Herbier des environs qu’il n’est surchargé de portraits de fleurs & de de Paris, si mon peu de santé me l’eût permis. fruits. Eh, qui ne se recriroit pas à l’aspect de Car de pretendre avec un autheur celebre que la toutes leurs meprises!