Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
SpringerLink
Log in

Drawing the Line: Mapping Cultivated Plants and Seeing Nature in Nineteenth-Century Plant Geography

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
New Perspectives on the History of Life Sciences and Agriculture

Part of the book series: Archimedes ((ARIM,volume 40))

Abstract

This chapter discusses discourses on crop distribution in early nineteenth-century plant geography and the construction of vegetation maps. An examination of Augustin-Pyramus de Candolle’s Carte botanique de France (1805) demonstrates that cultivated plants affected how botanists thought about plant distribution and understanding regional variation in plant life. Research on wild and cultivated plants was strongly intertwined in the early nineteenth century. By recovering this tradition, we are also led to reevaluate our understanding of the influence of “Humboldtianism” at this time. From the 1860s onwards, studies of wild and cultivated plants took separate routes, leading to a more specialized genre of research on cultivated plants.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Eckert (1921–1925, quotes vol. 2, p. 388).

  2. 2.

    Berghaus (1845–1848), sect. V (botanical geography). This atlas was soon reissued in Great Britain, see Johnston (1848). For the history of these atlases: Camerini (1993), Espenhorst (2003–2008, vol. 1, pp. 365–390).

  3. 3.

    Eckert (1921–1925, vol. 2, p. 389).

  4. 4.

    “Damit wird ein kartographischer Weg gezeigt, den zu beschreiten die Zeit noch nicht reif war.” Eckert (1921–1925, vol. 2, p. 389).

  5. 5.

    A comprehensive history of early botanical distribution maps does not exist yet. For the broader context of “thematic” (distribution) mapping, see Robinson (1982, pp. 100–108). For the second half of the nineteenth century, Güttler (2011).

  6. 6.

    Hinds (1835, p. 498).

  7. 7.

    Watson (1836).

  8. 8.

    A significant example for the popularity of “crop mapping” is the most widely distributed geographical journal in this time, so-called Petermanns Geographische Mittheilungen. Here, observations on the distributions of crops dominated observations on wild plants. See, for instance, the index volume of the journal’s first decade: Anonymous (1865, pp. 43–44).

  9. 9.

    For the history of plant geography more generally, see Nelson (1978), (Browne 1983), Nicolson (1996).

  10. 10.

    The literature on colonial botany has grown enormously after the pioneering work of Brockway (1979). See especially: Browne (1992), Browne (1996), Drayton (2000), Schiebinger and Swan (2005), Endersby (2008). I will refer to more literature concerning the role of botanical gardens later in this chapter.

  11. 11.

    Dettelbach (1996) and Dettelbach (1999).

  12. 12.

    Lamarck and Candolle (1805). For the history of this flora in the context of French botany, see Williams (2001, pp. 61–68).

  13. 13.

    Stafleu and Cowan (1976–1988, vol. 1, p. 442 and vol. 2, pp. 731–732).

  14. 14.

    Ebach and Goujet (2006).

  15. 15.

    Lamarck and Candolle (1805, vol. 2, p. VIII). Quoted from the translation of this text in Ebach and Goujet (2006, p. 767).

  16. 16.

    Young (1792, pp. 293–301).

  17. 17.

    See, for instance, Young (1794), containing a colored “Map of the soil of Suffolk.”

  18. 18.

    Young (1792, p. 293).

  19. 19.

    Young (1792, p. 294).

  20. 20.

    Young (1792, pp. 294–295).

  21. 21.

    Young (1792, p. 294).

  22. 22.

    Young (1792, p. 294). With respect to the lines, Young also discussed the possibilities of cultivating maize and wine in England, see (1792, p. 295).

  23. 23.

    Young (1792, p. 295).

  24. 24.

    Young (1792, p. 295).

  25. 25.

    Williams (2001, p. 110) emphasizes how much Lamarck and Candolle relied on the local floras designed by lay observers all over France.

  26. 26.

    For the broader history of lay observation within the history of science, see the special issue in Science in Context edited by Vetter (2011).

  27. 27.

    Lamarck and Candolle (1805, vol. 2: pp. V–VI).

  28. 28.

    For the close links between Candolle’s botanical work and the politics of the Napoleon administration, see the paper by Joseph Horan, chap. 5 in this volume.

  29. 29.

    Spary (2000).

  30. 30.

    McClellan and Regourd (2000).

  31. 31.

    Spary (2000, esp. 23 and 125).

  32. 32.

    For the broader context of Giraud-Soulavie’s research, see Bourguet (2002).

  33. 33.

    Giraud-Soulavie (1780–1784).

  34. 34.

    Before this period, cross-sections had only been used in geology and mining. See Rudwick (1976).

  35. 35.

    Giraud-Soulavie (1780–1784, vol. 2/1: p. 43).

  36. 36.

    Giraud-Soulavie (1780–1784, vol. 2/1: pp. 35–38).

  37. 37.

    Giraud-Soulavie (1780–1784, vol. 2/1: p. 188).

  38. 38.

    Giraud-Soulavie (1780–1784, vol. 2/1: p. 194).

  39. 39.

    Giraud-Soulavie (1780–1784, vol. 2/1: pp. 198–205).

  40. 40.

    Matagne (1999). See also the article by Juhé-Beaulaton (1999) in the same volume “Du jardin des plantes médicinales de Paris aux jardins coloniaux.”

  41. 41.

    Konvitz (1987, chap. 6).

  42. 42.

    Young (1792, p. 294). Candolle (1862) used this term later in Mémoires et souvenirs, p. 209.

  43. 43.

    Bigg (2007) and Daston (2008, esp. 107–110).

  44. 44.

    Green (2002).

  45. 45.

    For instance, Young (1794).

  46. 46.

    On the history of cameralism, see Wakefield (2009).

  47. 47.

    Schindler and Bonss (1980), Lowood (1991), Sandl (1999, pp. 91–92). For the broader context of this lay movement within discourses in Oekonomie, see the article by Denise Phillips, Chap. 2 in this volume.

  48. 48.

    An early example was Suckow (1777). Short historical sketches concerning the history of economic botany are in Heiser (1986), Wickens (1990), with a broader focus on Victorian Britain: Endersby (2008).

  49. 49.

    Nikolow (2001).

  50. 50.

    Fick (1971) and Robinson (1982, pp. 140–147).

  51. 51.

    See Nikolow (2001).

  52. 52.

    See, for instance, the “illuminated forest map” in Hartig (1805). For the broader context of German forestry, see Lowood (1990).

  53. 53.

    Scharfe and Neugebauer (1991).

  54. 54.

    Nikolow (1999).

  55. 55.

    Crome (1782, pp. XII–XIII).

  56. 56.

    Crome, (1782), p. XV: “… das Ganze mit einem Blick zu übersehen….”

  57. 57.

    See especially Daston (2010).

  58. 58.

    Biermann (1990, pp. 149–168).

  59. 59.

    Wakefield (2009, p. 28).

  60. 60.

    Heesen (2005).

  61. 61.

    Lack (2004).

  62. 62.

    Humboldt (2000), p. 93: “… die Kunst, in der Tasche zu schreiben….”

  63. 63.

    Berchtold (1789, vol. 1, p. 43).

  64. 64.

    Berchtold (1789, pp. 195–515).

  65. 65.

    See Faak (2002, pp. 61–62).

  66. 66.

    Lack (2009).

  67. 67.

    Humboldt (1815–1832, vol. 6/2: pp. 279–305).

  68. 68.

    Today this document is part of his “Nachlass,” Staatsbibliothek Berlin, manuscript department, “kleiner Kasten 7b,” No. 71.

  69. 69.

    Cañizares-Esguerra (2005).

  70. 70.

    Humboldt (2003, vol. 2: p. 77).

  71. 71.

    For this map, which has become an icon of “Humboldtian science,” see Dettelbach (1999).

  72. 72.

    The “essai” is available in a new English translation: Humboldt (2009).

  73. 73.

    Cited and translated from a German edition: Humboldt (1989), quoted on 153: “So bietet die Skala des Ackerbaus das Bild menschlicher Industrie von dem Innern der Bergwerke bis zu dem verschneiten Gipfel der Anden dar.”

  74. 74.

    Lamarck and Candolle1805, vol. 2: pp. VIII–IX. Quoted from: Ebach and Goujet (2006, p. 767).

  75. 75.

    Humboldt (2008), pp. 344–345: “Ich könnte daher den Ackerbau von Neu-Spanien nach den grossen Abteilungen behandeln, welche ich oben bei meinem Entwurf des physischen Abrisses des mexicanischen Bodens auseinandergesetzt habe und könnte den Kultur-Linien folgen, die auf meinen geologischen Profilen gezogen…sind.”

  76. 76.

    Humboldt (2008, pp. 344–347).

  77. 77.

    Humboldt (2008, p. 345): “Die meteorologischen Phänomene wie die in der Geographie der Pflanzen und Tiere stehen unterm Äquator unter unveränderlichen und leicht kenntlichen Gesetzen.”

  78. 78.

    Meyen (1836, p. 31): “Auch ist es nach den gegenwärtigen Erfahrungen nicht mehr schwer zu erkennen, dass dieser Parallelismus genau mit jenem übereinstimmt, welcher sich, in Hinsicht der Wärme-Abnahme, zwischen den Entfernungen vom Äquator zum Pole und von der Ebene bis zur Schneegrenze zeigt. Hier wird man die Vortheile, welche die Geographie der Pflanzen auf den Ackerbau und überhaupt auf die Cultur des Landes ausüben könnte, zuerst recht deutlich erkennen lernen.”

  79. 79.

    Humboldt (2008, p. 345).

  80. 80.

    Humboldt (2008, p. 345).

  81. 81.

    Humboldt (2008, p. 346).

  82. 82.

    See also: Meyen (1836, pp. 25–29).

  83. 83.

    Humboldt (2008, p. 345): “[D]ie angebauten Pflanzen sind in ihrer Organisation so beweglich, dass die menschliche Sorgfalt sie äufig über die Grenzen hinaustreibt, die der Naturforscher ihnen zu bestimmen geruht hat.”

  84. 84.

    Meyen (1836, p. 108).

  85. 85.

    Schouw (1823, p. 205): “Ob eine angebaute Pflanze an einem gewissen Orte vorkommt, hängt nicht nur von klimatischen Verhältnissen ab, sondern auch von dem Culturgrade, und der Betriebsamkeit der Völker, von ihrem gegenseitigen Verkehre, manchmal von ihren Sitten, ihren religiösen Vorstellungen u.s.w. Es bleiben indess doch noch immer Grenzen, welche, von den klimatischen Ursachen bestimmt, der Fleiss und die Kunst nicht übersteigen können. Diese zu bestimmen muss uns in theoretischer wie in praktischer Hinsicht wichtig seyn….”

  86. 86.

    Schouw (1823, p. 206). Again, while discussing the distribution areas of this plant, Schouw referred to Young and Candolle’s treatment of cultivated plants in France.

  87. 87.

    Allen (1994, pp. 94–103)).

  88. 88.

    Watson (1847–1859, vol. 1, pp. 30–31).

  89. 89.

    Watson (1847–1859, vol. 1, p. 32).

  90. 90.

    Watson (1847–1859, vol. 1, p. 33).

  91. 91.

    Güttler (2011).

  92. 92.

    A good overview is to be found in Troll (1925).

  93. 93.

    Especially Nicolson (1996).

  94. 94.

    A history of the material culture of nineteenth-century geography teaching in Germany has not been written yet, but encyclopedias from the 1860 provide us with good impression of the map use in schools, see especially the articles “Geschichte und Geographie in der Volksschule” and “Geographie in höheren Schulen” in Schmid (1859–1875), vol. 2, pp. 704–715 and 806–820.

  95. 95.

    Brogiato (1996).

  96. 96.

    Rudolph (1852).

  97. 97.

    Keltie (1885, quote 501). On this report, see Wise (1986).

  98. 98.

    Scharfe and Neugebauer (1991).

  99. 99.

    On this atlas, see note 2.

  100. 100.

    On Berghaus, see Engelmann (1977).

  101. 101.

    Berghaus called it a “Miscellen-Atlas für geographisch-physikalische Belustigungen” in a letter to his publisher Perthes from November 18, 1830. Archive of the Perthes Publishing Company, Research Library Gotha, University of Erfurt, Section “Mitarbeiter und Freunde des Verlages”, Nr. 19A/1, 18.

  102. 102.

    See note 2.

  103. 103.

    See the letters of Berghaus in the Archive of the Perthes Publishing Company, Research Library Gotha, University of Erfurt, Section “Mitarbeiter und Freunde des Verlages,” Nr. 19A.

  104. 104.

    See also note 8.

  105. 105.

    Drude made this statement in a letter that he wrote to his atlas editor on September 30, 1882: Archive of the Perthes Publishing Company, University of Erfurt, Section “Mitarbeiter und Freunde des Verlages,” Nr. 19B/6 (Correspondence of Hermann Berghaus), pp. 12–13.

References

  • Allen, David Elliston. 1994. The naturalist in Britain: A social history, 2nd ed. Princeton: University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anonymous. 1865. Inhaltsverzeichnis von Petermann’s ‘Geographischen Mitteilungen’ 1855–1864. Gotha: Justus Perthes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berchtold, Leopold. 1789. Essay to direct and extend the inquiries of patriotic travellers, 2 vols. London: Robinson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berghaus, Heinrich. 1845–1848. Physikalischer Atlas oder Sammlung von Karten, auf denen die hauptsächlichsten Erscheinungen der anorganischen und organischen Natur nach ihrer geographischen Verbreitung und Vertheilung bildlich dargestellt sind. Gotha: Perthes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biermann, Kurt-R. 1990. Miscellanea Humboldtiana. Berlin: Akademie.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bigg, Charlotte. 2007. The panorama; or, la nature á coup d’oeil. In Observing nature-representing experience: The osmotic dynamics of Romanticism, 1800–1850, ed. Erna Fiorentini, 73–95. Berlin: Reimer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourguet, Marie-Noëlle. 2002. Landscape with numbers: Natural history, travel and instruments in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. In Instruments, travel and science:Itineraries of precision from seventeenth to the twentieth century, ed. Marie-Noëlle Bourguet, Christian Licoppe, and H. Otto Sibum, 96–125. London: Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Brockway, Lucile H. 1979. Science and colonial expansion: The role of the British Royal Botanical Gardens. New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brogiato, Heinz Peter. 1996. ‘An dem Knochen wir von vielen genagt’: Zur Entwicklung der geographischen Schulatlanten im 19. Jahrhundert. Internationale Schulbuchforschung 18:35–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browne, Janet. 1983. The secular arc: Studies in the history of biogeography. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browne, Janet. 1992. A science of empire: British biogeography before Darwin. Revue d’histoire des sciences 45:453–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browne, Janet. 1996. Biogeography and empire. In Cultures of national history, ed. N. Jardine, A. Secord, and E. C. Spary, 305–321. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camerini, Jane R. 1993. The physical atlas of Heinrich Berghaus: Distribution maps as scientific knowledge. In Non-verbal communication in science prior to 1900, ed. R. G. Mazzolini, 479–512. Florence: Olschki.

    Google Scholar 

  • Candolle, Augustin Pyramus de. 1862. Mémoires et souvenirs de Augustin-Pyramus de Candolle, écrits par lui-même et publiês par son fils. Geneva: Joél Cherbuliez.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cañizares-Esguerra, Jorge. 2005. How derivative was Humboldt? Microcosmic nature narratives in early modern Spanish America and the (other) origins of Humboldt's ecological sensibilities. In Colonial botany: Science, commerce, and politics in the early modern world, ed. L. Schiebinger and C. Swan, 148–165. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crome, August Friedrich Wilhelm. 1782. Europens Produkte. Zum Gebrauch der Neuen Produkten-Karten von Europa. Dessau: Self-published.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daston, Lorraine. 2008. On scientific observation. Isis 99:97–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daston, Lorraine. 2010. The Humboldtian gaze. In Science as cultural practice. 1 Vol. Cultures and politics of research from the early modern period to the age of extremes, ed. Moritz Epple and Claus Zittel, 45–60. Berlin: Akademie.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dettelbach, Michael. 1996. Humboldtian science. In Cultures of national history, ed. N. Jardine, A. Secord, and E.C. Spary, 287–304. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dettelbach, Michael. 1999. The face of nature: Precise measurement, mapping and sensibility in the work of Alexander von Humboldt. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Biology and Biomedical Sciences 30:473–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drayton, Richard. 2000. Nature’s government: Science, imperial Britain, and the ‘improvement’ of the world. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebach, Malte C., and D. F. Goujet. 2006. The first biogeographical map. Journal of Biogeography 33:761–769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eckert, Max. 1921–1925. Die Kartenwissenschaft. Forschungen und Grundlagen zu einer Kartographie als Wissenschaft, 2 vols. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Endersby, Jim. 2008. Imperial nature: Joseph Hooker and the practices of Victorian science. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engelmann, Gerhard. 1977. Heinrich Berghaus: Der Kartograph von Potsdam. Halle: Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Espenhorst, Jürgen. 2003–2008. Petermann’s planet. Trans. G. C. Grossmann, 2 vols. Schwerte: Pangaea Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faak, Margot. 2002. Alexander von Humboldts amerikanische Reisejournale: Eine Übersicht. Berlin: Akademie der Wissenschaften.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fick, Karl E. 1971. Die kartographische Darstellung wirtschaftsgeographischer Sachverhalte im 18. Jahrhundert. Geographische Zeitschrift 59:131–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giraud-Soulavie, Jean Louis. 1780–1784. Histoire naturelle de la France méridionale, 2 vols. Paris: Coste Belle.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, Nancy L. 2002. The comparative gaze: Travelers in France before the age of mass tourism. French Historical Studies 25:423–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Güttler, Nils. 2011. Scaling the period eye: Oscar Drude and the cartographical practice of plant geography, 1870–1910s. Science in Context 24:1–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartig, Georg Ludwig. 1805. Anweisung zur Taxation und Beschreibung der Forste, zweiter oder practischer Teil, 2nd ed. Giessen: Heyer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heesen, Anke te. 2005. Accounting for the natural world: Double-entry bookkeeping in the field. In Colonial botany: Science, commerce, and politics in the early modern world, ed. L. Schiebinger and C. Swan, 237–251. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heiser, Charles B. 1986. Economic botany: Past and future. Economic Botany 40:261–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinds, Richard Brinsley. 1835. Observations on the construction of maps in geographical botany. Magazine of Natural History 8:498–501.

    Google Scholar 

  • Humboldt, Alexander von. 1815–1832. Reise in die Äquinoctial-Gegenden des neuen Kontinents in den Jahren 1799, 1800, 1801, 1802, 1803 und 1804, 6 vols. Stuttgart: Cotta.

    Google Scholar 

  • Humboldt, Alexander von. 1989. Ideen zu einer Geographie der Pflanzen nebst einem Naturgemälde der Tropenländer, Studienausgabe, 1 vol, ed. Hanno Beck, 42–161. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.

    Google Scholar 

  • Humboldt, Alexander von. 2000. Reise durch Venezuela. Auswahl aus den amerikanischen Reisetagebüchern, ed. Margot Faak. Berlin: Akademie.

    Google Scholar 

  • Humboldt, Alexander von. 2003. Reise auf dem Rio Magdalena, durch die Anden und Mexiko, ed. Margot Faak, 2nd ed. 2 vols. Berlin: Akademie.

    Google Scholar 

  • Humboldt, Alexander von. 2008. Versuch über den politischen Zustand des Königreichs Neu-Spanien. In Studienausgabe, vol. 4, ed. Hanno Beck. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.

    Google Scholar 

  • Humboldt, Alexander von. 2009. Essay on the geography of plants, ed. Stephen Jackson. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, Alexander Keith. 1848. The physical atlas: A series of maps and notes illustrating the geographical distribution of natural phenomena. Edinburgh: Blackwood.

    Google Scholar 

  • Juhé-Beaulaton, Dominique. 1999. Du jardin des plantes médicinales de Paris aux jardins coloniaux: Développement de l’agronomie tropicale française. In Le jardin entre science et représentation, ed. Jean-Louis Fischer, 267–283. Paris: CTHS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keltie, Scott J. 1885. Geographical education. Scottish Geographical Journal 1 (10): 497–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konvitz, Joseph W. 1987. Cartography in France, 1660–1848: Science, engineering, and statecraft. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lack, Hans Walter. 2004. The botanical field notes prepared by Humboldt and Bonpland in tropical America. Taxon 53 (2): 501–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lack, Hans Walter. 2009. Alexander von Humboldt and the botanical exploration of the Americas. Munich: Prestel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamarck, Jean-Baptiste, and Augustin Pyramus de Candolle. 1805. Flore Française: ou descriptions succinctes de toutes les plantes qui croissent naturellement en France, 3rd ed., 5 vols. Paris: H. Agasse.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowood, Henry E. 1990. The calculating forester: Quantification, cameral science, and the emergence of scientific forestry managment in Germany. In The quantifying spirit in the 18th Century, ed. T. Frängsmyr, J. L. Heilbron, and R. E. Rider, 315–342. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowood, Henry E. 1991. Patriotism, profit, and the promotion of science in the German Enlightenment: The economic and scientific societies, 1760–1815. New York: Garland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matagne, Patrick. 1999. Des jardins écoles aux jardin écologiques. In Le jardin entre science et représentation, ed. Jean-Louis Fischer, 307–315. Paris: CTHS.

    Google Scholar 

  • McClellan, James E. III, and François Regourd. 2000. The colonial machine: French science and colonization in the Ancien Régime. Osiris 15: 31–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyen, Franz Julius Ferdinand. 1836. Grundriss der Pflanzengeographie mit ausführlichen Untersuchungen über das Vaterland, den Anbau und den Nutzen der vorzüglichsten Culturpflanzen, welche den Wohlstand der Völker begründen. Berlin: Haude und Spenersche Buchhandlung.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, Gareth. 1978. From Candolle to Croizat: Comments on the history of biogeography. Journal of the History of Biology 11:269–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicolson, Malcolm. 1996. Humboldtian plant geography after Alexander von Humboldt: The link to ecology. British Journal for the History of Science 29:289–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nikolow, Sybilla. 1999. ‘Die Versinnlichung von Staatskräften’: Statistische Karten um 1800. Traverse 6 (3): 63–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nikolow, Sybilla. 2001. A.F.W. Crome's measurement of the ‘strength of the state’: Statistical representations in Central Europe around 1800. In The age of economic measurement, ed. Judy L. Klein and Mary S. Morgan, 23–56. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, Arthur Howard. 1982. Early thematic mapping in the history of cartography. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudolph, Ludwig. 1852. Atlas der Pflanzengeographie über alle Theile der Erde für Freunde und Lehrer der Botanik und Geographie nach den neuesten und besten Quellen entworfen und gezeichnet. Berlin: Nicolai.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudwick, Martin J. S. 1976. The emergence of a visual language for geological science, 1760–1840. History of Science 14:149–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandl, Marcus. 1999. Ökonomie des Raumes. Der kameralwissenschaftliche Entwurf der Staatswirtschaft im 18. Jahrhundert. Köln: Böhlau Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scharfe, Wolfgang, and Wolfgang Neugebauer. 1991. Administrativ-statistischer Atlas vom Preussischen Staate: Vorgeschichte, Entstehung und Umfeld des Preussischen Nationalatlases von 1827/28. Forschungen zur Brandenburgischen und Preussischen Geschichte 1:242–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiebinger, Londa, and Claudia Swan, eds. 2005. Colonial botany: Science, commerce, and politics in the early modern world. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schindler, Norbert, and Wolfgang Bonss, 1980. ‘Praktische Aufklärung’ – Ökonomische Sozietäten in Süddeutschland und Österreich im 18. Jahrhundert. In Deutsche patriotische und gemeinnützige Gesellschaften, ed. Rudolf Vierhaus, 255–353. München: Kraus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmid, Karl Adolf. ed. 1859–1875. Encyklopädie des gesammten Erziehungs- und Unterrichtswesens, 10 vols. Gotha: Besser.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schouw, Frederik Joakim. 1823. Grundzüge einer allgemeinen Pflanzengeographie. Textband und Atlas. Berlin: Reimer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spary, Emma. 2000. Utopia's garden: French natural history from Old Regime to revolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stafleu, Frans A., and Richard S. Cowan. 1976–1988. Taxonomic literature: A selective guide to botanical publications and collections with dates, commentaries and types, 2nd ed. Utrecht: Bohn, Scheltema & Holkema.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suckow, Georg Adolf. 1777. Ökonomische Botanik: zum Gebrauch der Vorlesungen auf den hohen Kameralschulen zu Lautern. Mannheim: Schwan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Troll, Karl. 1925. Die Landbauzonen Europas in ihrer Beziehung zur natürlichen Vegetation. Geographische Zeitschrift 31:265–280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vetter, Jeremy. 2011. Introduction: Lay participation in the history of scientific observation. Science in Context 24 (2): 127–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wakefield, Andre. 2009. The disordered police state: German cameralism as science and practice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, Hewett C. 1836. Observations on the construction of maps for illustrating the distribution of plants, with reference to the communication of Mr. Hinds on the same subject. Magazine of Natural History 9:17–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, Hewett C. 1847–1859. Cybele Britannica; or British plants and their geographical relations, 4 vols. London: Longham.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wickens, G. E. 1990. What is economic botany? Economic Botany 44:12–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, Roger L. 2001. Botanophilia in eighteenth-century France: The spirit of the enlightenment. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wise, Michael J. 1986. The Scott Keltie Report 1885 and the teaching of geography in Great Britain. The Geographical Journal 152:367–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, Arthur. 1792. Travels, during the years 1787, 1788, and 1789, undertaken more particularly with a view of ascertaining the cultivation, wealth resources, and national prosperity, of the Kingdom of France. London: J. Rackham.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, Arthur. 1794. General view of the agriculture on the County of Suffolk. London: C. Macrae.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Chair for Science Studies, ETH Zurich Gebäude RZ G 9.1, Clausiusstrasse 59, 8092, Zurich, Switzerland

    Nils Güttler

Authors
  1. Nils Güttler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nils Güttler .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of History, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee, USA

    Denise Phillips

  2. History of Science and Technology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA

    Sharon Kingsland

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Güttler, N. (2015). Drawing the Line: Mapping Cultivated Plants and Seeing Nature in Nineteenth-Century Plant Geography. In: Phillips, D., Kingsland, S. (eds) New Perspectives on the History of Life Sciences and Agriculture. Archimedes, vol 40. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12185-7_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation