Background

Hieronymus Bock was born around 1498 in Heidelsheim, Germany. His birthplace is debatable, but internal evidence indicates that his adult life was spent in the Saar. His parents, Heinrich and Margarethe (maiden name unrecorded), apparently wished their son to enter a cloister.

Education

Where Bock received his early schooling is unknown. He may have attended the University of Heidelberg; but whether he studied medicine, philosophy or theology is uncertain, for there is no record that he received a degree.

Career

In January 1523 Bock accepted a position in Zweibrticken, where he remained until 1533 when he accepted a canonry at the Benedictine church of St. Fabian in nearby Hombach. The growing religious unrest forced Bock, who had become a follower of Luther, to leave Hornbach in August 1550. For a short period, he acted as personal physician to the Landgraf Philipp II of Nassau, whose garden he is said to have supervised and to whom his Kreuterbuch was dedicated. In 1551 he returned to Hornbach, where he died three years later, probably of consumption.

The first result of Bock’s botanizing excursions, dating from his years at Hornbach and conducted, he states, while dressed as a peasant, is the short tract De herbarum quarundam nomenclaturis. As the title suggests, it is concerned primarily with nomenclature - more specifically, with relating Greek and Latin names to local plants. Despite the lexicographical orientation, the brief entries indicate a personal acquaintance with plants, and Bock is not afraid to admit that he has never seen some of the plants mentioned by the ancients.

The appearance of Bock’s Neu Kreutterbuch (1539) marked a new beginning in botany. It was some time, however, before his departure from tradition found general acceptance. Written in the vernacular, lacking illustrations, and sandwiched between the better- known writings of Brunfels and Fuchs, it was soon lost from sight. Only with the publication in 1546 of the first illustrated edition, and bolstered by the Latin translation of 1552, did Bock’s position become assured.

Bock’s lasting contributions to botany, commemorated by Charles Plumier, who named the genus Tragia (Euphorbiaceae) in his honor, were the result of a happy union of talent and perseverance. By combining personal observation and precise description with an attempt to establish taxonomic relationships on a new basis, Bock broke sharply with the past. Being neither a physician, at least in the ordinary sense nor a university scholar, he looked at plant life with the eyes of a true amateur, unencumbered by the necessity of finding a therapeutic rationale or a classical antecedent for every plant.

The third German edition (1551), from which the Latin translation was made, may be considered Bock’s final statement. Despite such additions as a preface and an index, the text and illustrations remained essentially unaltered in successive editions. It will be convenient first to note the general format of the Kreuterbuch. The descriptions of approximately seven hundred plants and trees are arranged in three parts. The first two deal with herbs, monocotyledons, and cryptogams, while the third part treats of shrubs and trees. Each of the more than four hundred chapter divisions follows a set formula: “On Names,” “On the Power and Effect,” “Internal Uses,” and “External Uses.” Prior to the section on nomenclature, which contains Greek, Latin, and Arabic synonyms, there is an untitled section in which the plant is described.

It is this material upon which Bock’s reputation depends. Innocent of the sexuality of plants and the taxonomic significance of the reproductive organs, Bock necessarily based the descriptions upon the morphological characteristics of the vegetative portions. The descriptions usually contain the following information: the general aspect, including height, sometimes expressed in the form of a comparison with another, better-known plant; remarks on the foliage, including any noteworthy shape, texture, odor, or color; and miscellaneous observations concerning root systems, time of flowering, and economic uses. By establishing marks useful for field identification - the presence of milky sap or stipules, the distinction between various underground parts or between terete and quadrangular stems - Bock was the first modern botanist to teach the importance of fine structure. Although this momentarily diverted attention from the potential significance of floral organs, it stimulated inquiry until optical aids changed the conception of plant anatomy.

The floral structure was not ignored, however, and it is here that Bock’s powers of observing and recording details are most apparent. He described the stamen, noting that it was typically composed of two parts, the filament, and anther and that while the number of stamens varied, their number was constant for a given species. This description, one of the earliest in botanical literature, is matched by his account of the pistil, which he correctly noted was composed of stigma and style. Another remarkable observation was his recognition that species of the birch family (Betulaceae) have, in addition to the familiar, tassel-like aments, other, quite inconspicuous flower clusters. In neither case, however, was Bock able to identify them with the staminate catkins or the pistillate inflorescence recognized today.

Passing from the blossom to the subsequent seed or fruit, another side of Bock’s ability is revealed. As the first to describe the lily of the valley (Convallaria majalis), his account is more noteworthy because it calls attention to the fruit, which he likens to red coral. Ever searching for more accurate information or a confirmation of his suspicions, he planted the downy catkins of a willow. He was pleased to see them germinate, which demonstrated that they were seeds. An even more determined effort was his nightly vigil to collect seeds from a fern (Osmunda regalis).

Naturally, he failed, but by collecting some of the ejected sporangia without resorting to incantations or other superstitious practices, he made a major, if unappreciated, step forward.

The larger, drupaceous fruits, which served many domestic purposes, did not require so exacting a description. On the other hand, in order to illustrate a fruit-bearing tree in the same naturalistic manner as herbs, a different technique was demanded. In conjunction with David Kandel, the Strasbourg artist whom Bock employed, a workable solution was found for some thirty trees. The woodcuts depict the characteristic leaf, the shape of the fruit (often disproportionately enlarged and placed in inset), and various genre scenes representing the symbolic value or economic use of the tree in question.

In his efforts to observe native plants, Bock traveled widely in the Rhineland and elsewhere, often supplying the names of towns where he encountered unusual plants. He recorded such ecological and phenological data as would provide a more accurate account, including habitat, the occurrence of weeds, and time of budding. Not all of his observations were made in the field, however, for he mentions his friends’ gardens, some of which he visited or from some of which he received specimens.

As a consequence of his wide knowledge, it was inevitable that Bock made some effort at classification. Expressly rejecting an alphabetical arrangement, he made the fullest possible use of relating plants in terms of similarity of form, corolla shape, and formation of seed capsules. Because of his ignorance of plant sexuality, his efforts have only historical interest today. Nevertheless, by indicating a method based upon more than one criterion, he provided guidelines for succeeding generations of taxonomists.

By focusing attention on the plants themselves and by daring to question the high authority of Dioscorides and other classical writers, Bock laid down methodological canons whose future importance transcended even his own accomplishments. The rapid development of botany in the latter half of the sixteenth century owed much to the schoolteacher from Zweibrticken who led the exodus from the library into the fields.

Achievements

• 

  Bock's major achievement was in his careful study of regional plants. The quality of his plant descriptions, the clarity of his descriptions, and his discovery of plants never before described by anyone.
  
  Bock’s major work, the New Kreuterbuch (1539), broke from the past by providing detailed descriptions and (in the 1546 edition) careful illustrations of approximately 700 plants, which he classified on the basis of structural similarity. As the first to describe the local flora, Bock has been credited with discovering many new species. The lack of illustrations turned out to be a blessing in disguise, for it forced Bock to describe plants in such a manner that they could be recognized by a reader whose botanical knowledge was limited to local species and their vernacular names.
  
  

Works

More photos

• book

  • New Kreuterbuch von Underscheidt, Würckung und Namen der Kreuter, so in teutschen Landen wachsen 1539
  • De stirpium maxime earum quae in Germania nostra nascuntur... momentaturis 1552
  • Kreutterbuch 1595
  • Hieronymi Tragi de stirpium: maxime earum, quae in Germania nostra nascuntur, usitatis nomenclaturis 1552
  • Kreuter Buch darinn underscheidt Namen unnd Wurckung der Kreutter 1560

Religion

In his religious affiliation, Bock was a Lutheran and in 1533 received a life-time position as a Lutheran minister in nearby Hornbach where he stayed up to his death in 1554.

Personality

Quotes from others about the person

• Botanist Edward Lee Greene judges Bock to be "the first father of phytography after Theophrastus"

Interests

• theology

• Philosophers & Thinkers

  Johann Schwebel, Martin Luther

Connections

On 25 January 1523, Bock married Eva, daughter of Heinrich and Margarethe Victor.

Father:

Heinrich Bock

Mother:

Margarethe Bock

Wife:

Eva (Victor) Bock

associate:

Otto Brunfels

Otto Brunfels (also known as Brunsfels or Braunfels) (believed to be born in 1488 – 23 November 1534) was a German theologian and botanist. Carl von Linné listed him among the "Fathers of Botany."

References

• Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie
  2018
• Neue Deutsche Biographie
  1955
• One Hundred and One Botanists
  2002
• Dictionary of scientific biography
  1981