PREFACE.
The present translation of Dr. E. Warming’s Haandbog i den Systematiske Botanik is taken from the text of the 3rd Danish Edition (1892), and from Dr. Knoblauch’s German Edition (1890), and the book has been further enriched by numerous additional notes which have been kindly sent to me by the author. Dr. Warming’s work has long been recognised as an original and important contribution to Systematic Botanical Literature, and I have only to regret that the pressure of other scientific duties has delayed its presentation to English readers. Dr. Warming desires me to record his high appreciation of the careful translation of Dr. Knoblauch, and his obligation to him for a number of corrections and improvements of which he has made use in the 3rd Danish Edition. In a few instances I have made slight additions to the text; these, however, appear as footnotes, or are enclosed in square brackets.
In the present Edition the Thallophytes have been revised and rearranged from notes supplied to me by Dr. Knoblauch, to whom I am indebted for the Classification of the Fungi, according to the more recent investigations of Brefeld. The Bacteria have been revised by Dr. Migula, the Florideæ rearranged after Schmitz, and the Taphrinaceæ after Sadebeck. The main body of the text of the Algæ and Fungi remains as it was originally written by Dr. Wille and Dr. Rostrup in the Danish Edition, though in many places considerable alterations and additions have been made. For the sake of comparison a tabular key to the Classification adopted in the Danish Edition is given in the Appendix.
In the Angiosperms I have retained the sequence of orders in the Danish original, and have not rearranged them according to the systems more familiar to English students. In any rearrangement much of the significance of Dr. Warming’s valuable and original observations would have been lost, and also from a teacher’s point of view I have found this system of great value. Although at present it may not be completely satisfactory, yet as an attempt to explain the mutual relationships, development and retrogression of many of the orders, it may be considered to have a distinct advantage over the more artificial systems founded upon Jussieu’s Divisions of Polypetalæ, Gamopetalæ, and Apetalæ.
With reference to the principles of the systematic arrangement adopted, I may here insert the following brief communication from the author (dated March, 1890), which he has requested me to quote from the preface of Dr. Knoblauch’s edition:—“Each form which, on comparative morphological considerations, is clearly less simple, or can be shown to have arisen by reduction or through abortion of another type having the same fundamental structure, or in which a further differentiation and division of labour is found, will be regarded as younger, and as far as possible, and so far as other considerations will admit, will be reviewed later than the ‘simpler,’ more complete, or richer forms. For instance, to serve as an illustration: Epigyny and Perigyny are less simple than Hypogny; the Epigynous Sympetalæ, Choripetalæ, Monocotyledones are, therefore, treated last, the Hydrocharitaceæ are considered last under the Helobieæ, etc. Zygomorphy is younger than Actinomorphy; the Scitamineæ and Gynandræ therefore follow after the Liliifloræ, the Scrophulariaceæ after the Solanaceæ, Linaria after Verbascum, etc. Forms with united leaves indicate younger types than those with free leaves; hence the Sympetalæ come after the Choripetalæ, the Sileneæ after the Alsineæ, the Malcaceæ after the Sterculiaceæ and Tiliaceæ, etc.
“Acyclic (spiral-leaved) flowers are older than cyclic (verticillate-leaved) with a definite number, comparing, of course, only those with the same fundamental structure. The Veronica-type must be considered as younger, for example, than Digitalis and Antirrhinum, these again as younger than Scrophularia; Verbascum, on the contrary, is the least reduced, and therefore considered as the oldest form. Similarly the one-seeded, nut-fruited Ranunculaceæ are considered as a later type (with evident abortion) than the many-seeded, folicular forms of the Order; the Paronychieæ and Chenopodiaceæ as reduced forms of the Alsineæ type; and the occurrence of few seeds in an ovary as generally arising through reduction of the many-seeded forms. The Cyperaceæ are regarded as a form derived from the Juncaceæ through reduction, and associated with this, as is so often the case, there is a complication of the inflorescence; the Dipsacaceæ are again regarded as a form proceeding from the Valerianaceæ by a similar reduction, and these in their turn as an offshoot from the Caprifoliaceæ, etc. Of course these principles of systematic arrangement could only be applied very generally; for teaching purposes they have often required modification.”
In preparing the translation considerable difficulty has been experienced in finding a satisfactory rendering of several terms which have no exact equivalent in English. I may here especially mention the term Vorblatt (Forblad) which I have translated by the term bracteole, when it clearly applied to the first leaf (or leaves) on a pedicel; but in discussing questions of general morphology a term was much needed to include both vegetative and floral shoots, and for this I have employed the term “Fore-leaf.” Also, the term “Floral-leaf” has been adopted as an equivalent of “Hochblatt,” and the term “bract” has been limited to a leaf subtending a flower. I have followed Dr. E. L. Mark in translating the word “Anlage” by “Fundament.”
At the end of the book will be found a short appendix giving an outline of some of the earlier systems of Classification, with a more complete account of that of Hooker and Bentham.
In a book of this character it is almost impossible to avoid some errors, but it is hoped that these will be comparatively few. In correcting the proof-sheets I have received invaluable assistance from Dr. Warming and Dr. Knoblauch, who have kindly read through every sheet, and to whom I am greatly indebted for many criticisms and suggestions. I have also to thank Mr. I. H. Burkill for his kind assistance in looking over the proofs of the Monocotyledons and Dicotyledons, and Mr. Harold Wager for kindly reading through the proofs of the Algæ and Fungi. My thanks are also especially due to Mr. E. L. Danielsen, and I wish to take this opportunity of acknowledging the very considerable help which I have received from him in translating from the Original Danish.
M. C. POTTER.
January, 1895.