Must Linnaeus Always Come First? Cultural Considerations in Aromatherapy

Can botanical science, Indigenous knowledge and artificial intelligence coexist without one diminishing the other?

This week, for International Day of the World's Indigenous Peoples (9th August), I am grateful for the opportunity to reflect upon some new ideas I was exposed to late last year, when I was researching the essential oils of the cedars of North America.

I approached it with trepidation, since there is so little written about them in aromatherapy, and I was aware that I would need to intellectually step into spaces where I might not be welcome. After all, these cedars belong to the First Nations peoples, not to British white women.

However, in a world where AI flattens much of the knowledge we have given it, and many of the North American "cedars" do in fact belong to Juniperus, Cupressus and Thuja species but are not presented as such, I felt there was a need for exploration in a bid for personal clarity.

This endeavour brought me to an interesting place: a website discussing museum curation, specifically around the ideas of creating exhibitions for Indigenous peoples that allow them to engage with their own heritage.

They presented an argument that stood in direct opposition to everything we teach about essential oils.

It was this.

Latin names of plants can be problematic.

Why Latin Plant Names Matter in Aromatherapy

In aromatherapy, it is important—well, vital actually—that we refer to our plants by their Latin names. It helps to centre them in a way that we understand botany, where a plant belongs, and fundamentally what we can expect from its chemistry.

Binomial nomenclature, as it is called, is part of the taxonomy created by Carl Linnaeus in the eighteenth century as a means of classifying plants and other objects in nature.

To me, binomial nomenclature is often one of the ways you discern the experience of someone writing. Do they understand the cultural "rules" of aromatherapy that often say a great deal about quality, price, efficacy and function?

But this museum article offered a different perspective—albeit about the trees themselves, rather than the essential oils.

Can Latin Plant Names Be Problematic in Indigenous Contexts? Cultural Considerations in Aromatherapy

The museum curators argued that using binomial nomenclature in Indigenous exhibitions can be problematic because it imposes a Western scientific classification over Indigenous names.

In doing so, these Latin names overwrite traditional, place-based names that are rich in ecological and cultural stories.

Standardised names also present a worldview that differs from the one held by the peoples who hold the tree sacred.

Grandmother Cedar

To the Anishinaabe peoples of Eastern Canada, for example, the Northern White Cedar is sacred.

Their name is Nookomis Giizhik, which means Grandmother Cedar.

Nookomis means "my grandmother", while Giizhik translates as cedar but also carries a more arcane association with the daytime sky.

Grandmother cedar is an ancestor, a relative, but the name Thuja occidentalis necessarily classifies her as an object.

That entire worldview has been inverted.

Her relationship moves from revered to objectified.

Neither perspective is necessarily wrong.

They are simply answering different questions.

Can Scientific Naming Erase Earlier Histories?

Often too, binomial nomenclature unintentionally erases huge chunks of human history, and can preserve episodes that remain painful for First Nations descendants.

Part of the issue comes from something called the Principle of Priority, which dictates that the first scientific name a species is given generally remains the accepted one.

What this means, in practice, is that if nobody formally recorded a plant before a European botanist did, the scientific record begins with that publication—even though countless generations may already have known that plant intimately.

Now the problems with that are many.

Consider the species Jeffersonia diphylla.

Named after Thomas Jefferson, the plant—known and used medicinally by peoples including the Cherokee and Haudenosaunee for generations before European contact—came to bear the name of a man who enslaved hundreds of African Americans.

Not only can traditional ethnobotanical knowledge disappear from everyday conversation, but the scientific name itself can preserve a colonial history whilst obscuring the people who already knew the plant.

What Does This Mean for Aromatherapy?

The museum curators posed another question that has stayed with me ever since.

Why would we name a tree Thuja occidentalis in an exhibition created for people who have always known the tree simply as cedar?

We place an artificial barrier between them and their lived experience.

Why is it relevant to them what we call it scientifically, when they have ancestral relationships that potentially predate that scientific naming by thousands of years?

Why break that emotional connection by superseding it with a narrative that, for them, may simply not matter?

It is their relationship with the tree that matters.

A European naming system has little bearing within that relationship.

But I think there is another, larger issue at play.

Modern aromatherapy is largely rooted in Western scientific traditions.

Whilst we often speak about wanting to embrace other cultures and share in the astonishing depth of knowledge they hold, we also tend to speak in languages that may feel alien to them.

We put up GCMS walls.

We insist on speaking Latin.

To people who have always known these trees simply as cedars.

Is it ACTUALLY a Cedar?

And I absolutely don't have all the answers.

Because I want to scream,"It's not a cedar, it's a juniper!" with every fibre of my being.

They would probably look confused and reply,"But she's Grandmother."

An entirely different worldview.

Actually, to them, it is a cedar.

It isn't me (who insists that a true Cedar is a Cedrus) who is wrong in this case, but neither are they wrong.

It is simply that Linnaean taxonomy is answering a different question.

And perhaps that is something worth pondering before we automatically assume our way of introducing a plant is the only one.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why do aromatherapists use Latin plant names?

Latin (binomial) names provide an internationally recognised way of identifying plants accurately. They help distinguish between species that share common names, allowing practitioners to understand the correct chemistry, therapeutic actions and safety considerations associated with an essential oil.

What is binomial nomenclature?

Binomial nomenclature is the scientific system developed by Carl Linnaeus for naming living organisms using two Latin names: the genus and species. It remains the international standard for botanical classification.

Why can Latin names be problematic in Indigenous contexts?

Museum curators and some Indigenous scholars have argued that relying exclusively on Latin names can unintentionally privilege a Western scientific worldview over traditional naming systems. Indigenous names often reflect ecological knowledge, cultural history and relationships with the plant that scientific names do not convey.

Are Latin names and Indigenous plant names in conflict?

Not necessarily. They answer different questions. Botanical names identify a species scientifically, while Indigenous names often describe the cultural, historical or spiritual relationship people have with that plant. Both perspectives can coexist.

Should aromatherapists stop using botanical names?

No. Botanical names remain essential for safe, professional aromatherapy practice. The question explored in this article is whether they should always be the first—or only—way we introduce a plant, particularly when discussing Indigenous medicines or speaking to broader audiences.

What is the Principle of Priority?

The Principle of Priority is a rule within botanical nomenclature that generally recognises the first validly published scientific name of a species as the accepted one. While this provides stability in taxonomy, it can also mean that earlier Indigenous names and histories become less visible within scientific literature.

How does artificial intelligence learn about essential oils?

Artificial intelligence learns from the information that people publish online, including books, websites, articles and educational resources. The more frequently an idea appears, the more likely it is to be reflected in AI-generated responses.

How can aromatherapists help preserve Indigenous knowledge?

One practical step is to retain botanical accuracy while also acknowledging traditional plant names, cultural histories and Indigenous perspectives where appropriate and respectfully sourced. Even small additions to product pages, blogs and teaching materials can help create a richer record of the plants we use.

What does this mean for the future of aromatherapy?

As aromatherapy continues to grow internationally, practitioners have an opportunity to communicate both scientific accuracy and cultural context. Doing so may not only enrich our own profession but also influence how future generations—and increasingly artificial intelligence—understand essential oils.