Histories of plants and physicians are familiar ground for scholars of early modern medicine. Studies of the sixteenth century are full of stories of new university gardens that were constructed explicitly for the benefit of medical students. Hands-on experience with materia medica was deemed to be crucial for these practitioners who, with new fervour, insisted upon returning scholars’ knowledge of plants to a purer state and upon the role of the physician as a holder of all medical knowledge at the top of the medical hierarchy. What is less clear, however, is how the study of plants transformed from its state of being fully within the realm of medicine to become the separate field of botany. This is the central question behind Cristina Bellorini's The World of Plants in Renaissance Tuscany: what was the status of plants in Renaissance Tuscany and how did they become a subject that could be studied for the sake of knowledge rather than only for utility. Bellorini is able to present a more holistic picture than traditional narratives of plant studies in this period by not only studying the medical stories but also examining the broader cultural associations ascribed to plants in the sixteenth century.

Tuscany is a critical site for the study of plants in the Renaissance for, as Bellorini argues, Cosimo, Francesco and Fernando de’ Medici were fundamental to increasing the interest and investment in diverse studies of plants. Like other noblemen in the same period, the Medici dukes were interested in experimenting with nature. They were active participants in the foundry of the palace, distilling plants and compounding medicines. Cosimo de’ Medici's copy of Mattioli's Discorsi (1544) shows that the duke regularly added notes based on Dioscorides’ descriptions of plants and added the local, Tuscan names of plants alongside many entries. Further evidence of the Medicis’ investment in these activities comes from the inventory of equipment in the foundry and from the many letters the dukes wrote to natural historians and to their gardeners, asking questions and requesting specific plants for their gardens. Bellorini argues that ‘these “scientific” activities … were seen as new credentials contributing to their personal prestige … adding luster to the new state’ (p. 227).

Chapter 2 turns to the dukes’ investment in plant studies at the University of Pisa. As in the history of early anatomical teaching, the education that students received about materia medica was largely theoretical and derived from a specific range of texts. Luca Ghini and Andrea Cesalpinto emerge as important symbols of the transformation of botanical education in the mid-sixteenth century. Notes from Ghini's lectures reveal that he insisted upon direct observation of plants rather than relying on texts. Cesalpino's vast herbaria and attempt to develop a new taxonomical system further emphasize this new focus within the university on first-hand observation. Chapter 3 looks at the university even more closely, where Bellorini explores the new techniques that professors used to teach students about plants, such as the development of botanical gardens as educational sites, field trips, herbaria and illustrations.

The reception of American plants is crucial in exploring the development of botany because it represents the growing flexibility of the study of plants in the early modern period and reflects scholars’ interest in including non-classical materials within the scope of official knowledge. A major focus of Chapter 4 is on how the Ricettario fiorentino, the official pharmaceutical document of the College of Physicians, and authors like Ghini and Gabriele Falloppio represented these new American plants. Bellorini demonstrates that although natural historians and physicians continued to focus on medicinal plants, American ornamental plants began to appear in some herbals and in university gardens. Plant studies were becoming newly open to plants that were remarkable but not necessarily useful.

Chapter 5 focuses again on the Ricettario fiorentino in order to consider to what extent this official document reflected the same kinds of knowledge and therapeutic recommendations found in other sources. The slow incorporation of plant distillation and Paracelsian theories into Italian practice is a particular focus of this chapter. The final chapter pursues this question of the deviations between official knowledge and on-the-ground interests by shedding light on the similarities and differences between the medicine taught in universities and the medicine that was actually practised by physicians. In addition to printed works offering treatment suggestions, Bellorini analyses letters between doctors and the Medici family that deal with treating illness. To further investigate the medicine delivered in situ to the Medici family, Bellorini turns to the records of the Speziale al Giglio, a Florentine apothecary shop, and finds that many fewer types of herb were sold compared with what was required by the Ricettario fiorentino.

The World of Plants in Renaissance Tuscany is a useful addition to the historiography of plant studies because it takes a magnifying glass to a particular place in a particular time. Although many of Bellorini's sources are medical, and so it is at times still difficult to see the separation between medicine and botany, she makes a convincing argument that plant studies began to expand and diverge in this time and place. Considering the pivotal role that Tuscany plays in the history of science, medicine and education, it makes sense to use the Tuscan context as a proving ground for determining a clearer picture of the history of botany. Historians of science and medicine would benefit from reading this book since it offers a holistic analysis of the status of plants in early modern culture, from medicine and natural history to painting and printing. Bellorini's analysis of sources from the Medici archive, alongside university records and medical documents, provides a very useful foundation for further discussions of the transformation of plant knowledge in the sixteenth century.