Annals of the History and Philosophy of Biology

Plant systematics in Jena during the early 19 th century
In fact the study of the reception of the “Théorie élémentaire” in Weimar-Jena is quite
complex because of the existence of the several German translations, for example the
edition of J. J. Römer 102 and the “translation”/ interpretation of K. P. Sprengel criticized
by A.-P.de Candolle himself 103.
3.3. Conclusion
To conclude we want to discuss two points of P.-F. Stevens’s interpretation of A.-L. de
Jussieu’s “Méthode naturelle” and the “German-speaking world”. First he assumes that
“There is nothing in Voigt’s text about continuity”. This idea of continuity was like the weighting
of plant characters a basis of A.-L. de Jussieu methodological thought. P. F. Stevens
refers to Fr. S. Voigt’s Darstellung des natürlichen Pflanzensystems von Jussieu (1806), which
includes indeed no idea about continuity, but two years later he published his first textbook
entitled System der Botanik (1808) with the aim to introduce the idea of Metamorphosis
in the construction of a natural method. Fr. S. Voigt’s approach to the structure
of the vegetable kingdom is agglomerative, he based his whole approach on the affinities
on the concept of the weighting of each feature of plant organs, he links the affinities of
plants to their environment, and finally he notices groupings of plants in form of connected
families and sub-families, genera and species. Consequently, the idea of continuity
has gained ground in the textbooks of Fr. S. Voigt, for exemple he wrote in 1827:
“Aber auch Monopetalie und Polypetalie sind nur relative, wenn auch beständigere Formen (man
denke z. B. an die Ericaceae) es müssen demnach die Nyctagineae, Primulaceae, Phlox u. s. w. auch mit
den Caryophylleis zusammengestellt, und anderseits unter diesen die Cerea, nemlich Cactus, als
abweichende, übrigens dazu gehörige Bildungen, erkannt werden.”
Although his publications have seldom been mentioned by the botanical community the
evaluation of Fr. S. Voigt’s propositions allows us to qualify a second assertion of P. F.
Stevens:
„If these German-speaking naturalists had attempted to understand the ideas of Candolle and
Jussieu by reading commentators and translators speaking their own language, they still would not
have found a clear idea of Nature.” 104
Fr. S. Voigt was educated in the field of botany by A. J. G. K. Batsch at the Jena botanical
garden. However the difference between the natural system developed by A. J. G. K.
Batsch and the outlines of Fr. S. Voigt’s classification is clear. Nevertheless, because of
the active support of J. W. von Goethe, the continuity of the botanical research on natural
classification had not been troubled. J. W. von Goethe never contrasted the natural
102 Römer, J. J. Theoretische Anfangsgründe der Botanik […]. Zürich, Orell, Füssli & Co., 1814-1815: 2 vol.
103 Sprengel, K. P. [& De Candolle, A.-P.] 1820, op. cit. note 6. De Candolle wrote: „Mr Sprengel, qui unissant
dans l´ouvrage ses idées aux miennes et dans le titre son nom au mien, en fit un livre vraiment absurde où la
fin de chaque chapitre est en opposition avec le commencement…“ De Candolle A.-P. Mémoires et souvenirs
(1778-1841). Candaux, J.-D. & Drouin, J.-M. Hrsg. Genève, Georg, 2004: p. 277 and De Candolle, A.-P.
Organographie végétale. Paris, Deterville, 1827: p. v. note 1.
104 Stevens, P. F. 1994. Op. cit. note 3: p. 94.
Annals of the History and Philosophy of Biology, Vol. 10 (2005)
137