This library is built in the open.
If you spot an error, have a suggestion, or just want to say hello — we’d love to hear from you.

having instituted happier observations and detected manifest signs of discrepancy, found it necessary to reduce to other genera or transferred to entirely new ones.
I truly think it is best in the nomenclatures of Plants (since descriptions of them and icons cannot always be grasped by the eyes or held by memory) to designate their differences derived from the form of the Flower and Fruit, without neglecting, however, the habit of the leaves, stems, roots, and the rest of the Plants (1),
(1) Hence the indication of the native Place serves a great deal, whether it be alpine, marshy, maritime, high, low, woody, squalid, burning, glacial, for this will surely profit the cultivation of that plant the most: For although it may happen that those proper to warm Regions are sometimes found in cold ones, and Maritime ones in the Alps, that same thing happens only very rarely and by chance. Rather, all peculiar names of the Provinces and Places in which they were first found should be rejected, since the same ones are born in other and distant Regions as well, as I myself can testify from experience: For I have discovered that several Plants called by Botanists Asian, Spanish, Portuguese, Danish, Pannonian, and English, in reality grow spontaneously and copiously in Etruscan soil as well, whose natives they can therefore be called by equal reason.