Annals of the History and Philosophy of Biology

Plant systematics in Jena during the early 19 th century
che neben das Aehnliche zu stellen. […]. Das künstliche Pflanzensystem wählt dagegen nur ein
einzelnes, sehr beständiges Merkmal, […].” 22
This comment reminds us of the French definition of system and method given by L.
Henckel von Donnersmarck above.
In the first part of this paper we pay attention to the base of Fr. S. Voigt’s botanical
practice: the botanical garden. We wonder whether this botanical garden reflected, after
the appointment of Fr. S. Voigt to the post of director in 1807, his reception of the
“French” natural method or still conserved the attempt of a natural system realized by
his predecessor A. J. G. K. Batsch. According to J. W. von Goethe’s statement 23, the
taxonomical arrangement of the garden had not been changed before the 1820s. In fact,
the plan of the garden inaugurated in 1794 followed A. J. G. K. Batsch’s Dispositio generum
(1786) 24 and Jena is considered to be one of the first gardens arranged following a natural
system 25. Nevertheless it seems problematic to believe that Fr. S. Voigt, successor to A. J.
G. K. Batsch after F. J. Schelver (1778-1832), maintained the original arrangement of
1794 when at the same time he rejected Batsch’s natural system, promoting instead the
ideas of A.-L. de Jussieu in his botanical teachings and textbooks.
In the course of our discussion we want to analyse Fr. S. Voigt’s reception of the
“French” natural method. We will explain how Fr. S. Voigt took the main principle of
the natural method into account, the concept of the constancy and subordination of the
plant features. Fr. S. Voigt tried to implement this evaluation of the plant characteristics
on the basis of their relative instability, particularly when he referred to: “die gradativen
Werthe der Charactere“ 26.
Finally we highlight the didactic treatment of the natural method by Fr. S. Voigt.
Thereby, follow the question whether the natural method could be a useful way of diffusing
plant systematics at the beginning of the 19 th century.
2. Fr. S. Voigt and A. J. G. K. Batsch’s arrangement of the Jena botanical
garden.
Around 1800 the University of Jena was recognized as a privileged forum for debates on
scientific theories 27 and especially about the comprehension and visualization of the
22 Voigt, Fr. S. 1827. Op. cit. note 2: p. 193.
23 Bradish, J. A. von. Goethes Beamtenlaufbahn, vol. 4. New York, 1937 : p. 282. [Oberaufsicht über die
unmittelbaren Anstalten für Wissenschaft und Kunst in Weimar und Jena].
24 Batsch, A. J. G. K. Dispositio generum plantarum ienensium. Jena, Heller, 1786.
25 See Poliansky, I. 2001 & 2004a and b. Fr. S. Voigt mentioned also Laurentius Heisterus who had arranged
the Helmstedt botanical garden according to his Systema plantarum generale of 1749. Fr. S. Voigt speculated
that Bernard de Jussieu might have been influenced by L. Heisterus’s system in his own arrangement of the
garden of Trianon. [See Heisterus, L. Systema plantarum generale ex fructificatione […]. Helmstedt, Weygand,
1749.]
26 See Jussieu, A.- L. 1824. Op. cit. note 14: p. 447.
27 Bach, T. & Breidbach, O. Die Lehre im Bereich der „Naturwissenschaften“ an der Universität Jena zwischen
1788 und 1807, in: N.T.M., 9, 2001: pp. 152-176.
Annals of the History and Philosophy of Biology, Vol. 10 (2005)
121