Annals of the History and Philosophy of Biology

Plant systematics in Jena during the early 19 th century
Perhaps he regarded the idea of metamorphosis as a justifying principle behind the attribution
of a specific value to a certain character. Was the metamorphosis to be helpful
not only to understand the features of plants but also to understand the affinities of plant
groups?
In 1812 Fr. S. Voigt arranged his catalogue of the botanical garden Jena and of the garden
Belvédère in Weimar 85 according to 106 natural families previously described in the
literature, for example by J. H. Jaume Saint-Hilaire 86. In this catalogue Fr. S. Voigt placed
the genera Chara or Potamogeton within the family Najades as Monocotyledons, although
A.-L. de Jussieu had defined the Najades as Acotyledons 87. In fact, although Fr. S. Voigt
characterized the Najades as Monocotyledons, he observed that they were at the boundary
to the Acotyledons:
„Es sind die unvollkommensten Gewächse mit deutlichen Blüthentheilen, und oft mit dunkeln,
schmalen, pergamentartigen Blättern versehen. Sie gränzen nahe an die Acotyledonen, mit denen
sie auch vielfach die Sternartige Stellung ihrer Blätter gemein haben. Viele tragen nur Staubfäden
und Stempel, ohne weitere Hüllen. “ 88
This idea derived without doubt from his reading of Jaume Saint-Hilaire who placed his
family fluviales (Potamogeton, Chara, Naias etc.) between the ferns and the Aroideae, the latter
being placed by Jaume Saint-Hilaire between the Monocotyledons 89.
In 1817 Fr. S. Voigt described 147 natural families in his Grundzüge einer Naturgeschichte
90. The Najades were included in a new family called Saurureae, but this time included in
the Acotyledons. In 1819 he deleted the group Najades from his classification probably
following the publications of R. Brown 91, in 1827 he put the Najades within the order of
Potameae as Embryonnatae Monocotyledones. Fr. S. Voigt’s natural families are in general conformity
with A.-L. de Jussieu’s natural groups but he introduced more hierarchy in their
arrangement, in that way emphasizing that some families are subordinated to others. Fr.
S. Voigt used the layout of the printed page to state his point, for example:
85 Voigt, Fr. S. Catalogus plantarum. Jena, Goepferdtii, 1812: 78 p.
86 In comparison with the 100 natural families of A.-L. de Jussieu, Fr. S. Voigt introduced 12 new families :
Dicotyledones: Passifloreae, Succulentae, Personatae, Orobranchoidae, Rhinanthoideae, Pyrenaceae, Primulaceae, Drimyrhizeae
and Monocotyledones : Aloideae, Smilacinae, Alismoideae, Gloriosae. He transferred 5 families from the Dicotyledons
to the Monocotyledons: Laurineae, Polygoneae, Atriplices, Amaranthi, Plantagines. Nevertheless he described again
the Plantagines as Dicotyledons in his Lehrbuch der Botanik (1827). Moreover, Fr. S. Voigt deleted 6 families:
Cannae, Pediculares, Vitices, Sempervivae, Scrophulariae, Lysimachiae.
87 Jussieu, A.-L. 1789. Op. cit. note 3.
88 Voigt, Fr. S. 1808. Op. cit. note 77: p. 137.
89 J. H. Jaume Saint-Hilaire proposed a vague definition of the group Najades: “Elles [Fluviales or Najades]
renferment des monocotylédones et des dicotylédones et nécessite par conséquent une réforme.” Jaume Saint-Hilaire, J. H.
1805. Op. cit. note 55: p. 50.
90 Voigt, Fr. S. Grundzüge einer Naturgeschichte. Frankfurt a. M., H. L. Brönner, 1817: pp. 636-637.
91 Voigt, Fr. S. l819. Op. cit. note 75. See Brown, R. Prodromus florae novae Hollandiae. London, Taylor & Johnson,
1810.
Annals of the History and Philosophy of Biology, Vol. 10 (2005)
133