See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/282204361

Botany in Greece during the 19th century. A periphery at the center.

Article · January 2012

CITATIONS READS

0 65

1 author:

George Vlahakis
Hellenic Open University
87 PUBLICATIONS   58 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Science and Literature View project

Science and Literature View project

All content following this page was uploaded by George Vlahakis on 27 September 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 BOTANY IN GREECE DURING THE 19th CENTURY:
A PERIPHERY AT THE CENTER
George N. Vlahakis*, Athina Economou-Amilli**
The independent Greek state of the nineteenth century belonged to what
historians of science traditionally view as the European periphery.1 It is a
situation similar to that of the Greek cultural period in an extended eighteenth
century (1700-1821).
We claim that in some cases however, Greek scientists from the second
half of the nineteenth century do deserve some recognition by their colleagues
in Europe. In this respect, Greek scientists engaged in the study of the Greek
flora may be considered suitable for acknowledgement.
In this context, we will provide some idea of the development of botany
in Greece, not just as a natural science, but as viewed by Greek scientists, as a
factor which would demonstrate the existence of Greeks since antiquity, and
thus their robust national characteristics and conscience.2
The holistic approach to scientific knowledge in Greece during the
nineteenth century was influenced by the foundation of a University in 1837,
which as an institution, gradually became responsible for creating a framework
of principles for scientific practice. The science of botany is an example of this
innovative act, representing a remarkable development in Greece, from the end
of the nineteenth century, without any significant discontinuities and regressions
characteristic of other scientific disciplines such as physics, chemistry and
astronomy.3

*
Institute for Neohellenic Research / National Hellenic Research Foundation, Hellenic Open University.
**
University of Athens, Faculty of Biology.
1
Kostas Gavroglu (ed.), The sciences in the European periphery during the Enlightenment, Dordrecht,
1999; Robert Fox (ed.), Centre and Periphery revisited: The structure of European Science, 1750-1914,
Oxford, 2003; K. Gavroglu, M. Patiniotis, F. Papanelopoulou, A. Simoes, A. Carneiro, M.P. Diogo, J.R.
Bertomeu Sanchez, A. Garcıa Belmar, A. Nieto-Galan, “Science and Technology in the European
Periphery: Some Historiographical Reflections,” History of Science, vol.46, 2008, pp. 153–175.
2
For a thorough and informative discussion of the subject see Robert Shannan Peckham, National
histories, natural states: nationalism and the politics of place in Greece, London 2001.
3
George N. Vlahakis, “A note on the penetration of newtonian physics in Greece,” Nuncius, vol.8, fasc. 2,
1993, pp.645-656. George N. Vlahakis, “The appearance of a “new” science in 18 th century Greece: The
case of chemistry,” Nuncius, vol.1, 1995, pp. 33-50.
2 Osmanlı Bilimi Araştırmaları XIII/2 (2012)
At that time one of the objectives of botany with particular interest for
European researchers was undoubtedly the Greek flora.4 In the framework of
general scientific missions such as the well-known French scientific expedition
to the Peloponnese5 or on individual visits,6 scientists and amateur naturalists,
tried to collect and identify as many as possible of the rare and “exotic” plants
from the Greek mainland or the Greek islands.7 It is not accidental that, in the
18th century and especially during the course of the nineteenth century, about
250 texts, articles and books were published.8 This specialized knowledge,
though referred to as part of the Greek natural heritage, was not enforced
directly on the Greeks but disseminated gradually and indirectly.
We argue that one of the reasons for this situation was the fact that
foreign scientists, especially those engaged in the study of natural history, were
imbued with a kind of “cultural imperialism”, i.e., they viewed the “Orient” of
which Greece was considered to be a part, almost without any noticeable
exception, through the eyes of a superior or colonizer.
The pre-university period
During 1750-1821, a period known as the Neohellenic Enlightenment,9
botany was one of the relatively less developed sciences in the broader Greek
cultural area which under the political umbrella of the Ottoman Empire was
covering the Balkans and Asia Minor. On the contrary, it seems that botanology,
the use of herbs in practical medicine, had particular repercussions, establishing
itself as a pseudo-science which view has not been eliminated even today.
Besides, medicine, under the spirit of an interdisciplinary approach, considered
the knowledge of plants and their properties to be essential for the preparation
of the necessary medications.10

4
See Nicholas R. Pearce, “John Stuart Mill’s botanical collections from Greece (a private passion),”
Phytologia Balcanica, 12(2), 2006, pp. 149-64.
5
The studies of this expedition concerning the Greek flora were presented in J. B. Bory de Saint-Vincent,
Louis Athanase Chaubard, Nouvelle Flore de Péloponnèse et des Cyclades, 1838.
6
P. M. R Aucher-Eloy, Relations de voyages en Orient de 1830 à 1838 (revues et annotées par M. Le
Comte Jambert etc.), Paris, 1843; J. Russeger, Reisen in Europa, Asien und Afrika IV, Stuttgart, 1848;
C.S. Sonnini, Voyage en Grèce et en Turquie, Paris, 1801.
7
W. Greuter, “The early botanical scientific exploration of Greece”, in Ioannes Tsekos and Michael
Mustakas, Proceedings of the 1st Botanical Congress, Dordrecht, 1998, pp. 9-21.
8
See also E. Economidou, “Bibliographie botanique sur la Grèce (Plantes Vasculaires-Végètation)”
Veröffntlichungen des Geobot. Inst. ETH, Stiftung, Rübe, Zürich, 56 (1976), pp.190-242.
9
For a thorough analysis of the period see Paschalis Kitromilides, Νεοελληνικός Διαφωτισμός (Neohellenic
Enlightenment), Αthens, 1999 (in Greek).
10
Regarding the plethora of manuscript herbaria of the era, see I. KARAS, Οι επιστήμες στην Τουρκοκρατία.
Χειρόγραφα και έντυπα (The sciences during the Turkish occupation, Manuscripts and Printed
Botany in Greece during the 19th century: A Periphery at the Center 3
This belief is reflected in almost all medical books of this era, like the
Greek translation of the book A treatise on the health of the educated people by
Constantine Michael (Vienna, 1785); the original is Antoine Tissot’s De la
santé des gens de lettres (Lausanne, 1783).11 The same opinion is also
expressed in A treatise on the treatment of venereal disease by I. Nikolidis
(Vienna, 1794); the original is part of the book Praecepta Medico-Practica
(Vienna, 1791), written by Anton Stoerck (1731-1803).12
The same attitude is seen in the edition, in 1787, of two complementary
books by George Zaviras,13 Medical advices and Botanical nomenclature in
four languages. The first book contains 183 recipes in the Greek and Latin
language, while the second one, which was based on the Hungarian "Uj fuves es
viragos Magyar kert" (New Hungarian botanic garden)14 includes 771 plants
used in these recipes with their names given in Latin, ancient Greek, modern
Greek and Hungarian respectively. This book, despite its absolutely restricted
horizon, can be considered in a sense as the first book on classical botany in
Greece.
The next book directly related to botany, especially its history and
methodology, was the edition of An introductory address into the proceedings
of the Linnean Society of London, translated from Italian, delivered by Sir James
Edward Smith,15 the famous English botanist, owner of the library and botanical
collections of Linnaeus and the first president of the Linnean Society of
London.
The 10 volumes of Εικονολογία παιδική (a picture book for children
including an attractive collection of tetrapods, plants, flowers, crops, minerals,
dresses, etc. compiled from natural history, crafts and sciences), originally
published in German by Friedrich Johann Justin Bertuch (1746-1822) under the

Documents), vol. C, The life sciences, and the section titled “Iatrikes syntages kai iatrosofia” (Medical
prescriptions and magic potions), Athens, 1994, pp. 160-319 (in Greek).
11
For more information see D. Karamperopoulos, Η μεταφορά της επιστημονικής ιατρικής γνώσης μέσω
των έντυπων ελληνικών βιβλίων κατά την εποχή του Νεοελληνικού Διαφωτισμού (The dissemination of
medical scientific knowledge through printed Greek books during the era of Neohellenic Enlightenment),
Ph.D. Thesis, Athens, 1996 (in Greek), p. 43.
12
Karamperopoulos, cit. note 11, p. 49.
13
Regarding the case of Zaviras’s Botanical Nomencalture see N. K. Vlachos, “Υπάρχει Φιλολογικό
Πρόβλημα για την Ονοματολογία Βοτανική του Γ.Ζαβίρα;”, (Is there a literary issue on the botanical
nomenclature by G. Zaviras?), Eranistes 1975, 12, pp. 17-27 (in Greek).
14
The author of the original was the Hungarian physician at the town of Debrecen Jozsef Csapo (1734-
1799). The book was first published in 1775 with a second edition in 1792. See also I. Karas, cit. note 6,
p.57 (in Greek).
15
G.N. Vlahakis, “Sir James Edward Smith and the introduction of botany in Greece during the late 18th
and early 19th centuries,” Archives of Natural History, 26 (1), 1999, pp. 85-100.
4 Osmanlı Bilimi Araştırmaları XIII/2 (2012)
title Bilderbuch für Kinder16 and published in Greek by the Kapetanakis
brothers in 1810-1812, reflect the idea that botany is related to beautiful pictures
of plants.17 This series is actually an encyclopedia of natural history useful for
children at the level of primary or secondary education, where every page
includes colored lithographs of excellent quality. Among them, the details of
plant lithographs are particularly impressive.
Issues of botany, either scattered or organized in chapters, are met with in
some books of general interest edited after 1800, such as Popular physics
against superstition where, in the chapter titled “Kingdom of Plants”,
interesting issues on plant physiology were developed.18 Extensive information
of systematic botany existed in the edited volumes of another publication having
a general encyclopedic character and related to subjects concerning commerce,
Ερμής ο Κερδώος (Hermes the Profitable), where 200 plants of commercial
interest were described.19
A reference should also be made to the translation of Jacquin’s book
Anleitung zur Pflanzenkenntisse nach Linne’s Methode (Vienna, 178520),
postponed due to political circumstances as the Greek revolution for
independence had already begun.
Of particular interest is also Botany or more precisely, Practical botany
adapted to medicine and economy, a book written by Dionysios Pyrros, a Greek
polymath with a wide range of interests.21 This was already announced at the

16
On this book see Arthur Koch, Ein “Orbis pictus” der Goethezeit. Friedrich Justin Bertuch und sein
Bilderbuch für Kinder, Weimar, 1975.
17
D. Allen, “The struggle for specialist journals: Natural history in the British periodicals market in the first
half of the nineteenth century,” Archives of Natural History, 23, 1996, pp. 107-123.
18
S. Kanellos, Φυσική δημώδης εις παύσιν της δεισιδαιμονίας (Popular physics against superstition),
Vienna, 1810, pp. 290-321 (in Greek). This book was a translation from the German original, best-seller
at that time book of Johann Heinrich Helmuth (1732-1813) Volksnaturlehre zur Dampfung des
Aberglaubens, first edition 1786, other editions 1792, 1795, 1798, 1803, 1810, 1822. Concerning the
Greek translator D. Karamperopoulos supports that he must be not S. Kanellos but Z. Kavras, a
prominent Greek physician of the period. On his arguments see D. Karamperopoulos, “Φυσική δημώδης
εις παύσιν της δεισιδαιμονίας, Βιέννη 1810. Ποιος ο συγγραφέας και ο μεταφραστής του βιβλίου;”
(Popular physics against superstition, Vienna 1810. Who was the author and the translator of the book?),
Ερανιστής, 25, 2005, pp. 163-171 (in Greek).
19
G.N. Vlahakis, Διερευνώντας τη διεπιστημονική προσέγγιση της γνώσης στους χρόνους του πρώϊμου
19ου αιώνα. Η περίπτωση του Ερμή του Κερδώου (Investigating the interdisciplinary approach of
knowledge in the years of the early 19th century. The case of Hermes the Profitable), Proceedings of the
Panhellenic Conference “Neohellenic Enlightenment-An attempt for a new research yield,” Κozani,
1996, pp. 29-58.
20
Ερμής ο Λόγιος (Hermes the Scholar), 1817, p. 29 and p. 52.
21
Vlahakis, (cit. note 12) and George N. Vlahakis, “Dionysios Pyrros: An unknown instrument-maker in
early 19th century Greece,” SIS Bulletin, 59, 1998, pp. 5-8.
Botany in Greece during the 19th century: A Periphery at the Center 5
time of the Greek revolution but was published much later in 1838 after the
establishment of the independent Greek state.
Pyrros referred in a dignified manner to the problems he faced when he
tried to publish his book: “Because I had already edited the “Textbook for
Physicians” in Nauplia, I decided to publish a textbook for Botany. It included 35,000
herbs, of which only 200 were useful in medicine and economy; these were chemically
analyzed and scientifically described. In order to print their colored pictures, I created
my own lithography since the Bavarians did not allow me to print it because of their
jealousy. They caused me a lot of trouble until I finally managed to finish, color, print
and distribute it in Athens in 1838. No other Greek has ever created such a botanical
textbook and all careful students are [previously] deceived studying incomplete
botanical books without being able to understand and learn”.22
This bitter reference to the Bavarians contradicts the fact that the book
was dedicated to the young and beautiful Amalia, Queen of Greece.23 Probably
it was due to the fact that despite his wish and efforts, Pyrros failed to be
appointed as a professor in the recently established University of Athens (1837),
and the desired chair was taken by the German Xaver Landerer who was also
the King’s pharmacist.
In the preface of the book, Pyrros provides some information concerning
his sources. He points out that he uses the Linnaean system but he used books
and works originally written by his professors in the University of Pavia. They
are known to be Domenico Nocca (1758-1841), professor of botany, who wrote
the book Elementi di botanica (Pavia, 1805), Giuseppe Raggi (1752-1816),
professor of clinical medicine, Giovanni Rasori (1766-1837),24 professor of
pathology, Siro Borda (1761-1824), professor of materia-medica and finally
Luigi Brugnatelli, whose Pharmacopea had already been translated into
Greek.25
The book contains also ca. two hundred lithographed figures of the most
useful plants according to Pyrros. The originals were taken from the already

22
D. Pyrros, Περιήγησις ιστορική και Βιογραφία (Historical tour and biography), Athens, 1848, p.198 (in
Greek).
23
D. Pyrros, Bοτανική Πρακτική (Practical botany), Athens, 1838 (in Greek).
24
See E. Rossi, “Giovanni Rasori; 1766-1837 or Italian medicine in transition,” Bulletin of history of
medicine, 29 (2), 1955, pp. 116-33.
25
George N. Vlahakis, “Against French science: Alessandro Volta and Luigi Brugnatelli in early
nineteenth-century Greece,” Nuncius, vol.16, 2001, pp. 191-210; Şeref Etker, “Brugnatelli
Farmakopesi’nin 1818’de İstanbul’da Yayınlanan Elence Çevirisi” (La traduction en Grec de la
Pharmacopée de Brugnatelli, publiée à Istanbul en 1818), IV.Türk Eczacılık Tarihi Toplantısı Bildirileri
(4-5 Haziran 1998; İstanbul) (Proceedings of the IVe Congress of the History of Turkish Pharmacy), ed.
E. Dölen, Marmara Üniversitesi Eczacılık Fakültesi Yay. No.15, Istanbul 2000, pp. 297-302.
6 Osmanlı Bilimi Araştırmaları XIII/2 (2012)
mentioned encyclopedic work by Johann Bertuch, from the French
Encyclopédie edited by Diderot and d’Alambert, from some unnamed edition of
the botanical work of Dioscorides and from a relevant work composed by Philip
Miller (1691-1771), an English gardener and botanist whom he erroneously
referred to as German. It is of some importance however that the lithographs
were printed by Pyrros himself by a method he had perfected for this very
purpose, and he mentioned in the preface of his Botany, that lithography was “a
necessary invention, very useful, even divine for humanity”.26
Pyrros also provides information on his attitude towards the development
of botany in Greece: “No other European science teacher existed until then [1813,]
except for me in Athens and Sofianopoulos in Patras of Achaia. I created a botanical
garden including 300 herbs, and a museum with 300 different minerals in the house of
Mr. Dimitrios Kalifournas, President of the Parliament. As everybody in Athens knows
well, these were not as important as the present ones, but those we had then compared
to the current noble ones, were incomparably greater. If the government spent 50 or
100 thousands five-drachma coins as they currently do in schools, almost everyone
would likely become a philosopher or an engineer”.27
One can easily understand from the above quote, that even in the capital
of a peripheral country like Greece, the idea of forming collections and cabinets
of “natural curiosities” has been a fashion for the members of the political and
financial elite, who wanted to imitate the habits of the upper class in the capitals
of the centre, such as London and Paris.
Before ending this brief description about the state of botany during the
pre-university period, we will mention the contribution of two men from Corfu,
who wrote related books in Italian, namely Nicolo DallaPorta28 and Michele
Pieri.29 Pieri published two books on the flora of Corfu. The first one is titled
Della Corcirese flora, centuria prima (Corfu, 1808) and the second, Della
Corcirese flora, centuria prima, seconda e terza etc., (Corfu, 1814). DallaPorta

26
Pyrros, cit. note 18, p. 22.
27
Pyrros, cit. note 18, p. 72.
28
Niccolo DallaPorta was a native of Cephallonia island. He was interested in chemistry. He translated
Chaptal’s Elements de Chimie in Italian (1792) and one year later he published also in Italian a short
book under the title Trattato elementare dei gas, which received well by the Italian chemists of the
period. He was also correspondent member of the Ionian Academy of sciences in Corfu. For more
detailed information about Nicolo DallaPorta see [Link], Λόγος επιτάφιος προς τον αείμνηστον
ιατροφιλόσοφoν Δρ. Νικόλαον Δελλαπόρταν, Συντεθείς μεν αυτοσχεδίως και εκφωνηθείς παρά Γεωργίου
ιερέως Βυζαντίου (Funeral speech to memorable Medical philosopher Dr. Nikolaos Dellaportas,
improvised and delivered by George Byzantios of the Priest), Cephallonia, 1860 (in Greek).
29
For biographical information about Pieri see L. Brokinis, “Έργα, Βιογραφικά Σχεδιάρια” (Works,
Biographical Sketches), issues A’ and B’. ed.-introd. by K. Dafnis, Kerkyraika Chronika, vol.16, pp. 126-
30 (in Greek).
Botany in Greece during the 19th century: A Periphery at the Center 7
wrote the book Prospetto delle plante che si trovato nell'isola di Cephalonia, e
che si possono ad operate a titolo di alimento o di rimedio del signor Nicolo
DallaPorta, Medico, Physico (Corfu, 1821). This book was written in a
systematic and scientific manner by a man with recognized qualifications from
the University of Padua and a good knowledge of all scientific developments
during that period. It is impressive that, before the main text, he included a short
description of the Linnaean system. We should also mention that both Pieri and
DallaPorta, although they wrote in Italian, they highlighted the Greek influence
in their introductions, and they contributed to the creation of modern Greek
botanical nomenclature, giving Greek names to the plants wherever possible.
Furthermore these works were of some importance in the wider European
botanical community as we find reference to them in several works and journals
such as the prestigious (at that time) Flora or Botanische Zeitung.
The university period
The situation seemed to change gradually after the acquisition of
independence by a part of Greece and the establishment of the small Greek
Kingdom in 1834. After three years, the authorities, and more specifically the
Bavarian King Otto, decided to establish a University in 1837 which was
organized according to German standards. This institution, as the only one of
the highest educational level in Greek territory, immediately gained prestige in
Greek society. Following the general policy of the King, most high ranking
positions in public service were filled by experts of the same nationality and the
University thus recruited mainly foreigners, especially scientists from Germany.
To maintain political equilibrium a few Greek scientists who had shown
significant prominence during the period of the Neohellenic Enlightenment, and
particularly in the fields of theology, history and philosophy, were also
appointed professors in the University.30
Botany was one of the first sciences which developed in the University of
Athens at a time when other physical sciences like physics and chemistry were
in a phase of decline. One possible reason was that botany could be considered
as more compatible with the philosophical movement of romanticism
introduced also from Germany during the first decades of the 19th century.
Another one, also significant, was that for botany there was not any need for
expensive scientific instruments and laboratories as botanical research was

30
Regarding the recruitment of the University see K. Lappas, “Το διδακτικό προσωπικό του
Πανεπιστημίου Αθηνών στον 19ο αιώνα” (The teaching staff of the University of Athens in the XIXth
century), Proceedings of International Symposium, University: Ideology and Education. Historical
Dimensions and Perspectives, Athens, 1989, pp. 137-147 (in Greek).
8 Osmanlı Bilimi Araştırmaları XIII/2 (2012)
mostly focused at that time on the collecting of plant specimens from Greek
lands.
The first professorship of botany in Greece was awarded to the German
botanist Carl Nicolaus Fraas (1810-1875).31 Fraas had studied botany in
Munich. He came to Greece in 1835, was appointed Director of the Forest
School of the Botanical Garden, and in 1837, adjunct professor of systematic
botany. He resigned in 1842 and returned to Munich where he successfully
continued his academic work. From his botanical output, we can mention
Synopsis plantarum flora classica (1845), Klima und Pflanzenwelt in der Zeit
(1847), and Elements of Botany (1837).
What we infer from Fraas’ work is that although he was very hard
working and productive he could not adapt himself to Greek customs and his
scientific publications seemed rather to be addressed to his European
counterparts rather than to Greek intellectual circles. In Europe he was
considered among the best agronomists and botanists. It is of some interest that
even Friedrich Engels referred to him in an 1868 text as a “darwinist before
Darwin”.32 It is characteristic of Fraas’s shortcomings including an inability to
consider himself a member of the Greek scientific community that he never
learned the Greek language to an acceptable degree and his writings were
almost all in German with the exception of Elements of botany.
We cannot conclude the same for Fraas’s successor in the chair of botany,
Xavier Landerer (1809-1885),33 who was already professor of pharmaceutical
chemistry and prescription since 1844. Dionysios Pyrros had similar aspirations
as previously referred to but they remained unfulfilled. The decision of the
government to appoint the chair of botany to Landerer, reveals the nature of
changes occurring at that time, as one of the important scholars of the pre-
independence period was out-contested by an expert. This choice led to one of
the first conflicts for a professorial position in the University environment.

31
For more details on the life and work of C.N. Frass see F.A. Zehetmair, Carl Nicolaus Fraas (1810-
1875). Ein bayerischer agrawissenschftler und reformer der intensiven Landwirtschaft, 1995. See also
Heinz Kahleber, “Bavarian plant collectors in Greece-1. Franz Xaver Berger, Franz Zuccarini and Carl
Nicolaus Fraas, Willdenowia, 36, 2006, pp. 565-76.
32
Annelise Griese (ed.), Marx-Engels Gesamtausgabe, Bd.31, Naturwissenschaftliche Exzerpte und
Notizen, 1999, p. 892.
33
Ev. Varella, “Pharmazeutische Handbucher im Griechenland des frühen 19. Jahrhnderts - D. Pyrrhus und
F.X. Landerer,” Geschichte der Pharmazie, 45, 1993, pp. 49-53; Andreas Lardos, “The botanical
material medica of the Iatrosophikon- A collection of prescriptions from a monastery in Cyprus,”
Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 104, 2006, pp. 387-406.
Botany in Greece during the 19th century: A Periphery at the Center 9
Several others would follow in the years to come.34 However, based on all
available evidence, nobody admitted this conflict openly. We can indirectly
form an opinion from the evidence mentioned by Pyrros in his autobiography,
and from the introduction of Landerer's book Textbook of botany (Athens,
1845). According to Pyrros:
When the King came to Athens, the doctors gathered, and, in order to find a
permanent income, they agreed to create an Institution. Therefore, they founded
a University, and they received large salaries for teaching…, they prompted me
to write a report, teach one of the sciences and convince other teachers. In the
beginning, knowing the idiosyncrasies of the doctors, I denied. So I stayed
outside, like the wise A. Korais in Paris…, but everybody ran here barefoot and
begging…35
If one believes Pyrros’s writings one can conclude that competing for a
position of professor in the University was actually a strong factor for discord
among the Greek scientists. Only a few such as Adamantios Korais, the leading
figure of the Neohellenic Enlightenment, Pyrros and some others who had
chosen to remain out of the running, decided to stay independent of the
University.
Landerer pointed out the interdisciplinary nature of botany, “which is the
part of natural history that teaches us to recognize, differentiate and classify
plants” and “is one of the most essential courses in medicine and
pharmacology”.36 Influenced by the romantic philhellenes of the 19th century
and justifying the undertaking of this task, Landerer mentioned: “I wish, as long
as I live and step on Greek land, to become as useful as possible for the
revitalizing of knowledge in this ancient place”.37 This reference is not made
idly. Landerer was truly fond of Greece. So much so that he repeats the afore-
mentioned words in the prefaces of numerous books on Chemistry, Mineralogy,
Pharmacology, etc. that he had published during his stay in Greece. It is thus
evident he had a completely different attitude from Fraas.
Landerer also recognized the need for the creation of a stable and valid
scientific language in Greek, though he admitted that he had not the appropriate
knowledge of the Greek language, so that he considered his book as “raw

34
George N. Vlahakis, “Επιστημονικές διαμάχες, ιδεολογικές αντιπαραθέσεις και προσωπικές έριδες κατά
τον 18ο αι. - 19ο αιώνα στον ελληνικό πνευματικό χώρο” (Scientific debates, ideological confrontations
and personal disputes in the Greek intellectual area from the 18th to the 20th centuries), Kritiki. Crtical
science and Education, 4, 2006, pp. 57-66 (in Greek).
35
Pyrros, cit. note 18, p.48.
36
X. Landerer, Εγχειρίδιον Βοτανικής (Textbook of Botany), Athens, 1845, p.5.
37
Landerer, cit. note 32, p.6.
10 Osmanlı Bilimi Araştırmaları XIII/2 (2012)
material ready for those who will elaborate it in the future.” Going one step
further, Landerer also made an appeal to scholars to comment on the names he
used in his botanical nomenclature to improve a possible future edition.
Following a tradition from the past century, he introduced a brief history of
botany.38 One of the first arguments in this historical account is that Aristotle
was the founder of the scientific knowledge concerning the plants as we may
conclude from the writing of Theophrastus, where though there is much
valuable information one could be astonished by the great number of mistakes
and inconsistencies. Commenting on that, Landerer wrote: “It is impossible for
anyone to understand how such childish ignorance and superstition could be at
the same time presented with so great wisdom.” According to Landerer some
progress became evident in botany after Dioscorides and the Arabs, whose
contribution raised the number of the described herbs to 1400. After the
fifteenth century, through the work of Conrad Gesner (1516-1565) and
Hieronymus Brunschwig (1450-1512), and more generally through the work of
the German botanists39 within a short period, the number of the known plants
gradually reached a maximum of 80,000. This high number caused several
problems concerning taxonomy but Linnaeus solved the problem successfully.
More recently, new systems of plant classification were proposed by Antoine de
Jussieu (1686-1758) and Augustin Pyramus de Candolle (1778-1841).
The new knowledge acquired during the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries makes unavoidable the division of botany into several branches with
specialized subjects such as classical botany, physiological botany, and applied
botany. Furthermore, applied botany could be separated into agricultural botany,
medical botany and economic botany.
Consequently, Landerer tried to give to the readers of his introductory
book, who were in fact the students in the University, some idea of a wide range
of subjects like plant anatomy, plant physiology, plant diseases and plant
taxonomy.
The contribution of Landerer to botany and especially to the study of the
Greek flora is considered to exceed the level of popularized science. Relevant
literature provides us with titles of his publications in accredited scientific
journals in the German language such as Oesterreichische Botanische
Zeitschrift and Flora.40 These articles and his work in general were cited by
38
Landerer, cit. note 32, pp. 7-11.
39
Landerer, cit. note 32, pp. 5-9, where he writes: “Germany took pride in founding the history of
phytology.”
40
Some of his publications in these journals are: “Über die in Griechenland vorkommenden
kryptogamischen Pflanzen und deren Bedeutung bei den alten Griechen,” Öster. Bot. Zeitschrift, vol.4,
Botany in Greece during the 19th century: A Periphery at the Center 11
several natural scientists of the time. Furthermore, Landerer wrote a number of
articles in the daily press and the periodicals of that time, trying to inspire the
Greeks with an interest for the study and preservation of the rich natural beauty
of their country. This effort, to disseminate some basic principles and
descriptions of botany through a popularized framework does not refute his vast
scientific reputation as such an activity was usual, since there was difficulty in
publishing specialized scientific journals in Greek, most probably because of the
restricted number of interested people. Meanwhile, one should bear in mind the
model of the nineteenth century scientist, who obsessed by the feeling of global
offering did not stay locked in his laboratory, but being instead a component of
the society, worked towards the materialistic and ethical development of
society. That meant that he did not address his findings only to a specific
scientific community but he tried to make them available to everybody, to make
them useful for the advancement of living standards. In the field of botany that
could be effected in two ways. Concerning the materialist component, by the
description of the healing properties some herbs have. On the ethical side, the
contribution of a botanist could be that he could promote the admiration of the
natural beauty and subsequently to beauty as an abstract idea, which should be a
part of everyone’s culture, and especially to the culture of the Greeks which had
recognized its value since ancient times.
If we bear in mind the above scheme it is not inexplicable that several
articles - referring to certain plants as well as brief descriptions of the Greek
flora - are found in journals of that period, written not only by specialized
botanists, but also by doctors and naturalists. Of particular interest are the
relevant themes from the Parnassos Journal, one of the most important
periodical publications of the nineteenth century in Greece.41
It is characteristic and proves the opinion we have expressed in the
previous paragraph that one of the first articles published in Parnassos was

1854, pp.82-84; “Botanischen Notizen aus Griechenland,” Flora, vol.39, 1856, pp. 449, 647, 753;
“Botanischen Notizen aus Griechenland,” Flora, vol.40, 1857, p. 128; “Über die Forstgewächse in
Griechenland,” Flora, vol.40, 1857, p.85; “Botanische Notizen aus Griechenland. Über die Griechenland
vorkommenden Schwamme,” Flora, vol.41, 1858, pp. 675-683; “Zusammenstellung der am Meerstrande
in Griechenland sich findenden Pflanzen,” Flora, vol.42, 1859, p.516.
41
S. Kartoulis, “Εντομοβόρα Φυτά” (Insectivorous plants), Parnassos, 1877, vol. A΄, p. 200 and “Άνθη
Βαρόμετρα”, (Barometer flowers), p. 639; Ε. Kechagias, “Γενικαί Οδηγίαι προς την κατ’ οίκον υπό
γονέων διδασκαλίαν των μαθημάτων της Φυσικής Ιστορίας” (General instructions on the teaching of
natural history lessons at home by parents), Parnassos, vol. B΄, 1878, p.50 ; S. D. Krinos, “Περί
επιστημονικού προσδιορισμού των υπό των Ελλήνων γνωσθέντων φυτών” (On the scientific
identification of the plants first studied by the Greeks), Parnassos, vol. E΄, 1881, p.7; Τh. von Heldreich,
“Η χλωρίς της νήσου Κεφαλληνίας” (The flora of the Island of Cephallοnia), Parnassos, vol. Z΄, 1883,
p.476; Th. von Heldreich, “Περί βοτανικής εκδρομής εν Αττική” (On a botanical field-trip in Attika),
Parnassos, vol. H΄, 1884, p.180; Τh. von Heldreich, “Περί φυτολογικής εξετάσεως της Θεσσαλίας” (A
study of the plants of Thessaly), Parnassos, vol. Z΄, 1883, pp. 257-266.
12 Osmanlı Bilimi Araştırmaları XIII/2 (2012)
titled “Ethics, as developed by the physical sciences”,42 written by one of the
most enlightened minds in the nineteenth century Greek society, Anastasios
Christomanos (1841-1907), professor of Chemistry in the University of
Athens.43 In the standard columns of the journal we read also short articles
about the “arts and sciences”, “geography and travelling” and “meteorological
conditions”.
Of interest is also an article by Stephanos Kartulis (1852-1920), sent from
Berlin, where the author had lived while studying medicine. It was based on
Charles Darwin’s Insectivorous Plants (London, 1875). Kartoulis’s source was
the German translation titled Insectenfressenden Pflanzen, Deutsche Aufgabe
von J.U. Carus, and published in Stuttgart in1876.
It was one of the first references to Darwin’s work in Greece and
surprisingly received with very positive and enthusiastic tones as Kartulis
referred to it as “one of the brightest sun-rays... which fairly raised the
admiration of the scientists” and now “no doubt exists to the scientists... for the
origin of the man”.44
Kartulis was in any case a man of progressive views. Later, in the 1880s
when he settled in Alexandria, Egypt he collaborated with the famous German
physician Robert Koch (1843-1910) for the treatment of cholera and he was a
member of the team which found its cause, namely the bacillus Vibrio
cholerae.45 Kartulis is also known for some other significant contributions to
medicine and his portrait is preserved in the special portrait collection of the
University of Liverpool.
The plants whose physiology Kartulis described in detail were Mimosa
pudica and Drosera rotundifolia. The publication of such an article in a journal
with a variety of subjects and a broad readership indicates the important role

42
Anastasios Christomanos, Parnassos, 1877, pp. 50-57.
43
For his life and work, as well as his views for the role of science in the society see: George N. Vlahakis,
“Alchemy survived? An alchemical manuscript, Anastasios Christomanos and the status of chemistry in
the 19th century Greece,” Proceedings of the 5th International Congress for the History of Chemistry,
Lisbon, 2005, pp. 598-605; George N. Vlahakis, “Introducing sciences in the new states: The
establishment of the Phypics and chemistry laboratories in the University of Athens,” Science,
Technology and the 19th century State, edited by Eft. Nicolaidis and Konst. Chatzis, Athens, 2000, pp.
89-106; Helena Maniati, “The educational utilization of elements of the history of natural sciences (19th
century): Highlighting the cognitive continuity with Antiquity”, Science and Education, vol.14, 7-8,
2005, pp.713-720.
44
S. Kartoulis, cit. note 37.
45
N. Howard-Jones, “Robert Koch and the cholera vibrio: A centenary,” British Medical Journal, vol.288,
1984, pp.379-381.
Botany in Greece during the 19th century: A Periphery at the Center 13
these journals played in the formation of public opinion on several themes, not
always using strictly scientific criteria.46
Stamatios Krinos (1815-1886) was one of the first Greek chemists. He
was born in Constantinople and studied in Italy and France. In 1861 he became
professor of pharmacy in the University of Athens. His article in Parnassos had
the title “On the scientific identification of the plants first studied by the
Greeks.” The author proposed a method to find which plants were referred to by
the ancients in their works and comparing his method with the results obtained
by other European botanists. Thus we can see that the Greeks did not absorb the
knowledge introduced from Europe as it was but they tried to test and change it
according to their beliefs in a procedure of assimilation, seen also during the
period of the Neohellenic Enlightenment.47 That article was the core of an
unfinished book which Krinos was planning to write and had the provisional
title “On plants’ archaeology”.
There are not only the articles published in Parnassos but also in other
similar journals like Pandora and Hestia which indicate clearly the degree of
popularity botany had acquired in nineteenth century Greece.
The great interest in botany and more generally on subjects related to
natural history is reflected by the comparatively large number of books treating
relevant themes and published during the course of the century.
The further development of botany during the second half of the 19th
century is based on two other persons: Theodoros Orphanides and Theodor von
Heldreich.48 Their contribution, the difficulties they encountered, and their
achievements traced through available primary and secondary sources could be
considered as a representative case for the status of all the scientific disciplines
in Greece until the rise of the twentieth century.
Theodoros Georgios Orphanides (1817-1886) was a botanist and poet, a
combination absolutely compatible with the romantic spirit of the era. He was
born in Smyrna, Asia Minor and came to Greece with his family as a refugee.
After completing his secondary education he became a journalist and poet. In
1844 he was sent by the Greek government to Paris for further studies. There he

46
George N. Vlahakis, “Science and Society in 19th century Greece: The journals” in Science, Technology
and the 19th century State, edited by Eft. Nicolaidis and Konst. Chatzis, Athens, 2000, pp. 117-124.
47
M. Patiniotis, “Eclecticism and appropriation of the new scientific methods by the Greek-speaking
scholars in the Ottoman Empire” in F. Günergun and D. Raina (eds.) Science between Europe and Asia.
Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol.275, Dordrecht, 2011, pp. 193-206.
48
M. K. Stephanidis, Εκατονταετηρίς 1837-1937, Ιστορία της Φυσικομαθηματικής Σχολής (The one
hundred years between 1837-1937, History of the School of Physics and Mathematics), Athens, 1952 (in
Greek).
14 Osmanlı Bilimi Araştırmaları XIII/2 (2012)
studied botany in the Natural History Museum and in Sorbonne, having as
professors the famous botanists Adrien-Henri de Jussieu (1797-1853), Adolphe
Brongniart (1801-1876) and Joseph Decaisne (1807-1882). He returned to
Athens in 1848 when he was appointed professor of botany at the University of
Athens and stayed in that post for over thirty years. During his botanical
excursions on the Greek mountains he discovered more than fifty new species.
The main results of his research were distributed as Flora graeca exsiccata of
which there are sets in many herbaria. He also published a 16-page Prospectus
flora graeca exsiccata in 1850 and served as editor of the journal Geoponika
(agricultural subjects), from 1872 to 1876. He contributed also to the
development of the new Greek botanical nomenclature. We can see that
Orphanides combined excellently pure and applied science for the promotion of
agriculture in Greece.
Theodor von Heldreich (1822-1902) was born in Dresden and studied in
Germany, France and Italy. In 1843 he came to Greece to study the Greek flora.
In 1851 he became director of the Athens Botanical Garden. In 1855 he married
Sofia Katakuzenos, the granddaughter of the well-known scholar of the
Neohellenic Enlightenment, Konstantinos Koumas, a move which helped him to
be favorably accepted as a member of the upper class Greek society.49 He
described hundreds of species and published two very interesting books in
German: Die Nutzpflanzen Griechenlands (1862) and Die Pflanzen der
attischen Ebene (1877). He wrote numerous articles and booklets on Greek
plants and worked also for the establishment of reliable and permanent botanical
nomenclature in Greece.
Both Orphanides and Heldreich, lived and acted in a university
environment, where everybody, at least officially recognized the need for the
development of sciences, especially chemistry and botany. Chemistry was based
on the huge work of Anastasios Christomanos and physics tried to regain its lost
prestige through the strenuous efforts of Timoleon Argyropoulos. At the same
time Orphanides, besides his pure scientific research and student teaching,
contributed to the acquisitions of the Botanical Museum - a vital necessity for
the study of the Greek flora - and also to the development of relationships with
foreign academic centers.
According to the final report of George Rallis as Rector in 1869:
“Mr. Spiridon Zambeli(o)s who lived in Venice, gave to the Greek Deputy Consul
Typaldos Forestis, a parcel containing 200 plants of the Apennine flora,

49
Asuman Baytop & Kit Tan, “Theodor von Heldreich (1822-1902) and his Turkish collections,” Turkish
Journal of Botany, vol.32, 2008, pp. 471-479.
Botany in Greece during the 19th century: A Periphery at the Center 15
collected under the supervision of the famous Italian botanist Mr. Loukianis. The
Professor of Botany in Stockholm Mr. Anderson, curator of the Natural History
Museum of the local Academy of Sciences, created a collection of almost all the
Swedish flora, containing 1605 species…” 50
Orphanides, after studying botany in France, was appointed at the
University, where he met Heldreich, director of the Natural History Museum
and Botanical Garden in Athens, and also Iraklis Mitsopoulos (1816-1896),
professor of natural history and more specifically of zoology. Mitsopoulos was
born in Patras. He studied with a grant offered by the first Greek governor
Ioannis Kapodistrias in the High School of Aegina. In 1832 he became a public
servant in the National Library of Athens. In 1837, with the help of another
government grant, he went to Germany where he studied philology and natural
sciences. On his return in 1844 he was appointed teacher of physics in the High
School of Patras and one year later, professor at the University of Athens, a
position he held for 47 years. These three men represented the corners of a
triangle, giving for several years the impression of an admirable cooperation
although an underlying current of conflict might have existed from the very
beginning.
We consider this competition, which during its last stage was expressed
in the most ridiculous and public manner as a result of general as well as
personal limitations. One of them was that Heldreich had a very good
knowledge of botany, and he believed that he knew much more than Orphanides
concerning this matter. On the other hand Orphanides felt insecure and inferior
as to his level of scientific knowledge. In a broader context there was a general,
although never openly admitted, strong conflict between the French and the
German influence not only concerning politics but also affecting culture and
science.51 In this particular case, Orphanides represented French culture, while
Mitsopoulos, Heldreich and Kruper, were supporters of the German one.
Theobald Kruper (1829-1917) was born in Pomerania and studied in
Stettin and Berlin. From these times he became acquainted with Otto Staudinger
to whom he later sold some collections. Some of these collections are now in
the Museum für Naturkunde in Berlin and the Slovakian National Museum in
Bratislava. He collected Lepidoptera and birds’ eggs. From 1858 onwards he
lived in southeastern Europe and repeatedly visited the Ionian islands of Corfu
and Cephalonia as well as the mountain Parnassos. In 1872 he became curator
of the zoological department of the Natural History Museum of the University

50
George Rallis, Report to Athens University, 1869, pp.60-61.
51
K. Krimpas, Θραύσματα κατόπτρου (Broken pieces of mirror), Athens, 1993, p. 83.
16 Osmanlı Bilimi Araştırmaları XIII/2 (2012)
of Athens. He is considered the best collector of entomological collections in
the Near East.
The unstable balance in the relationships of the above scientists was
permanently destroyed in 1862, when Orphanides expressed his open conflict
against Heldreich. The conflict continued in 1863, when Orphanides tried to
obtain seeds of Pinus peuce legally from Heldreich. The quarrel peaked on 14th
April 1865, when Heldreich was insulted by Orphanides in the presence of the
Minister of Public Education. Orphanides accused Heldreich of being
inadequate to perform his duties as curator of the Botanical Museum.
Orphanides believed that Heldreich was responsible for the Museum’s
miserable status. Orphanides expressed his accusations in writing and justified
them with a series of arguments in articles published at the Nomimofron (The
law-abider), a newspaper of this period. The articles were finally published in
the form of libel in a brochure entitled The Situation of the Natural History
Museum of the University.52
In the preface of this brochure Orphanides tried to persuade the reader
that the reason for his attack on Heldreich was only his concern for the smooth
functioning of the Museum. In his attempt he admitted that almost everybody
supported Heldreich and accused Orphanides as a hater and pursuer of the
foreigners. Many have expressed the opinion that Orphanides hated Heldreich
because he was an excellent botanist well-known even to the rest of the world.
Orphanides wrote with an obvious sense of disappointment: “Nobody said that I
am a zealot and I have acted according to my conscience.” In the following
pages Orphanides presented a series of evidence to prove the inadequacy of
Heldreich and furthermore that Heldreich abused his position to sell rare insects,
plants, fossils, etc. for his own profit.
This unhappy situation could not fail to attract the interest of the
University Council, which appointed a committee with professors B.
Oikonomidis, D. Aiginitis, K. Vousakis and P. Kyriakou as members, in order
to investigate the validity of the accusations. The Committee’s final decision
was favorable for Heldreich. Taking this opportunity and playing on the positive
climate for him, Heldreich had the chance for a victorious revenge. Therefore he
decided to express his opinion in writing,53 rejecting the accusations of
Orphanides and adding heavy condemnations. Commenting on the speculated
scientific inadequacy of Orphanides he wrote in a very scornful manner: “It is

52
Th. Orphanidis, Η κατάστασις του φυσιογραφικού Μουσείου του Πανεπιστημίου (The state of the
University Museum of Natural Sciences), Athens, 1865, p.6.
53
Th. von Heldreich, Aπάντησις. (Reply), Athens, 1865, p.5.
Botany in Greece during the 19th century: A Periphery at the Center 17
very unusual for someone to sleep as a theater clown or a house-painter and
wake up in the morning to be a University Professor without a diploma,”
according to the accusations published in 1864 in the newspaper Elpis (Hope)
(issues no. 1266 and 1269). Heldreich went further and considered Orphanides a
man of malicious character and actually not a scientist but a plant-trader who
very willingly and for reasons none other than pure profit sold the heritage of
the Greek nature to foreigners, thus revenging himself of the charges stated
against him by Orphanides.
It is probable that both are partly correct as so happens in such cases.
Charles Edmond Boissier (1810-1885), the famous Swiss botanist, cooperated
with Orphanides as well as with Heldreich in the preparation of his monumental
5-volume work Flora Orientalis (1867-1884) and the content of his herbarium
in Geneva indicates this conclusion.54 According to the files existing in the
Conservatoire et Jardin Botaniques in Geneva, the correspondence between
Boissier and Heldreich was extensive and systematic. Unfortunately no records
exist of letters to and from Orphanides.
Another characteristic of this debate is that, unusually, it was not based
on existing or imaginary scientific oppositions on particular theories. Naturally
each accused the other of scientific inadequacy but this accusation was not
related to their support of the different taxonomic schools of thought in Europe.
The main reason for their bad relationship was their competition, especially in
the collectors’ market in England, as we have found several advertisements in
English magazines like The Botanical Gazette and Hooker’s Journal of Botany,
for collections to be sold either by Orphanides or Heldreich.
Heldreich and Orphanides had another even indirect scientific
relationship. Alphonse Pyramus de Candolle (1806-1893), son of Augustin
Pyramus de Candolle, was the professor of Heldreich and used the modified
system of taxonomy proposed by Adrien de Jussieu, professor of Orphanides. 55
Their scientific work, as shown in the titles of their publications,56 gives
the impression that Heldreich was closer to the truth despite the exaggerations

54
Audrey le Lièvre, “A view of Edmond Boissier,” Curtis’s Botanical Magazine, vol.11, 3, 1994, p.130-
143.
55
Krimbas, cit. note 47, p.104.
56
Th. von Heldreich, “Catalogo delle piante raccolte nel Peloponneso nell’ anno 1844,” Giorn. Bot. It.,
1846; Th. von Heldreich, Herbarium Graecum normale, 1856-1861; Th. von Heldreich, “Über Pflanzen
der Griechischen, insbesondere der attischen Flora,” Garten Flora, 1861; Th. von Heldreich & August
Mommsen, Die Pflanzen der attischen Ebene, (1872), Schleswig, [Link], 1877; Th. von Heldreich,
“Beitrag zur Flora von Epirus geliefert von Herrn N.K. Choldres,” Verh. Bot Ver. Prov. Brandenburg,
21, 1879, p.61; Th. von Heldreich, “L’Attique au point de vue des caractères de sa végétation, ” Congr.
Inter. Bot. Hort. Paris 1878, Paris, 1880, p. 8; Th. von Heldreich, “Murinitia, eine Idylle von Korax mit
18 Osmanlı Bilimi Araştırmaları XIII/2 (2012)
of the moment. This conflict and insecurity may have finally prevented
Orphanides from proposing Heldreich for the post as the next Professor of
Botany. Perhaps another reason for this decision was the German origin of
Heldreich. We must not forget that Germans were the majority of the professors
holding chairs in the University during the first period. As the climate became
more nationalistic it is possible that opinion prevailed which supported the
appointment of such highly esteemed positions only to Greeks. One way or
other, the situation probably caused Heldreich some bitterness and the chasm
between the two men remained unbridgeable. The speculation that good
relations were finally restored is based on the fact that Heldreich delivered a
complimentary speech at Orphanides’ funeral. This hypothesis, however, cannot
be verified, given that such an action practically restored the posthumous fame
of a no longer dangerous rival, and presented Heldreich as a magnanimous and
forgiving man.
The position of the Professor of Botany remained vacant for
approximately 10 years, and was finally occupied in 1892 by Spyridon
Miliarakis (1852-1919). He left for Paris for specialization in botany without
even participating in the relevant competition for the position - announced in
1880 and finally decided in 1884. The senate, for reasons of equal treatment and
so as not to be accused of favoring Miliarakis, sent Gerakis, a fellow-
competitor, also to Paris. Miliarakis who studied with the famous professor
Sachs in the University of Wurzburg had a good knowledge of cell physiology
and published a textbook of botany which is still considered high in quality,
containing terminology currently in use. He worked on higher plant systematics,
enriching the botanical collections of the Museum.
Miliarakis was the last Professor of Botany at Athens University in the
nineteenth and the first half of the twentieth century and therefore it is with him
that we close our discourse on botany in Greece during the nineteenth century.
His work on the progress of natural history in Greece undoubtedly deserves

topographische dendrologischen und philologischen Bemerkungen,” M. Deffner΄s Arch. Mittel-neugrich.-

Philol., 1, 1880, pp. 89-103; Th. von Heldreich, “Bericht über die botanischen Ergebnisse einer
Bereisung Thessaliens,” Sitzungsber. Königl. Preus. Ak. Wiss., 1883, p.115; Th. von Heldreich,
“Une Graminée de l’Atlas retrouvée sur le mont Taygéte en Grèce, Bull. Inter., Ac. Geogr. Bot., 1889; Th.
von Heldreich, “Η χλωρίς του Παρνασσού (La flore de Parnassos),” Parnassos, Vol. ΙΓ΄(vol. XIII), 1890,
p. 173-192, 257-274 (en Grec); Th. von Heldreich, “La flore du Pélion,” Palligenesia, 1891 (en Grec); Th.
von Heldreich & E. Boissier, “Delle piante raccolte dal Lig. Heldreich nel suo viaggio nel Peloponeso nell’
anno 1844 secondo le determinazioni di Boissier e Heldreich” Misc. Bot. Min. (Genéve), vol. 16, 1844,
p.373; Th. Orphanidis, Ennumeratio chloridis hellenicae, Athens, 1866; Th. Orphanidis, “Sur l’état actuel
de la flore greque,” Act. Congr. Int. Bot., Paris, 1866; Th. Orphanidis, “Deux discours sur quelques plant
de la flore greque,” Congr. Int. Bot. Petersburg, 1870; Th. Orphanidis, “Boute nuove et rare di Graecia,”
Congr. Int. Bot. Firenze, 1876; Th. Orphanidis, “Dissertation sur les charactères spécifiques du genre
Colchicum et sur quelques espèces nouvelles découvertes en Grèce,” Congr. Int. Bot. Firenze, 1875, p. 27.
Botany in Greece during the 19th century: A Periphery at the Center 19
additional study. He was one of the first and strongest supporters of Darwin’s
theory in Greece, publishing a series of favorable articles and pamphlets.57
Heldreich58 was also a supporter of Darwin. This was probably the reason why
Miliarakis edited Heldreich’s book The Popular Names of the Plants Identified
by Th. Heldreich avoiding completely in the preface any reference to
Orphanides. Though this book was printed at the beginning of the twentieth
century, from the philosophical and stylistic viewpoint it belongs to the
nineteenth century. It is characteristic that Miliarakis besides the practical
usefulness of this knowledge added:
This opuscule will be useful both philologically and ethnologically because,
while it reveals the great number of names that have remain unaltered since ancient
times, on the other hand it shows through the changes, some of these names which have
suffered during several periods and in several places to give us a picture of the
evolution of the language during that time.
That was the situation among the members of the small botanical
community in Greece during the nineteenth century. Personal conflicts and
intrigues which marked this course happily did not prevent this science from
being developed to a degree not significantly far from the level it had attained in
Europe. We may thus conclude that for botany, at least Greece was somehow a
periphery at the center.
Acknowledgments. This paper was written during the stay of one of the
authors, G. N. Vlahakis, in the Max-Planck Institute for the History of Science
as a visiting scholar in the framework of project Heaphestus of ΙΝR/NHRF
through funding by the European Union (Seventh Framework Programme
[FP7/2007-2013] under grant agreement n°229825). We thank Prof. R.
Spichiger and Herve M. Burdet for providing valuable information concerning
the correspondence between Boissier and the Greek botanists. We would also
like to thank Prof. K. Krimbas, member of the Academy of Athens for the
discussions we had about natural sciences in Greece during the nineteenth
century and for his valuable comments and remarks.

57
George N. Vlahakis, “Η υποδοχή των ιδεών του Δαρβίνου στην Ελλάδα” (The reception of Darvin’s
ideas in Greece) in K. Skordoulis (ed.), Ζητήματα Επιστήμης: Ιστορία, Φιλοσοφία και Διδακτική (Matters
of science: History, philosophy, didactics), 2008, pp. 75-86 (in Greek).
58
Krimbas, cit. note 47, pp. 81-108.
20 Osmanlı Bilimi Araştırmaları XIII/2 (2012)
Botany in Greece during the 19th Century: A Periphery at the Center
The science of botany is exemplified as a blueprint of the approach of
scientific knowledge in Greece during the nineteenth century, a period in which
the Greek flora is of particular interest to European researchers in the
framework of general scientific missions or specific visits. In the time before the
Greek Independence (1834) it seems that botanology established itself a pseudo-
science and the importance of herbs in practical medicine is reflected in almost
all medical books of this era. At that time some books, either original or
translations, related to the history and methodology of botany were published.
The foundation of the University recruited either by foreigners or by
Greek scientists, served as a starting point for the diversification of research.
The succession of the first German professors of botany and the silent
underrating of the Greek scholars who were active during the period known as
Neohellenic Enlightenment (1750-1821) are discussed. This part of the paper
deals with the contribution of C. Fraas and X. Landerer to botany as a scientific
discipline in the University of Athens.
Another subject under investigation is the fact that despite the difficulty
in publishing specialized journals in Greek, relevant themes were published in
the Parnassos Journal, one of the most important Greek encyclopedic
periodicals of the nineteenth century.
The development of botany is based on two persons, Prof. Th. Orphanidis
- who essentially contributed to the enrichment of the Natural History Museum
of the University and also to the development of relations with foreign academic
centers, and Th. von Heldreich - curator of the botanical collections of the
Natural History Museum. Their contribution, achievements and the long-term
conflict between them are examined.
Keywords: Botany, Th. Orphanidis, Th. von Heldreich, Greece

Ondokuzuncu Yüzyılda Yunanistan’da Botanik: ‘Merkez’deki ‘Çevre’

Ondokuzuncu yüzyıl boyunca Yunanistan’da bilimsel bilgiye olan
yaklaşımı anlamak için botanik bilimi örnek alınabilir. Söz konusu yüzyılda,
Yunanistan florası, gerek genel bilimsel misyonları gerekse özel ziyaretleri
çerçevesinde Avrupalı araştırmacıların ilgi odağında olmuştur. Yunanistan’ın
bağımsızlığından (1834) önceki dönemde, botanoloji bir pseudo-bilim olarak
var olmuş ve tedavide bitkilerin kullanımı o döneme ait tıp kitaplarının
neredeyse tümünde yer almıştır. O dönemde, ister telif ister tercüme, botaniğin
tarihi ve metodolojisi konusunda bazı kitaplar yayımlanmıştır.
 Botany in Greece during the 19th century: A Periphery at the Center 21
Üniversite’nin ister yabancı ister Yunan bilim adamlarının katkılarıyla
kuruluşu, araştırma konularında çeşitliliğin başlangıcı olmuştur. Bu çalışmada,
Neohellenik Aydınlanma (1750-1821) olarak bilinen dönemde etkin olan Alman
botanik profesörleri ile Yunan bilim adamlarının gizliden gizliye küçümsenmesi
tartışılacaktır. Makalenin bu kısmında, C. Fraas and X. Landerer’in Atina
Üniversitesi’nde botanik bilimine katkıları ele alınacaktır. Araştırılan bir diğer
konu, Yunanca uzmanlık dergilerinde yayımlamanın zorluğuna rağmen, ilgili
konuların ondokuzuncu yüzyılın Yunanca ansiklopedik dergilerinden Parnassos
Journal’da yayımlanmış olmasıdır.
Yunanistan’da botanik, iki kişi sayesinde gelişmiştir. Bunlardan biri,
Üniversite’nin Doğa Bilimleri Müzesi’nin zenginleşmesine ve yabancı
akademik merkezler ile ilişkilerin gelişmesine katkıda bulunan Profesör Th.
Orphanidis’dir. Diğeri ise Doğa Bilimleri Müzesi’nin botanik koleksiyonunun
sorumlusu Th. von Heldreich’dır. Makale, bu iki kişinin katkısı ve aralarındaki
uzun süren çekişmeyi de inceleyecektir.
Anahtar sözcükler: Botanik, Th. Orphanidis, Th. von Heldreich, Yunanistan.

View publication stats