CHAPTER II. (3)

Previous

GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS.

Article I.Regions where Cultivated Plants originated.

In the beginning of the nineteenth century, the origin of most of our cultivated species was unknown. LinnÆus made no efforts to discover it, and subsequent authors merely copied the vague or erroneous expressions by which he indicated their habitations. Alexander von Humboldt expressed the true state of the science in 1807, when he said, “The origin, the first home of the plants most useful to man, and which have accompanied him from the remotest epochs, is a secret as impenetrable as the dwelling of all our domestic animals.... We do not know what region produced spontaneously wheat, barley, oats, and rye. The plants which constitute the natural riches of all the inhabitants of the tropics, the banana, the papaw, the manioc, and maize, have never been found in a wild state. The potato presents the same phenomenon.”2178

At the present day, if a few cultivated species have not yet been seen in a wild state, this is not the case with the immense majority. We know at least, most frequently, from what country they first came. This was already the result of my work of 1855, which modern more extensive research has confirmed in almost all points. This research has been applied to 247 species,2179 cultivated on a large scale by agriculturists, or in kitchen gardens and orchards. I might have added a few rarely cultivated or but little known, or of which the cultivation has been abandoned; but the statistical results would be essentially the same.

Out of the 247 species which I have studied, the old world has furnished 199, America 45, and three are still uncertain.

No species was common to the tropical and austral regions of the two hemispheres before cultivation. Allium schoenoprasum, the hop (Humulus lupulus), the strawberry (Fragaria visca), the currant (Ribes rubrum), the chestnut (Castanea vulgaris), and the mushroom (Agaricus campestris), were common to the northern regions of the old and new worlds. I have reckoned them among the species of the old world, since their principal habitation is there, and there they were first cultivated.

A great number of species originated at once in Europe and Western Asia, in Europe and Siberia, in the Mediterranean basin and Western Asia, in India and the Asiatic archipelago, in the West Indies and Mexico, in these two regions and Columbia, in Peru and Brazil, or in Peru and Columbia, etc., etc. They may be counted in the table. This is a proof of the impossibility of subdividing the continents and of classing the islands in well-defined natural regions. Whatever be the method of division, there will always be species common to two, three, four, or more regions, and others confined to a small portion of a single country. The same facts may be observed in the case of uncultivated species.

A noteworthy fact is the absence in some countries of indigenous cultivated plants. For instance, we have none from the Arctic or Antarctic regions, where, it is true, the floras consist of but few species. The United States, in spite of their vast territory, which will soon support hundreds of millions of inhabitants, only yields, as nutritious plants worth cultivating, the Jerusalem artichoke and the gourds. Zizana aquatica, which the natives gathered wild, is a grass too inferior to our cereals and to rice to make it worth the trouble of planting it. They had a few bulbs and edible berries, but they have not tried to cultivate them, having early received the maize, which was worth far more.

Patagonia and the Cape have not furnished a single species. Australia and New Zealand have furnished one tree, Eucalyptus globulus, and a vegetable, not very nutritious, the Tetragonia. Their floras were entirely wanting in graminÆ similar to the cereals, in leguminous plants with edible seeds, in CruciferÆ with fleshy roots.2180 In the moist tropical region of Australia, rice and Alocasia macrorhiza have been found wild, or perhaps naturalized, but the greater part of the country suffers too much from drought to allow these species to become widely diffused.

In general, the austral regions had very few annuals, and among their restricted number none offered evident advantages. Now annual species are the easiest to cultivate. They have played a great part in the ancient agriculture of other countries.

In short, the original distribution of cultivated species was very unequal. It had no proportion with the needs of man or the extent of territory.

Article II.Number and Nature of Cultivated Species at Different Epochs.

The species marked A in the table on pp. 437-446 must be regarded as of very ancient cultivation. They are forty-four in number. Some of the species marked B are probably as ancient, though it is impossible to prove it. The five American species marked D are probably cultivated as early as those in the category C, or the most ancient in the category B.

As might be supposed, the species A are especially plants provided with roots, seeds, and fruits proper for the food of man. Afterwards come a few species having fruits agreeable to the taste, or textile, tinctorial, oil-producing plants, or yielding stimulating drinks by infusion or fermentation. There are among these only two green vegetables, and no fodder. The orders which predominate are the CruciferÆ, LeguminosÆ, and GraminaceÆ.

The number of annuals is twenty-two out of the forty-four, or fifty per cent. Out of five American species marked D, two are annuals. In the category A, there are two biennials, and D has none. Among all the Phanerogams the annuals are not more than fifty per cent., and the biennials one or at most two per cent. It is clear that at the beginning of civilization plants which yield an immediate return are most prized. They offer, moreover, this advantage, that their cultivation is easily diffused or increased, either because of the abundance of seed, or the same species may be grown in summer in the north, and in winter or all the year round in the tropics.

Herbaceous perennial plants are rare in categories A and D. They are only from two to four per cent., unless we include Brassica oleracea, and the variety of flax which is usually perennial (L. angustifolium), cultivated by the Swiss lake-dwellers. In nature herbaceous perennials constitute about forty per cent. of the Phanerogams.2181

A and D include twenty ligneous species out of forty-nine, that is about forty-one per cent. They are in the proportion of forty-three per cent. of the Phanerogams.

Thus the earliest husbandmen employed chiefly annuals or biennials, rather fewer woody species, and far fewer herbaceous perennials. These differences are due to the relative facility of cultivation, and the proportion of the evidently useful species in each division.

The species of the old world marked B have been in cultivation for more than two thousand years, but perhaps some of them belong to category A. The American species marked E were cultivated before the discoveries of Columbus, perhaps for more than two thousand years. Many other species marked (?) in the table date probably from an ancient epoch, but as they chiefly exist in countries without a literature and without archÆological records we do not know their history. It is useless to insist upon such doubtful categories; on the other hand, the plants which we know to have been first cultivated in the old world less than two thousand years ago, and in America since its discovery, may be compared with plants of ancient cultivation.

These species of modern cultivation number sixty-one in the old world, marked C, and six in America, marked F; sixty-seven in all.

Classed according to their duration, they number thirty-seven per cent. annuals, seven to eight per cent. biennials, thirty-three per cent. herbaceous perennials, and twenty-two to twenty-three per cent. woody species.

The proportion of annuals or biennials is also here larger than in the whole number of plants, but it is not so large as among species of very ancient cultivation. The proportions of perennials and woody species are less than in the whole vegetable kingdom, but they are higher than among the species A, of very ancient cultivation.

The plants cultivated for less than two thousand years are chiefly artificial fodders, which the ancients scarcely knew; then bulbs, vegetables, medicinal plants (Cinchonas); plants with edible fruits, or nutritious seeds (buckwheats) or aromatic seeds (coffee).

Men have not discovered and cultivated within the last two thousand years a single species which can rival maize, rice, the sweet potato, the potato, the bread-fruit, the date, cereals, millets, sorghums, the banana, soy. These date from three, four, or five thousand years, perhaps even in some cases six thousand years. The species first cultivated during the GrÆco-Roman civilization and later nearly all answer to more varied or more refined needs. A great dispersion of the ancient species from one country to another took place, and at the same time a selection of the best varieties developed in each species. The introductions within the last two thousand years took place in a very irregular and intermittent manner. I cannot quote a single species cultivated for the first time after that date by the Chinese, the great cultivators of ancient times. The peoples of Southern and Western Asia innovated in a certain degree by cultivating the buckwheats, several cucurbitaceÆ, a few alliums, etc. In Europe, the Romans and several peoples in the Middle Ages introduced the cultivation of a few vegetables and fruits, and that of several fodders. In Africa a few species were then first cultivated separately. After the voyages of Vasco di Gama and of Columbus a rapid diffusion took place of the species already cultivated in either hemisphere. These transports continued during three centuries without any introduction of new species into cultivation. In the two or three hundred years which preceded the discovery of America, and the two hundred which followed, the number of cultivated species remained almost stationary. The American strawberries, Diospyros virginiana, sea-kale, and Tetragonia expansa introduced in the eighteenth century, have but little importance. We must come to the middle of the present century to find new cultures of any value from the utilitarian point of view, such as Eucalyptus globulus of Australia and the Cinchonas of South America.

The mode of introduction of the latter species shows the great change which has taken place in the means of transport. Previously the cultivation of a plant began in the country where it existed, whereas the Australian Eucalyptus was first planted and sown in Algeria, and the Cinchonas of America in the south of Asia. Up to our own day botanical or private gardens had only diffused species already cultivated somewhere; now they introduce absolutely new cultures. The royal garden at Kew is distinguished in this respect, and other botanical gardens and acclimatization societies in England and elsewhere are making similar attempts. It is probable that tropical countries will greatly profit by this in the course of a century. Others will also find their advantage from the growing facility in the transport of commodities.

When a species has been once cultivated, it is rarely, perhaps never completely, abandoned. It continues to be here and there cultivated in backward countries, or those whose climate is especially favourable. I have passed over some of these species which are nearly abandoned, such as dyer’s woad (Isatis tinctoria), mallow (Malva sylvestris), a vegetable used by the Romans, and certain medicinal plants formerly much used, such as fennel, cummin, etc., but it is certain that they are still grown in some places.

The competition of species causes the cultivation of some to diminish, of others to increase; besides, vegetable dyes and medicinal plants are rivalled by the discoveries of chemists. Woad, madder, indigo, mint, and several simples must give way before the invasion of chemical products. It is possible that men may succeed in making oil, sugar, and flour, as honey, butter, and jellies are already made, without employing organic substances. Nothing, for instance, would more completely change agricultural conditions than the manufacture of flour from its known inorganic elements. In the actual state of science, there are still products which will be more and more required of the vegetable kingdom; these are textile substances, tan, indiarubber, gutta-percha, and certain spices. As the forests where these are found are gradually destroyed, and these substances are at the same time more in demand, there will be the greater inducement to cultivate certain species.

These usually belong to tropical countries. It is in these regions also, particularly in South America, that fruit trees will be more cultivated—those of the order AnonaceÆ for instance, of which the natives and botanists already recognize the value. Probably the number of plants suitable for fodder, and of forest trees which can live in hot dry countries, will be increased. The additions will not be numerous in temperate climates, nor especially in cold regions.

From these data and reflections it is probable that at the end of the nineteenth century men will cultivate on a large scale and for use about three hundred species. This is a small proportion of the one hundred and twenty or one hundred and forty thousand in the vegetable kingdom; but in the animal world the proportion of creatures subject to the will of man is far smaller. There are not perhaps more than two hundred species of domestic animals—that is, reared for our use,—and the animal kingdom reckons millions of species. In the great class of molluscs the oyster alone is cultivated, and in that of the Articulata, which counts ten times more species than the vegetable kingdom, we can only name the bee and two or three silk-producing insects. Doubtless the number of species of animals and vegetables which may be reared or cultivated for pleasure or curiosity is very large: witness menageries and zoological and botanical gardens, but I am only speaking here of useful plants and animals, in general and customary employment.

Article III.Cultivated Plants known or not known in a Wild State.

Science has succeeded in discovering the geographical origin of nearly all cultivated species; but there is less progress in the knowledge of species in a natural state—that is wild, far from cultivation and dwellings. There are species which have not been discovered in this condition, and others whose specific identity and truly wild condition are doubtful.

In the following enumeration I have classed the species according to the degree of certainty as to the wild character, and the nature of the doubts where such exist.2182

1. Spontaneous species, that is wild, seen by several botanists far from dwellings and cultivation, with every appearance of indigenous plants, and under a form identical with one of the cultivated varieties. These are the species which are not enumerated below; they are 169 in number.

Among these 169 species, 31 belong to the categories A and D, of very ancient cultivation, 56 have been in cultivation less than two thousand years, C, and the others are of modern or unknown date.

2. Seen and gathered in the same conditions, but by a single botanist in a single locality. Three species.

Cucurbita maxima, Faba vulgaris, Nicotiana Tabacum.

3. Seen and mentioned but not gathered in the same conditions by one or two authors and botanists, more or less ancient, who may have been mistaken. Two species.

Carthamus tinctorius, Triticum vulgare.

4. Gathered wild by botanists in several localities under a form slightly different to those which are cultivated, but which most authors have no hesitation in classing with the species. Four species.

Olea europÆa, Oryza sativa, Solanum tuberosum, Vitis vinifera.

5. Wild, gathered by botanists in several localities under forms considered by some botanists as constituting different species, while others treat them as varieties. Fifteen species.

Allium ampeloprasum porrum, Cichorium Endivia, var., Crocus sativus, var., *Cucumis melo, Cucurbita Pepo, Helianthus tuberosus, Latuca scariola sativa, Linum usitatissimum annuum, Lycopersicum esculentium, Papaver somniferum, Pyrus nivalis var., *Ribes grossularia, Solanum Melongena, *Spinacia oleracea var., Triticum monococcum.

6. Subspontaneous, that is half-wild, similar to one or other of the cultivated forms, but possibly plants escaped from cultivation, judging from the locality. Twenty-four species.

Agava americana, Amarantus gangeticus, Amygdalus persica, Areca catechu, *Avena orientalis, Avena sativa, *Cajanus indicus, Cicer arietinum, Citrus decumana, Cucurbita moschata, Dioscorea japonica, Ervum Ervilia, Ervum lens, Fagopyrum emarginatum, Gossypium barbadense, Holcus saccharatus, Holcus sorghum, Indigofera tinctoria, Lepidum sativum, Maranta arundinacea, Nicotiana rustica, Panicum miliaceum, Raphanus sativus, Spergula arvensis.

7. Subspontaneous like the preceding, but different enough from the cultivated varieties to lead the majority of authors to regard them as distinct species. Three species.

*Allium ascalonicum (variety of A. cepa?), Allium scorodoprasum (variety of A. sativum?), Secale cereale (variety of one of the perennial species of Secale?).

8. Not discovered in a wild state nor even half-wild, derived perhaps from cultivated species at the beginning of agriculture, but too different not to be commonly regarded as distinct species. Three species.

Hordeum hexastichon (derived from H. distichon?), Hordeum vulgare (derived from H. distichon?), Triticum spelta (derived from T. vulgare?)

9. Not discovered in a wild state nor even half-wild, but originating in countries which are not completely explored, and belonging perhaps to little-known wild species of these countries. Six species.

Arachis hypogea, Carophyllus aromaticus, Convolvulus batatas, *Dolichos lubia, Manihot utilissima, Phaseolus vulgaris.

10. Not found in a wild state, nor even half-wild, but originating in countries which are not sufficiently explored, or in similar countries which cannot be defined, more different than the latter from known wild species. Eighteen species.

Amorphophallus konjak, Arracacha esculenta, Brassica chinensis, Capsicum annuum, Chenopodium quinoa,2183 Citrus nobilis, Cucurbita ficifolia, Dioscorea alata, Dioscorea Batatas, Dioscorea sativa, Eleusine coracana, Lucuma mammosa, Nephelium Litchi, *Pisum sativum, Saccharum officinarum, Sechium edule, *Tricosanthes anguina, Zea mays.

Total 247 species. These figures show that there are 193 species known to be wild, 27 doubtful, as half-wild, and 27 not found wild.

I believe that these last will be found some time or other, if not under one of the cultivated forms, at least in an allied form called species or variety according to the author. To attain this result tropical countries will have to be more thoroughly explored, collectors must be more attentive to localities, and more floras must be published of countries now little known, and good monographs of certain genera based upon the characters which vary least in cultivation.

A few species having their origin in countries fairly well explored, and which it is impossible to confound with others because each is unique in its genus, have not been found wild, or only once, which leads us to suppose that they are extinct in nature, or rapidly becoming so. I allude to maize and the bean (see pp. 387 and 316). I mention also in Article IV. other plants which appear to be becoming extinct in the last few thousand years. These last belong to genera which contain many species, which renders the hypothesis less probable;2184 but, on the other hand, they are rarely seen at a distance from cultivated ground, and they hardly ever become naturalized, that is wild, which shows a certain feebleness or a tendency to become the prey of animals and parasites.

The 67 species cultivated for less than two thousand years (C, F) are all found wild, except the species marked with an asterisk, which have not been found or which are subject to doubts. This is a proportion of eighty-three per cent.

What is more remarkable is that the great majority of species cultivated for more than four thousand years (A), or in America for three thousand or four thousand years (D), still exist wild in a form identical with some one of the cultivated varieties. Their number is thirty-one out of forty-nine, or sixty-three per cent. In categories 9 and 10 there are only two of these species of very ancient cultivation, or four per cent., and these are two species which probably exist no longer as wild plants.

I believed, À priori, that a great number of the species cultivated for more than four thousand years would have altered from their original condition to such a degree that they could no longer be recognized among wild plants. It appears, on the contrary, that the forms anterior to cultivation have commonly remained side by side with those which cultivators employed and propagated from century to century. This may be explained in two ways: 1. The period of four thousand years is short compared to the duration of most of the specific forms in phanerogamous plants. 2. The cultivated species receive, outside of cultivated ground, continual reinforcements from the seeds which man, birds, and different natural agents disperse and transport in a thousand ways. Naturalizations produced in this manner often confound the wild plants with the cultivated ones, and the more easily that they fertilize each other since they belong to the same species. This fact is clearly demonstrated in the case of a plant of the old world cultivated in America, in gardens, and which, later, becomes naturalized on a large scale in the open country or the woods, like the cardoon at Buenos Ayres, and the oranges in several American countries. Cultivation widens areas, and supplements the deficits which the natural reproduction of the species may present. There are, however, a few exceptions, which are worth mentioning in a separate article.

Article IV.Cultivated Plants which are Extinct, or becoming Extinct in a Wild State.

These species to which I allude present three remarkable characters:—

1. They have not been found wild, or only once or twice, and often doubtfully, although the regions whence they come have been visited by several botanists.

2. They have not the faculty of sowing themselves, and propagating indefinitely outside cultivated ground. In other terms, in such cases they do not pass out of the condition of adventitious plants.

3. It cannot be supposed that they are derived within historic times from certain allied species.

These three characters are found united in the following species:—Bean (Faba vulgaris), chick-pea (Cicer arietinum), ervilla (Ervum Ervilia), lentil (Ervum lens), tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum), wheat (Triticum vulgare), maize (Zea mays). The sweet potato (Convolvulus batatas) should be added if the kindred species were better known to be distinct, and the carthamine (Carthamus tinctorius) if the interior of Arabia had been explored, and we had not found a mention of the plant in an Arabian author.

All these species, and probably others of little-known countries or genera, appear to be extinct or on their way to become so. Supposing they ceased to be cultivated, they would disappear, whereas the majority of cultivated plants have become somewhere naturalized, and would persist in a wild state.

The seven species mentioned just now, excepting tobacco, have seeds full of fecula, which are the food of birds, rodents, and different insects, and have not the power of passing entire through their alimentary canal. This is probably the sole or principal cause of their inferiority in the struggle for existence.

Thus my researches into cultivated plants show that certain species are extinct or becoming extinct since the historical epoch, and that not in small islands but on vast continents without any great modifications of climate. This is an important result for the history of all organic beings in all epochs.

Article V.Concluding Remarks.

1. Cultivated plants do not belong to any particular category, for they belong to fifty-one different families. They are, however, all phanerogamous except the mushroom (Agaricus campestris).

2. The characters which have most varied in cultivation are, beginning with the most variable: a. The size, form, and colour of the fleshy parts, whatever organ they belong to (root, bulb, tubercle, fruit, or seed), and the abundance of fecula, sugar, and other substances which are contained in these parts; b. The number of seeds, which is often in inverse ratio to the development of the fleshy parts of the plant; c. The form, size, or pubescence of the floral organs which persist round the fruits or seeds; d. The rapidity of the phenomena of vegetation—whence often results the quality of ligneous or herbaceous plants, and of perennial, biennial, or annual.

The stems, leaves, and flowers vary little in plants cultivated for those organs. The last formations of each yearly or biennial growth vary most; in other terms, the results of vegetation vary more than the organs which cause vegetation.

3. I have not observed the slightest indication of an adaptation to cold. When the cultivation of a species advances towards the north (maize, flax, tobacco, etc.), it is explained by the production of early varieties, which can ripen before the cold season, or by the custom of cultivating in the north, in summer, the species which in the south are sown in winter. The study of the northern limits of wild species had formerly led me to the same conclusion, for they have not changed within historic times although the seeds are carried frequently and continually to the north of each limit. Periods of more than four or five thousand years, or changements of form and duration, are needed apparently to produce a modification in a plant which will allow it to support a greater degree of cold.

4. The classification of varieties made by agriculturists and gardeners are generally based on those characters which vary most (form, size, colour, taste of the fleshy parts, beard in the ears of corn, etc.). Botanists are mistaken when they follow this example; they should consult those more fixed characters of the organs for the sake of which the species are not cultivated.

5. A non-cultivated species being a group of more or less similar forms, among which subordinate groups may often be distinguished (races, varieties, sub-varieties), it may have happened that two or more of these slightly differing forms may have been introduced into cultivation. This must have been the case especially when the habitation of a species is extensive, and yet more when it is disjunctive. The first case is probably that of the cabbage (Brassica), of flax, bird-cherry (Prunus avium), the common pear, etc. The second is probably that of the gourd, the melon, and trefoil haricot, which existed previous to cultivation both in India and Africa.

6. No distinctive character is known between a naturalized plant which arose several generations back from a cultivated plant, and a wild plant sprung from plants which have always been wild. In any case, in the transition from cultivated plant to wild plant, the particular features which are propagated by grafting are not preserved by seedlings. For instance, the olive tree which has become wild is the oleaster, the pear bears smaller fruits, the Spanish chestnut yields a common fruit. For the rest, the forms naturalized from cultivated species have not yet been sufficiently observed from generation to generation. M. Sagot has done this for the vine. It would be interesting to compare in the same manner with their cultivated forms Citrus, Persica, and the cardoon, naturalized in America, far from their original home, as also the Agave and the prickly pear, wild in America, with their naturalized varieties in the old world. We should know exactly what persists after a temporary state of cultivation.

7. A species may have had, previous to cultivation, a restricted habitation, and subsequently occupy an immense area as a cultivated and sometimes a naturalized plant.

8. In the history of cultivated plants, I have noticed no trace of communication between the peoples of the old and new worlds before the discovery of America by Columbus. The Scandinavians, who had pushed their excursions as far as the north of the United States, and the Basques of the Middle Ages, who followed whales perhaps as far as America, do not seem to have transported a single cultivated species. Neither has the Gulf Stream produced any effect. Between America and Asia two transports of useful plants perhaps took place, the one by man (the Batata, or sweet potato) the other by the agency of man or of the sea (the cocoa-nut palm).


[1] Hooker, Flora TasmaniÆ, i. p. cx.

[2] Bretschneider, On the Study and Value of Chinese Botanical Works, p. 7.

[3] De Naidaillac, Les Premiers Hommes et les Temps PrÉhistoriques, i. pp. 266, 268. The absence of traces of agriculture among these remains is, moreover, corroborated by Heer and Cartailhac, both well versed in the discoveries of archÆology.

[4] M. Montelius, from Cartailhac, Revue, 1875, p. 237.

[5] Heer, Die Pflanzen der Pfahlbauten, in 4to, Zurich, 1865. See the article on “Flax.”

[6] Perrin, Étude PrÉhistorique de la Savoie, in 4to, 1870; Castelfranco, Notizie intorno alla Stazione lacustre di Lagozza; and Sordelli, Sulle piante della torbiera della Lagozza, in the Actes de la Soc. Ital. des Scien. Nat., 1880.

[7] Much, Mittheil d. Anthropol. Ges. in Wien, vol. vi.; Sacken, Sitzber. Akad. Wien., vol. vi. Letter of Heer on these works and analysis of them in Naidaillac, i. p. 247.

[8] Alph. de Candolle, GÉographie Botanique RaisonnÉe, chap. x. p. 1055; chap. xi., xix., xxvii.

[9] Unger, Versuch einer Geschichte der Pflanzenwelt, 1852.

[10] Forbes, On the Connection between the Distribution of the Existing Fauna and Flora of the British Isles, with the Geological Changes which have affected their Area, in 8vo, Memoirs of the Geological Survey, vol. i. 1846.

[11] A. de Candolle, GÉographie Botanique RaisonnÉe, chap. vii. and x.

[12] Ibid., chap. viii. p. 804.

[13] Bretscheider, On the Study and Value, etc., p. 15.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Ibid., p. 23.

[16] Atsuma-gusa. Recueil pour servir À la connaissance de l’extrÊme Orient, Turretini, vol. vi., pp. 200, 293.

[17] There are in the French language two excellent works, which give the sum of modern knowledge with regard to the East and Egypt. The one is the Manuel de l’Histoire Ancienne de l’Orient, by FranÇois Lenormand, 3 vols. in 12mo, Paris, 1869; the other, L’Histoire Ancienne des Peuples de l’Orient, by Maspero, 1 vol. in 8vo, Paris, 1878.

[18] Nemnich, Allgemeines polyglotten-Lexicon der Naturgeschichte, 2 vols. in 4to.

[19] Hehn, Kulturpflanzen und Hausthiere in ihren Uebergang aus Asien, in 8vo, 3rd edit. 1877.

[20] Bretschneider, On the Study and Value of Chinese Botanical Works, with Notes on the History of Plants and Geographical Botany from Chinese Sources, in 8vo, 51 pp., with illustrations, Foochoo, without date, but the preface bears the date Dec. 1870. Notes on Some Botanical Questions, in 8vo, 14 pp., 1880.

[21] Wilson’s dictionary contains names of plants, but botanists have more confidence in the names indicated by Roxburgh in his Flora Indica (edit. of 1832, 3 vols. in 8vo), and in Piddington’s English Index to the Plants of India, Calcutta, 1832. Scholars find a greater number of words in the texts, but they do not give sufficient proof of the sense of these words. As a rule, we have not in Sanskrit what we have in Hebrew, Greek, and Chinese—a quotation of phrases concerning each word translated into a modern language.

[22] The best work on the plant-names in the Old Testament is that of RosenmÜller, Handbuch der biblischen Alterkunde, in 8vo, vol. iv., Leipzig, 1830. A good short work, in French, is La Botanique de la Bible, by Fred. Hamilton, in 8vo, Nice, 1871.

[23] Reynier, a Swiss botanist, who had been in Egypt, has given the sense of many plant-names in the Talmud. See his volumes entitled Economie Publique et Rurale des Arabes et des Juifs, in 8vo, 1820; and Economie Publique et Rurale des Egyptiens et des Carthaginois, in 8vo, Lausanne, 1823. The more recent works of Duschak and LÖw are not based upon a knowledge of Eastern plants, and are unintelligible to botanists because of names in Syriac and Hebrew characters.

[24] Adolphe Pictet, Les Origines des Peuples Indo-EuropÉens, 3 vols, in 8vo, Paris, 1878.

[25] A certain number of species whose origin is well known, such as the carrot, sorrel, etc., are mentioned only in the summary at the beginning of the last part, with an indication of the principal facts concerning them.

[26] Some species are cultivated sometimes for their roots and sometimes for their leaves or seeds. In other chapters will be found species cultivated sometimes for their leaves (as fodder) or for their seeds, etc. I have classed them according to their commonest use. The alphabetical index refers to the place assigned to each species.

[27] See the young state of the plant when the part of the stem below the cotyledons is not yet swelled. Turpin gives a drawing of it in the Annales des Sciences Naturelles, series 1, vol xxi. pl. 5.

[28] In A. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. RaisonnÉe, p. 826.

[29] LinnÆus, Spec. Plant, p. 935.

[30] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., i. p. 225.

[31] Boissier, Fl. Orient, i. p. 400.

[32] Buhse, AufzÄhlung Transcaucasien, p. 30.

[33] Hooker, Flora of British India, i. p. 166.

[34] Maximowicz, PrimitiÆ FlorÆ Amurensis, p. 47.

[35] Thunberg, Fl. Jap., p. 263.

[36] Franchet and Savatier, Enum. Plant Jap., i. p. 39.

[37] Unger, Pflanzen des Alten Ægyptens, p. 51, figs. 24 and 29.

[38] In my manuscript dictionary of common names, drawn from the floras of thirty years ago.

[39] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., iii. p. 126.

[40] Webb, Phytogr. Canar., p. 83; Iter. Hisp., p. 71; Bentham, Fl. Hong Kong, p. 17; Hooker, Fl. Brit. Ind., i. p. 166.

[41] Willkomm and Lange, Prod. Fl. Hisp., iii. p. 748; Viviani, Flor. Dalmat., iii. p. 104; Boissier, Fl. Orient., i. p. 401.

[42] Webb, Phytographia Canariensis, i. p. 83.

[43] Webb, Iter. Hispaniense, 1838, p. 72.

[44] CarriÈre, Origine des Plantes Domestiques dÉmontrÉe par la Culture du Radis Sauvage, in 8vo, 24 pp., 1869.

[45] Ledebour, Fl. Ross.; Boissier, Fl. Orient. Works on the flora of the valley of the Amur.

[46] A. de Candolle, GÉographie Botanique RaisonnÉe, p. 654.

[47] Delalande, Hoedic et Houat, 8vo pamphlet, Nantes, 1850, p. 109.

[48] Hardouin, Renou, and Leclerc, Catalogue du Calvados, p. 85; De Brebisson, Fl. de Normandie, p. 25.

[49] Watson, Cybele, i. p. 159.

[50] Babington, Manual of Brit. Bot., 2nd edit., p. 28.

[51] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., i. p. 159.

[52] Grisebach, Spicilegium Fl. Rumel., i. p. 265.

[53] Fries, Summa, p. 30.

[54] Miquel, Disquisitio pl. regn. Batav.

[55] Moritzi, Dict. InÉd. des Noms Vulgaires.

[56] Moritzi, ibid.; Viviani, Fl. Dalmat., iii. p. 322.

[57] Neilreich, Fl. Wien, p. 502.

[58] LinnÆus, Fl. Suecica, No. 540.

[59] H. Davies, Welsh Botanology, p. 63.

[60] In turnips and swedes the swelled part is, as in the radish, the lower part of the stem, below the cotyledons, with a more or less persistent part of the root. (See Turpin. Ann. Sc. Natur., ser. 1, vol. xxi.) In the Kohl-rabi (Brassica oleracea caulo-rapa) it is the stem.

[61] This classification has been the subject of a paper by Augustin Pyramus de Candolle, Transactions of the Horticultural Society, vol. v.

[62] Fries, Summa Veget. Scand., i. p. 29.

[63] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., i. p. 216.

[64] Boissier, Flora Orientalis; Sir J. Hooker, Flora of British India; Thunberg, Flora Japonica; Franchet and Savatier, Enumeratio Plantarum Japonicarum.

[65] Piddington, Index.

[66] KÆmpfer, Amoen., p. 822.

[67] Davies, Welsh Botanology, p. 65.

[68] Moritzi, Dict. MS., compiled from published floras.

[69] Threlkeld, Synopsis Stirpium Hibernicarum, 1 vol. in 8vo, 1727.

[70] Moritzi, Dict. MS.

[71] RosenmÜller, Biblische Naturgeschichte, vol. i., gives none.

[72] LinnÆus, Species, p. 361; Loureiro, Fl. Cochinchinensis, p. 225.

[73] Maximowicz, Diagnoses Plantarum JaponicÆ et ManshuriÆ, in MÉlanges Biologiques du Bulletin de l’Acad., St. Petersburg, decad 13, p. 18.

[74] Dioscorides, Mat. Med., 1. 2, c. 139; Columella, 1. 11, c. 3, 18, 35; Lenz, Bot. der Alten, p. 560.

[75] Pliny, Hist. Plant., 1. 19, c. 5.

[76] Nemnich, Polygl. Lexicon, ii. p. 1313.

[77] Lenz, Bot. der Alten, p. 560; Heldreich, Nutzpflanzen Griechenlands; Langkavel, Bot. der SpÄteren Griechen.

[78] Sprengel, Dioscoridis, etc., ii. p. 462.

[79] Olivier de Serres, ThÉÂtre de l’Agriculture, p. 471.

[80] Bauhin, Hist. Pl., iii. p. 154.

[81] The best information about the cultivation of this plant was given by Bancroft to Sir W. Hooker, and may be found in the Botanical Magazine, pl. 3092. A. P. de Candolle published, in La 5e Notice sur les Plantes Rares des Jardin Bot. de GenÈve, an illustration showing the principal bulb.

[82] Grisebach, Flora of British West-India Islands.

[83] Bertoloni, Flora Italica, ii. p. 146; Decaisne, Recherches sur la Garance, p. 68; Boissier, Flora Orientalis, iii. p. 17; Ledebour, Flora Rossica, ii. p. 405.

[84] Cosson and Germain, Flore des Environs de Paris, ii. p. 365.

[85] Kirschleger, Flore d’Alsace, i. p. 359.

[86] Willkomm and Lange, Prodromus FlorÆ HispanicÆ, ii. p. 307.

[87] Ball, Spicilegium FlorÆ MaroccanÆ, p. 483; Munby, Catal. Plant. Alger., edit. 2, p. 17.

[88] Piddington, Index.

[89] Plinius, lib. 19, cap. 3.

[90] De Gasparin, TraitÉ d’Agriculture, iv. p. 253.

[91] Columna, Ecphrasis, ii. p. 11.

[92] LinnÆus, Hortus Cliffortianus, p. 420.

[93] A. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. RaisonnÉe, p. 824.

[94] Schlechtendal, Bot. Zeit. 1858, p. 113.

[95] Decaisne, Recherches sur l’Origine de quelques-unes de nos Plantes Alimentaires, in Flore des Serres et Jardins, vol. 23, 1881, p. 112.

[96] Lescarbot, Histoire de la Nouvelle France, edit. 3, 1618, t. vi. p. 931.

[97] Pickering, Chron. Arrang., pp. 749, 972.

[98] Catalogue of Indiana Plants, 1881, p. 15.

[99] Boissier, Fl. Orient., iii. p. 745; Viviani, Fl. Dalmat., ii. p. 108; Bertoloni, Fl. Ital., viii. p. 348; Gussone, Synopsis Fl. SiculÆ, ii. p. 384; Munby, Catal. Alger., edit. 2, p. 22.

[100] A. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. RaisonnÉe, p. 671.

[101] Fraas, Synopsis Fl. Class., p. 196; Lenz, Bot. der Alten, p. 485.

[102] Willkomm and Lange, Prodromus FlorÆ HispanicÆ, ii. p. 223; De Candolle, Flore FranÇaise, iv. p. 59; Koch, Synopsis Fl. Germ., edit. 2, p. 488; Ledebour, Fl. Ross., ii. p. 794; Boissier, Fl. Orientalis, iii. p. 767; Bertoloni, Fl. Ital., viii. p. 365.

[103] Tournefort, ÉlÉments de Botanique, p. 379.

[104] Gussone, Synopsis FlorÆ SiculÆ.

[105] A. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. RaisonnÉe, pp. 810, 816.

[106] Acosta, p. 163, verso.

[107] De l’Ecluse (or Clusius), Rariarum Plantarum HistoriÆ, 1601, lib. 4, p. lxxix., with illustration.

[108] De Martius, Flora Brasil., vol. x. p. 12.

[109] Von Humboldt, Nouvelle Espagne, edit. 2, vol. ii. p. 451; Essai sur la GÉographie des Plantes, p. 29.

[110] At that epoch Virginia was not distinguished from Carolina.

[111] Banks, Trans. Hort. Soc., 1805, vol. i. p. 8.

[112] Gerard, Herbal, 1597, p. 781, with illustration.

[113] Banks, Trans. Hort. Soc., 1805, vol. i. p. 8.

[114] Dunal, Hist. Nat. des Solanum, in 4to.

[115] The plant imported by Sir John Hawkins and Sir Francis Drake was clearly the sweet potato, Sir J. Banks says; whence it results that the questions discussed by Humboldt touching the localities visited by these travellers do not apply to the potato.

[116] De l’Ecluse, Rariarum Plantarum HistoriÆ, 1601, lib. 4. p. lxxviii.

[117] Targioni-Tozzetti, Lezzioni, ii. p. 10; Cenni Storici sull’ Introduzione di Varie Piante nell’ Agricoltura di Toscana, 1 vol. in 8vo, Florence, 1853, p. 37.

[118] Solanum verrucosum, whose introduction into the neighbourhood of Gex, near Geneva, I mentioned in 1855, has since been abandoned because its tubers are too small, and because it does not, as it was hoped, withstand the potato-fungus.

[119] Chloris Andina, in 4to. p. 103.

[120] Sabine, Trans. Hort. Soc., vol. v. p. 249.

[121] No importance should be attached to this flavour, nor to the watery quality of some of the tubers, since in hot countries, even in the south of Europe, the potato is often poor. The tubers, which are subterranean ramifications of the stem, are turned green by exposure to the light, and are rendered bitter.

[122] Journal Hort. Soc., vol. iii. p. 66.

[123] Hooker, Botanical Miscellanies, 1831. vol. ii. p. 203.

[124] Journal of the Voyage, etc., edit. 1852, p. 285.

[125] Vol. i. part 2, p. 329.

[126] Vol. v. p. 74.

[127] Ruiz and Pavon, Flora Peruviana, ii. p. 38.

[128] Dunal, Prodromus, xiii., sect. i. p. 22.

[129] Hooker, Bot. Miscell., ii.

[130] Hooker, Fl. Antarctica.

[131] Journal Hort. Soc., new series, vol. v.

[132] Weddell, Chloris Andina, p. 103.

[133] AndrÉ, in Illustration Horticole, 1877, p. 114.

[134] The form of the berries in S. columbianum and S. immite is not yet known.

[135] Hemsley, Journal Hort. Soc., new series, vol. v.

[136] Asa Gray, Synoptical Flora of North America, ii. p. 227.

[137] See, for the successive introduction into the different parts of Europe, Clos, Quelques Documents sur l’Histoire de la Pomme de Terre, in 8vo, 1874, in Journal d’Agric. Pratiq. du Midi de la France.

[138] Turpin gives figures which clearly show these facts. MÉm. du MusÉum, vol. xix. plates 1, 2, 5.

[139] Dr. Sagot gives interesting details on the method of cultivation, the product, etc., in the Journal Soc. d’Hortic. de France, second series, vol. v. pp. 450-458.

[140] Humboldt, Nouvelle Espagne, edit. 2, vol. ii. p. 470.

[141] Meyen, Grundrisse Pflanz. Geogr., p. 373.

[142] Boissier, Voyage Botanique en Espagne.

[143] Boyer, Hort. Maurit., p. 225.

[144] Choisy, in Prodromus, p. 338.

[145] Marcgraff, Bres., p. 16, with illustration.

[146] Sloane, Hist. Jam., i. p. 150; Hughes, Barb., p. 228.

[147] Clusius, Hist., ii. p. 77.

[148] Ajes was a name for the yam (Humboldt, Nouvelle Espagne).

[149] Humboldt, ibid.

[150] Oviedo, Ramusio’s translation, vol. iii. pt. 3.

[151] Rumphius, Amboin., v. p. 368.

[152] Forskal, p. 54; Delile, Ill.

[153] D’Hervey Saint-Denys, Rech. sur l’Agric. des Chin., 1850, p. 109.

[154] Study and Value of Chinese Botanical Works, p. 13.

[155] Thunberg, Flora Japon., p. 84.

[156] Forster, PlantÆ Escul., p. 56.

[157] Hooker, Handbook of New Zealand Flora, p. 194.

[158] Seemann, Journal of Bot., 1866, p. 328.

[159] Roxburgh, edit. Wall., ii. p. 69.

[160] Piddington, Index.

[161] Wallich, Flora Ind.

[162] Roxburgh, edit. 1832, vol. i. p. 483.

[163] Rheede, Mal., vii. p. 95.

[164] Meyer, Primitioe Fl. Esseq., p. 103.

[165] R. Brown, Bot. Congo, p. 55.

[166] Schumacher and Thonning, Besk. Guin.

[167] Wallich, in Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., ii. p. 63.

[168] Sloane, Jam., i. p. 152.

[169] Several ConvolvulaceÆ have large roots, or more properly root-stocks, but in this case it is the base of the stem with a part of the root which is swelled, and this root-stock is always purgative, as in the Jalap and Turbith, while in the sweet potato it is the lateral roots, a different organ, which swell.

[170] No. 701 of Schomburgh, coll. 1, is wild in Guiana. According to Choisy, it is a variety of the Batatas edulis; according to Bentham (Hook, Jour. Bot., v. p. 352), of the Batatas paniculata. My specimen, which is rather imperfect, seems to me to be different from both.

[171] Clusius, Hist., ii. p. 77.

[172] A. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. RaisonnÉ, pp. 1041-1043, and pp. 516-518.

[173] Dr. Bretschneider, after having read the above, wrote to me from Pekin that the cultivated sweet potato is of origin foreign to China, according to Chinese authors. The handbook of agriculture of Nung-chang-tsuan-shu, whose author died in 1633, asserts this fact. He speaks of a sweet potato wild in China, called chu, the cultivated species being kan-chu. The Min-shu, published in the sixteenth century, says that the introduction took place between 1573 and 1620. The American origin thus receives a further proof.

[174] Moquin-Tandon, in Prodromus, vol. xiii. pt. 2, p. 55; Boissier, Flora Orientalis, iv. p. 898; Ledebour, Fl. Rossica, iii. p. 692.

[175] Roxburgh, Flora Indica, ii. p. 59; Piddington, Index.

[176] Theophrastus and Dioscorides, quoted by Lenz, Botanik der Griechen und RÖmer, p. 446; Fraas, Synopsis Fl. Class., p. 233.

[177] Heldreich, Die Nutzpflanzen Griechenlands, p. 22.

[178] AlawÂm, Agriculture nabathÉenne, from E. Meyer, Geschichte der Botanik, iii. p. 75.

[179] Notice sur l’AmÉlioration des Plantes par le Semis, p. 15.

[180] Pohl, Plantarum BrasiliÆ Icones et Descriptiones, in fol., vol. i.

[181] J. MÜller, in Prodromus, xv., sect. 2, pp. 1062-1064.

[182] Sagot, Bull. de la Soc. Bot. de France, Dec. 8, 1871.

[183] I give the essentials of the preparation; the details vary according to the country. See on this head: Aublet, Guyane, ii. p. 67; Decourtilz, Flora des Antilles, iii. p. 113; Sagot, etc.

[184] R. Brown, Botany of the Congo, p. 50.

[185] Humboldt, Nouvelle Espagne, edit. 2, vol. ii. p. 398.

[186] Hist. de l’Acad. des Sciences, 1824.

[187] Guillemin, Archives de Botanique, i. p. 239.

[188] Acosta, Hist. Nat. des Indes, French trans., 1598, p. 163.

[189] Thomas, Statistique de Bourbon, ii. p. 18.

[190] The catalogue of the botanical gardens of Buitenzorg, 1866, p. 222, says expressly that the Manihot utilissima comes from Bourbon and America.

[191] Aypi, mandioca, manihot, manioch, yuca, etc., in Pohl, Icones and Desc., i. pp. 30, 33. Martius, BeitrÄge z. Ethnographie, etc., Braziliens, ii. p. 122, gives a number of names.

[192] Thonning (in Schumacher, Besk. Guin.), who is accustomed to quote the common names, gives none for the manioc.

[193] J. MÜller, in Prodromus, xv., sect. 1, p. 1057.

[194] Kunth, in Humboldt and B., Nova Genera, ii. p. 108.

[195] Pohl, Icones et Descr., i. p. 36, pl. 26.

[196] MÜller, in Prodromus.

[197] De Martius, BeitrÄge zur Ethnographie, etc., i. pp. 19, 136.

[198] Piso, Historia Naturalis BraziliÆ, in folio, 1658, p. 55, cum icone.

[199] Jatropia Sylvestris Vell. Fl. Flum., 16, t. 83. See MÜller, in D. C. Prodromus, xv. p. 1063.

[200] Kunth, Enum., iv. p. 381.

[201] Schweinfurth and Ascherson, AufzÄhlung, p. 294.

[202] Ledebour, Flora Altaica, ii. p. 4; Flora Rossica, iv. p. 162.

[203] Regel, Allior. Monogr., p. 44.

[204] Baker, in Journal of Bot., 1874, p. 295.

[205] Bretschneider, Study and Value, etc., pp. 15, 4, and 7.

[206] Thunberg, Fl. Jap.; Franchet and Savatier, Enumeratio, 1876, vol. ii.

[207] Unger, Pflanzen des Alten Ægyptens, p. 42.

[208] Piddington, Index.

[209] Hiller, Hierophyton; RosenmÜller, Bibl. Alterthum, vol. iv.

[210] De Charencey, Actes de la Soc. Phil., 1st March, 1869.

[211] Davies, Welsh Botanology.

[212] All these common names are found in my dictionary compiled by Moritzi from floras. I could have quoted a larger number, and mentioned the probable etymologies, as given by philologists—Hehn, for instance, in his Kulturpflanzen aus Asien, p. 171 and following; but this is not necessary to show its origin and early cultivation in several different countries.

[213] Annales des Sc. Nat., 3rd series, vol. viii.

[214] A. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. RaisonnÉe, ii. p. 828.

[215] Kunth, Enumer., iv. p. 394.

[216] Fraas, Syn. Fl. Class., p. 291.

[217] Theophrastus, Hist., l. 7, c. 4.

[218] J. Bauhin, Hist., ii. p. 548.

[219] Pliny, Hist., l. 19, c. 6.

[220] Ibid.

[221] Juvenalis, Sat. 15.

[222] Forskal, p. 65.

[223] Ainslie’s Mat. Med. Ind., i. p. 269.

[224] Hiller, Hieroph., ii. p. 36; RosenmÜller, Handbk. Bibl. Alterk.; iv. p. 96.

[225] Piddington, Index; Ainslie’s Mat. Med. Ind.

[226] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., ii.; Loureiro, Fl. Cochin., p. 249.

[227] Thunberg, Fl. Jap., p. 132.

[228] Unger, Pflanzen d. Alt. Ægypt., p. 42, figs. 22, 23, 24.

[229] Hasselquist, Voy. and Trav., p. 279.

[230] Ledebour, Fl. Rossica, iv. p. 169.

[231] Aitchison, A Catalogue of the Plants of the Punjab and the Sindh, in 8vo, 1869, p. 19; Baker, in Journal of Bot., 1874, p. 295.

[232] Ill. Hortic., 1877, p. 167.

[233] Bretschneider, Study and Value, etc., pp. 47 and 7.

[234] Nouvelle Espagne, 2nd edit., ii. p. 476.

[235] Sloane, Jam., i. p. 75.

[236] Acosta. Hist. Nat. des Indes, French trans., p. 165.

[237] Ledebour, Flora Rossica, iv. p. 169.

[238] Lenz, Botanik. der Alten Griechen und RÖmer, p. 295.

[239] Dodoens, Pemptades, p. 687.

[240] Pliny, Hist., l. 19, c. 6.

[241] He will treat of this in a publication entitled Cibaria, which will shortly appear.

[242] GÉog. Bot. RaisonnÉe, p. 829.

[243] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind.; edit. 1832, vol. ii. p. 142.

[244] Piddington, Index.

[245] Loureiro, Fl. Cochin., p. 251.

[246] LinnÆus, Species, p. 429.

[247] Hasselquist, Voy. and Trav., 1766, pp. 281, 282.

[248] Sibthorp, Prodr.

[249] Fraas, Syn. Fl. Class., p. 291.

[250] Koch, Syn. Fl. Germ., 2nd edit., p. 833.

[251] Viviani, Fl. Dalmat., p. 138.

[252] Koch, Syn. Fl. Germ.

[253] A. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. RaisonnÉe, p. 829.

[254] Baker, in Journ. of Bot., 1874, p. 295.

[255] Cosson and Germain, Flore, ii. p. 553.

[256] Grenier and Godron, Flore de France, iii. p. 197.

[257] Willkomm and Lange, Prodr. Fl. Hisp., i. p. 885.

[258] Ledebour, Flora Rossica, iv. p. 163.

[259] Le Grand d’Aussy, Histoire de la Vie des FranÇais, vol. i. p. 122.

[260] Nemnich, Polyglott. Lexicon, p. 187.

[261] Ibid.

[262] Asa Gray, Botany of the Northern States, edit. 5, p. 534.

[263] De Candolle, Flore FranÇaise, iv. p. 227.

[264] Arum Egyptium, Columma, Ecphrasis, ii. p. 1, tab. 1; Rumphius, Amboin, vol. v. tab. 109. Arum colocasia and A. esculentum, LinnÆus; Colocasia antiquorum, Schott, Melet., i. 18; Engler, in D. C. Monog. Phaner., ii. p. 491.

[265] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., iii. p. 495.

[266] Wight, Icones, t. 786.

[267] Thwaites, Enum. Plant. Zeylan., p. 335.

[268] Miquel, Sumatra, p. 258.

[269] Rumphius, Amboin, vol. v. p. 318.

[270] Bretschneider, On the Study and Value, etc., p. 12.

[271] Forster, De Plantis Escul., p. 58.

[272] Franchet and Savatier, Enum., p. 8; Seemann, Flora Vitiensis, p. 284.

[273] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind.

[274] Thwaites, Enum. Plant. Zeylan.

[275] Rumphius, Amboin.

[276] Miquel, Sumatra, p. 258; Hasskarl, Cat. Horti. Bogor. Alter., p. 55.

[277] Forster, De Plantis Escul., p. 58.

[278] Seemann, Flora Vitiensis.

[279] Franchet and Savatier, Enum.

[280] Pliny, Hist., l. 19, c. 5.

[281] Alpinus, Hist. Ægypt. Naturalis, edit. 2, vol. i. p. 166; ii. p. 192.

[282] Delile, Fl. Ægypt. Ill., p. 28; De la Colocase des Anciens, in 8vo, 1846.

[283] Clusius, Historia, ii. p. 75.

[284] Parlatore, Fl. Ital., ii. p. 255.

[285] Prosper Alpinus, Hist. Ægypt. Naturalis; Columna; Delile, Ann. du Mus., i. p. 375; De la Colocase des Anciens; Reynier, Economie des Egyptiens, p. 321.

[286] See Engler, in D. C. MonographiÆ Phanerogarum, ii. p. 502.

[287] Forster, De Plantis Esculentis Insularum Oceani Australis, p. 58.

[288] Thwaites, Enum. Pl. Zeyl., p. 336.

[289] Nadeaud, Enum. des Plantes IndigÈnes, p. 40.

[290] Engler, in D. C. Monog. Phaner.

[291] Bentham, Flora Austr., viii. p. 155.

[292] Engler, in D. C. Monogr. Phaner., vol. ii. p. 313.

[293] Gardener’s Chronicle, 1873, p. 610; Flore des Serres et Jardins, t. 1958, 1959; Hooker, Bot. Mag., t. 6195.

[294] Franchet and Savatier, Enum. Pl. JaponiÆ, ii. p. 7.

[295] M. Sagot, Bull. de la Soc. Bot. de France, 1871, p. 306, has well described the growth and cultivation of yams, as he has studied them in Cayenne.

[296] Kunth, Enumeratio, vol. v.

[297] These are D. globosa, alata, rubella, fasciculata, purpurea, of which two or three appear to be merely varieties.

[298] Piddington, Index.

[299] Thwaites, Enum. Plant. Zeyl., p. 326.

[300] Decaisne, Histoire et Culture de l’Igname de Chine, in the Revue Horticole, 1st July and Dec. 1853; Flore des Serres et Jardins, x. pl. 971.

[301] On the Study and Value, etc., p. 12.

[302] Franchet and Savatier, Enum. Plant. JaponiÆ, ii. p. 47.

[303] Blume, Enum. Plant. JavÆ, p. 22.

[304] Forster, Plant. Esculent., p. 56; Rumphius, Amboin, vol. v., pl. 120, 121, etc.

[305] Hughes, Hist. Nat. Barb., 1750, p. 226.

[306] Humboldt, Nouvelle Espagne, 2nd edit., vol. ii. p. 468.

[307] Ibid., p. 403.

[308] HÆnke, in Presl, Rel., p. 133.

[309] Martius, Fl. Bras., v. p. 43.

[310] Sagot, Bull. Soc. Bot. France, 1871, p. 305.

[311] Hooker, Fl. Nigrit, p. 53.

[312] Schumacher and Thonning, Besk. Guin, p. 447.

[313] Brown, Congo, p. 49.

[314] Bojer, Hortus Mauritianus.

[315] See Tussac’s description, Flore des Antilles, i. p. 183.

[316] Hooker, Niger Flora, p. 531.

[317] Sloane, Jamaica, 1707, vol. i. p. 254.

[318] In Bull. Soc. des Natur. de Moscou, 1822, vol. i. p. 34.

[319] Aublet, Guyane, i. p. 3.

[320] Meyer, Flora Essequibo, p. 11.

[321] Seemann, Bot. of Herald., p. 213.

[322] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., i. p. 31; Porter, The Tropical Agriculturalist p. 241; Ainslie, Materia Medica, i. p. 19.

[323] Fries, Summa, p. 29; Nylander, Conspectus, p. 46; Bentham, Handb. Brit. Fl., edit. 4, p. 40; Mackay, Fl. Hibern., p. 28; Brebisson, Fl. de Normandie, edit. 2, p. 18; Babbington, PrimitiÆ Fl. SarnicÆ, p. 8; Clavaud, Flore de la Gironde, i. p. 68.

[324] Bertoloni, Fl. Ital., vii. p. 146; Nylander, Conspectus.

[325] Ledebour, Fl. Ross.; Griesbach, Spiciligium Fl. Rumel.; Boissier, Flora Orientalis, etc.

[326] Watson, who is careful on these points, doubts whether the cabbage is indigenous in England (Compendium of the Cybele, p. 103), but most authors of British floras admit it to be so.

[327] Br. balearica and Br. cretica are perennial, almost woody, not biennial; and botanists are agreed in separating them from Br. oleracea.

[328] Aug. Pyr. de Candolle has published a paper on the divisions and subdivisions of Br. oleracea (Transactions of the Hort. Soc., vol. v., translated into German and in French in the Bibl. Univ. Agric., vol. viii.), which is often quoted.

[329] Alph. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. RaisonnÉe, p. 839.

[330] Ad. Pictet, Les Origines Indo-EuropÉennes, edit. 2, vol. i. p. 380.

[331] Brandza, Prodr. Fl. Romane, p. 122.

[332] De Charencey, Recherches sur les Noms Basques, in Actes de la SociÉtÉ Philologique, 1st March, 1869.

[333] Ad. Pictet, Les Origines Indo-EuropÉennes, edit. 2, vol. i. p. 380.

[334] Fick, VÖrterb. d. Indo-Germ. Sprachen, p. 3-4.

[335] Piddington, Index; Ainslie, Mat. Med. Ind.

[336] RosenmÜller, Bibl. Alterth., mentions no name.

[337] See Fraas, Syn. Fl. Class., pp. 120,124; Lenz, Bot. der Alten, p. 617.

[338] Sibthorp, Prodr. Fl. GrÆc., ii. p. 6; Heldreich, Nutzpfl. Griechenl., p. 47.

[339] Ainslie, Mat. Med. Ind., i. p. 95.

[340] Heldreich, Nutz. Gr.

[341] Piddington, Index; Ainslie, Mat. Med. Ind., i. p. 95.

[342] Hooker, Fl. Brit. Ind., i. p. 160.

[343] Boissier, Fl. Orient, vol. i.

[344] De Candolle, Syst., ii. p. 533.

[345] Sibthorp and Smith, Prodr. Fl. GrÆcÆ, ii. p. 6.

[346] Poech, Enum. Pl. Cypri, 1842.

[347] Unger and Kotschy, Inseln Cypern., p. 331.

[348] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., i. p. 203.

[349] Lindemann, Index Plant. in Ross., Bull. Soc. Nat. Mosc. 1860, vol. xxxiii.

[350] Lindemann, Prodr. Fl. Cherson, p. 21.

[351] Nyman, Conspectus Fl. Europ., 1878, p. 65.

[352] Schweinfurth, Beitr. Fl. Æth., p. 270.

[353] In the United States purslane was believed to be of foreign origin (Asa Gray, Fl. of Northern States, ed. 5; Bot. of California, i. p. 79), but in a recent publication, Asa Gray and Trumbull give reasons for believing that it is indigenous in America as in the old world. Columbus had noticed it at San Salvador and at Cuba; Oviedo mentions it in St. Domingo and De Lery in Brazil. This is not the testimony of botanists, but Nuttall and others found it wild in the upper valley of the Missouri, in Colorado, and Texas, where, however, from the date, it might have been introduced.—Author’s Note, 1884.

[354] Piddington, Index to Indian Plants.

[355] Nemnich, Polyglot. Lex. Naturgesch., ii. p. 1047.

[356] Loureiro, Fl. Cochin., i. p. 359; Franchet and Savatier, Enum. Pl. Japon., i. p. 53; Bentham, Fl. Hongkong, p. 127.

[357] Hooker, Fl. Brit. Ind., i. p. 240.

[358] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., ii. p. 145; Lindemann, in Prodr. Fl. Chers., p. 74, says, “In desertis et arenosis inter Cherson et Berislaw, circa Odessam.”

[359] Lenz, Bot. der Alten, p. 632; Heldreich, Fl. Attisch. Ebene., p. 483.

[360] Bertoloni, Fl. It., vol. v.; Gussone, Fl. Sic., vol. i.; Moris, Fl. Sard., vol. ii.; Willkomm and Lange, Prodr. Fl. Hisp., vol. iii.

[361] Botanical Magazine, t. 2362; Bon Jardinier, 1880, p. 567.

[362] Sir J. Hooker, Handbook of New Zealand Flora, p. 84; Bentham, Flora Australiensis, iii. p. 327; Franchet and Savatier, Enum. Plant. JaponiÆ, i. p. 177.

[363] Cl. Gay, Flora Chilena, ii. p. 468.

[364] Fries, Summa Veget. Scand.; Munby, Catal. Alger., p. 11; Boissier, Fl. Orient., vol. ii. p. 856; Schweinfurth and Ascherson, AufzÄhlung, p. 272; Hooker, Fl. Brit. Ind., ii. p. 679.

[365] Dioscorides, Mat. Med., l. 3, c. 67, 68; Pliny, Hist., l. 19, c. 7, 8; Lenz, Bot. der Alten Griechen und RÖmer, p. 557.

[366] Steven, Verzeichniss Taurischen Halbinseln, p. 183.

[367] Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 913.

[368] Lenz, Bot. d. Alt. Gr. und R., p. 572.

[369] Munby, Catal. Alger., edit. 2, p. 22; Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 857.

[370] Dioscorides, Mat. Med., l. 3, c. 70; Pliny, Hist., l. 20, ch. 12.

[371] The list of these plants may be found in Meyer, Gesch. der Bot., iii. p. 401.

[372] Phillips, Companion to the Kitchen Garden, ii. p. 35.

[373] Theophrastus, Hist., l. 1, 9; l. 2, 2; l. 7, 6; Dioscorides, Mat. Med., l. 3, c. 71.

[374] E. Meyer, Gesch. der Bot., iii. p. 401.

[375] Targioni, Cenni Storici, p. 58.

[376] English Botany, t. 230; Phillips, Companion to the Kitchen Garden; Le Bon Jardinier.

[377] Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 927.

[378] Krok, Monographie des Valerianella, Stockholm, 1864, p. 88; Boissier, Fl. Orient., iii. p. 104.

[379] Bertoloni, Fl. Ital., i. p. 185; Moris, Fl. Sard., ii. p. 314; Gussone, Synopsis Fl. SiculÆ, edit. 2, vol. i. p. 30.

[380] Dodoens, Hist. Plant., p. 724; LinnÆus, Species, p. 1159; De Candolle, Prodr., vi. p. 620.

[381] Moris, Flora Sardoa, ii. p. 61.

[382] Willkomm and Lange, Prodr. Fl. Hisp., ii. p. 180.

[383] Webb, Phyt. Canar., iii. sect. 2, p. 384; Ball, Spicilegium Fl. Maroc., p. 524; Willkomm and Lange, Pr. Fl. Hisp.; Bertoloni, Fl. Ital., ix. p. 86; Boissier, Fl. Orient., iii. p. 357; Unger and Kotschy, Inseln Cypern., p. 246.

[384] Munby, Catal., edit. 2.

[385] Heldreich, Nutzpflanzen Griechenlands, p. 27.

[386] Targioni, Cenni Storici, p. 52.

[387] Dictionnaire FranÇais-BerbÈre, published by the Government, 1 vol. in 8vo.

[388] Theophrastus, Hist., l. 6, c. 4; Pliny, Hist., l. 19, c. 8; Lenz, Bot. der Alten Griechen and RÖmer, p. 480.

[389] AthenÆus, Deipn., ii. 84.

[390] Pickering, Chron. Arrangement, p. 71; Unger, Pflanzen der Alten Ægyptens, p. 46, figs. 27 and 28.

[391] Ainslie, Mat. Med. Ind., i. p. 22.

[392] Piddington, Index.

[393] Bretschneider, Study, etc., and Letters of 1881.

[394] Phillips, Companion to the Kitchen Garden, p. 22.

[395] Aug. de Saint Hilary, Plantes Remarkables du Bresil, Introd., p. 58; Darwin, Animals and Plants under Domestication, ii. p. 34.

[396] Cl. Gay, Flora Chilena, iv. p. 317.

[397] The author who has gone into this question most carefully is Bischoff, in his BeitrÄge zur Flora Deutschlands und der Schweitz, p. 184. See also Moris, Flora Sardoa, ii. p. 530.

[398] Webb, Phytogr. Canariensis, iii. p. 422; Lowe, Flora of Madeira, p. 544.

[399] Munby, Catal., edit. 2, p. 22, under the name of L. sylvestris.

[400] Schweinfurth and Ascherson, AufzÄhlung, p. 285.

[401] Boissier, Fl. Orient., iii. p. 809.

[402] Clarke, Compos. IndicÆ, p. 263.

[403] Theophrastus, l. 7, c. 4.

[404] Nemnich, Polygl. Lexicon.

[405] A. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. RaisonnÉe, p. 843.

[406] Bretschneider, Study and Value of Chinese Botanical Works, p. 17.

[407] Ball, Spicilegium Fl. Marocc., p. 534; Munby, Catal., edit. 2, p. 21.

[408] Boissier, Fl. Orient., iii. p. 715.

[409] Clarke, Compos. Ind., p. 250.

[410] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., ii. p. 774.

[411] Dioscorides, ii. c. 160; Pliny, xix. c. 8; Palladius, xi. c. 11. See other authors quoted by Lenz, Bot. d. Alten, p. 483.

[412] Heldreich, Die Nutzpflanzen Griechenlands, pp. 28, 76.

[413] Aug. Pyr. de Candolle, Prodr., vii. p. 84; Alph. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot., p. 845.

[414] Clarke, Compos. Ind., p. 250.

[415] De Viviani, Flora Dalmat., ii. p. 97; Schultz in Webb, Phyt. Canar., sect. ii. p. 391; Boissier, Fl. Orient., iii. p. 716.

[416] Lowe, Flora of Madeira, p. 521.

[417] Ball, Spicilegium, p. 534.

[418] Munby, Catal., edit. 2, p. 21.

[419] Boissier, Fl. Orient., iii. p. 716.

[420] Bunge, BeitrÄge zur Flora Russlands und Central Asiens, p. 197.

[421] Lenz, Bot. der Alten, p. 483; Heldreich, Die Nutzpflanzen Griechenlands, p. 74.

[422] Nemnich, Polygl. Lex., at the word Cichorium Endivia.

[423] Royle, Ill. Himal., p. 247; Piddington, Index.

[424] J. Bauhin, Hist., ii. p. 964; Fraas, Syn. Fl. Class.; Lenz, Bot. der Alten.

[425] Brassavola, p. 176.

[426] Mathioli, ed Valgr., p. 343.

[427] Ebn Baithar, ueberitz von Sondtheimer, i. p. 34; Forskal, Egypt, p. 77; Delile, Ill. Ægypt., p. 29.

[428] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., ed. 1832, v. iii. p. 771, applied to Spinacia tetandra, which seems to be the same species.

[429] Maximowicz, PrimitiÆ Fl. Amur., p. 222.

[430] Bretschneider, Study and Value of Chin. Bot. Works, pp. 15, 17.

[431] Dict. d’Agric., v. p. 906.

[432] Boissier, Fl. Orient., vi. p. 234.

[433] Wight, Icones, t. 818.

[434] Nees, Gen. Plant. Fl. Germ., 1. 7, pl. 15.

[435] Bauhin, Hist., ii. p. 965.

[436] A. gangeticus, A. tristis, and A. hybridis of LinnÆus, according to Baker, Flora of Mauritius, p. 266.

[437] Wight, Icones, p. 715.

[438] Roxburgh, Flora Indica, edit. 2, vol. iii. p. 606.

[439] Boissier, Flora Orientalis, iv. p. 990; Schweinfurth and Ascherson, AufzÄhlung, etc., p. 289.

[440] Franchet and Savatier, Enum. Plant. JaponiÆ, i. p. 390.

[441] Hasskarl, Plant. Javan. Rariores, p. 431.

[442] Gay, Ann. des Sc. Nat., 3rd series, vol. viii.

[443] LinnÆus, Species Pl.; De Candolle, Fl. FranÇ., iii. p. 219.

[444] Koch, Synopsis Fl. Germ.; Babington, Man. of Brit. Bot.; English Bot., etc.

[445] Ledebour, Flora Ross., iv. p. 163.

[446] Baker, Journal of Bot., 1874, p. 295.

[447] Strabo, xii. p. 560; Pliny, bk. xviii. c. 16.

[448] Hehn, Culturpflanzen, etc., p. 355.

[449] Gasparin, Cours d’Agric., iv. p. 424.

[450] Targioni-Tozzetti, Cenni Storici, p. 34.

[451] Fraas, Synopsis Fl. Class., p. 63; Heldreich, Die Nutzpflanzen Griechenlands, p. 70.

[452] Bauhin, Hist. Plant., ii. p. 381.

[453] Colmeiro, Catal.

[454] Tozzetti, Dizion. Bot.

[455] Ebn Baithar, Heil und Nahrungsmittel, translated from Arabic by Sontheimer, vol. ii. p. 257.

[456] Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 94.

[457] Royle, Ill. Himal., p. 197.

[458] Piddington, Index.

[459] Heldreich, Nutzpflanzen Griechenlands, p. 72.

[460] Fraas, Synopsis Fl. Class., p. 58; Lenz, Bot. der Alten Gr. und RÖm., p. 731.

[461] O. de Serres, ThÉÂtre de l’Agric., p. 242.

[462] Targioni-Tozzetti, Cenni Storici, p. 34.

[463] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., i. p. 708; Boissier, Fl. Or., p. 532.

[464] Turczaninow, Flora Baical. Dahur., i. p. 340.

[465] Targioni-Tozzetti, Cenni Storici, p. 35; MarÈs and Virgineix, Catal. des BalÉares, p. 100.

[466] De Gasparin, Cours d’Agric., iv. p. 472.

[467] Bertoloni, Flora Ital., viii. p. 6.

[468] Willkomm and Lange, Prodr. Fl. Hisp., iii. p. 262.

[469] Munby, Catal., edit. 2, p. 12.

[470] De Gasparin, Cours d’Agric., iv. p. 445, according to Schwerz and A. Young.

[471] Munby, Catal., edit. 2, p. 11.

[472] Boissier, Fl. Orient., i. p. 115.

[473] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., i. p. 548.

[474] Baker, in Hooker’s Fl. of Brit. Ind., ii. p. 86.

[475] Bon Jardinier, 1880, pt. i. p. 618.

[476] De Candolle, Fl. FranÇ., iv. p. 528.

[477] Targioni, Cenni Storici, p. 35.

[478] Costa, Intro. Fl. di Catal., p. 60.

[479] Moritzi, Dict. MS., compiled from floras published before the middle of the present century.

[480] Willkomm and Lange, Prodr. Fl. Hisp., iii. p. 366.

[481] MarÈs and Virgineix, Catal., 1880.

[482] Moris, Fl. Sard., i. p. 467.

[483] Munby, Catal., edit. 2.

[484] Bentham, Handbook Brit. Fl., edit. 4, p. 117.

[485] Moris, Fl. Sard., i. p. 467; Viviani, Fl. Dalmat., iii. p. 290.

[486] Bon Jardinier, 1880, p. 619.

[487] Forskal, Fl. Egypt., p. 71; Delile, Plant. Cult. en Egypt., p. 10; Wilkinson, Manners and Customs of Ancient Egyptians, ii. p. 398.

[488] Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 127.

[489] Bertoloni, Fl. It., vii. p. 500.

[490] Nutzpflanzen Griechenlands, p. 71.

[491] See Lenz, Bot. d. Alten, p. 727; Fraas, Fl. Class., p. 54.

[492] Wittmack, Sitzungsber Bot. Vereins Brandenburg, Dec. 19, 1879.

[493] Willkomm and Lange, Prodr. Fl. Hisp., iii. p. 308.

[494] Baker, in Hooker’s Fl. Brit. Ind.

[495] Herrera, Agricultura, edit. 1819, iv. p. 72.

[496] Baker, in Hooker’s Fl. Brit. Ind.

[497] For instance, Munby, Catal. Plant AlgeriÆ, edit. 2, p. 12.

[498] Munby, Catal., edit. 2.

[499] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., i. p. 666; Hohenacker, Enum. Plant. Talysch, p. 113; C. A. Meyer, Verzeichniss, p. 147.

[500] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., edit. 1832, iii. p. 323; Hooker, Fl. Brit. Ind., ii. p. 178.

[501] Piddington’s Index gives four.

[502] Targioni, Cenni Storici, p. 30.

[503] Cato, Be re Rustica, edit. 1535, p. 34; Pliny, bk. xviii. c. 15.

[504] Heldreich, Nutzpflanzen Griechenlands, p. 71. In the earlier language than the Indo-Europeans, vik bears another meaning, that of “hamlet” (Fick, Vorterb. Indo-Germ., p. 189).

[505] Vilmorin, Bon Jardinier, 1880, p. 603.

[506] Targioni, Cenni Storici, p. 31; Bertoloni, Fl. Ital., vii. pp. 444, 447.

[507] Lenz, Botanik. d. Alten, p. 730.

[508] Fraas, Fl. Class.; Heldreich, Nutzflanzen Griechenlands.

[509] Wittmack, Sitz. Ber. Bot. Vereins Brandenburg, Dec. 19, 1879.

[510] Willkomm and Lange, Prodr. Fl. Hisp., iii. p. 313; Bertoloni, Fl. Ital.

[511] Schweinfurth and Ascherson, AufzÄhlung, etc., p. 257.

[512] Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 605.

[513] J. Baker, in Hooker’s Fl. of Brit. Ind.

[514] Munby, Catal.

[515] Theophrastus, Hist. Plant., viii., c. 2, 10.

[516] Columella, De rei rustica, ii. c. 10; Pliny, xviii. c. 13, 32.

[517] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind.; Hooker, Fl. Brit. Ind., ii. p. 178.

[518] RosenmÜller, Handb. Bibl. Alterth., vol. i.

[519] Piddington, Index.

[520] Heldreich, Pflanz. d. Attisch. Ebene, p. 476; Nutzpf. Gr., p. 72.

[521] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., i. p. 681.

[522] C. A. Meyer, Verzeichniss, p. 148.

[523] Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 606.

[524] Willkomm and Lange, Prodr. Fl. Hisp., iii. p. 312.

[525] Lenz, Bot. d. Alten, p. 730; Heldreich, Nutzpfl. Gr., p. 72.

[526] Lenz.

[527] Caruel, Fl. Tosc., p. 193; Gussone, Syn. Fl. Sic., edit. 2.

[528] Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 602; Moris, Fl. Sard., i. p. 582.

[529] Willkomm and Lange, Prodr. Fl. Hisp.

[530] Boissier, Fl. Orient.

[531] Theophrastus, Hist. Plant., viii. c. 8; Columella, De rei rustica, ii. c. 10; Pliny, Hist., xviii. c. 16.

[532] Fraas, Syn. Fl. Class., p. 63; Lenz, Bot. der Alten, p. 719.

[533] Baker, in Hooker’s Fl. Brit. Ind., ii. p. 57.

[534] Schweinfurth, Beitr. z. Fl. Æthiop., p. 258.

[535] Baker, in Hooker’s Fl. Brit. Ind.

[536] Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 70.

[537] Boissier, ibid.

[538] Sibthorp, Fl. GrÆca, t. 766; Lenz, Bot. der Alten, Bertoloni, Fl. Ital., viii. p. 250; Willkomm and Lange, Prodr. Fl. Hisp., iii. p. 390.

[539] Caruel, Fl. Tosc., p. 256; Willkomm and Lange.

[540] The plants which spread from one country to another introduce themselves into islands with more difficulty, as will be seen from the remarks I formerly published. GÉogr. Bot. RaisonnÉe, p. 706).

[541] Piddington, Index.

[542] Ainslie, Mat. Med. Ind., i. p. 130.

[543] RosenmÜller, Bibl. Alterth.

[544] As usual, Fick’s dictionary of Indo-European languages does not mention the name of this plant, which the English say is Sanskrit.

[545] Brotero, Flora Lusitanica, ii. p. 160.

[546] Cosson, Notes sur Quelques Plantes Nouvelles ou Critiques du Midi de l’Espagne, p. 36.

[547] Bon Jardinier, 1880, p. 512.

[548] Boissier, Fl. Orient., i. p. 731.

[549] Hooker, Fl. Brit. Ind., i. p. 243, and several specimens from the Nilgherries and Ceylon in my herbarium.

[550] Zollinger, No. 2556 in my herbarium.

[551] Piddington, Index.

[552] Sobolewski, Fl. Petrop., p. 109.

[553] Rafn, Danmarks Flora, ii. p. 799.

[554] Wahlenberg, quoted by Moritzi, Dict. MS.; Svensk Botanik, t. 308.

[555] Bauhin, Hist. Plant., iii. p. 722.

[556] Spergula Maxima, BÖninghausen, an illustration published in Reichenbach’s PlantÆ Crit., vi. p. 513.

[557] Panicum maximum, Jacq., Coll. 1, p. 71 (1786); Jacq., Icones 1, t. 13; Swartz, Fl. IndiÆ Occ., vii. p. 170; P. polygamum, Swartz, Prodr., p. 24 (1788); P. jumentorum, Persoon Ench., i. p. 83 (1805); P. altissimum of some gardens and modern authors. According to the rule, the oldest name should be adopted.

[558] In Dominica according to Imray, in the Kew Report for 1879, p. 16.

[559] Nees, in Martius, Fl. Brasil., in 8vo, vol. ii. p. 166.

[560] Doell, in Fl. Brasil., in fol., vol. ii. part 2.

[561] Sir W. Hooker, Niger Fl., p. 560.

[562] Nees, FlorÆ AfricÆ Austr. GramineÆ, p. 36.

[563] A. Richard, Abyssinie, ii. p. 373.

[564] Peters, Reise Botanik, p. 546.

[565] Bojer, Hortus Maurit., p. 565.

[566] Baker, Fl. of Mauritius and Seychelles, p. 436.

[567] Thwaites, Enum. Pl. ZeylaniÆ.

[568] Seemann, Tr. of the LinnÆan Society, xxii. p. 337, pl. 61.

[569] KÆmpfer, AmÆn. Japon.

[570] Bretschneider, On the Study and Value of Chin. Bot. Works, pp. 13 and 45.

[571] Franchet and Savatier, Enum. Pl. Jap., i. p. 61.

[572] Fortune, Three Years’ Wandering in China, 1 vol. in 8vo

[573] Fontanier, Bulletin Soc. d’Acclim., 1870, p. 88.

[574] Loureiro, Fl. Cochin., p. 414.

[575] Griffith, Reports; Wallich, quoted by Hooker, Fl. Brit. India, i. p. 293.

[576] Anderson, quoted by Hooker.

[577] The Colonies and India, Gardener’s Chronicle, 1880, i. p. 659.

[578] Speech at the Bot. Cong. of London in 1866.

[579] Flora, 1868, p. 64.

[580] Planchon, in Hooker, Journal of Botany, vol. vii. p. 165.

[581] Heer, Die Pflanzen der Pfahlbauten, in 4to, ZÜrich, 1865, p. 35; Ueber den Flachs und die Flachskultur, in 4to, ZÜrich, 1872.

[582] Loret, Observations Critiques sur Plusieurs Plantes MontpelliÉraines, in the Revue des Sc. Nat., 1875.

[583] Boissier, Flora Orient., i. p. 851. It is L. usitatissimum of Kotschy, No. 164.

[584] Boissier, ibid.; Hohenh., Enum. Talysch., p. 168.

[585] Steven, Verzeichniss der auf der taurischen Halbinseln wildwachsenden Pflanzen, Moscow, 1857, p. 91.

[586] Heer, Ueb. d. Flachs, pp. 17 and 22.

[587] Jordan, quoted by Walpers, Annal., vol. ii., and by Heer, p. 22.

[588] Ball, Spicilegium Fl. Marocc., p. 380.

[589] Munby, Catal., edit. 2, p. 7.

[590] Rohlf, according to Cosson, Bulle. Soc. Bot. de Fr., 1875, p. 46.

[591] Planchon, in Hooker’s Journal of Botany, vol. 7; Bentham, Handbk. of Brit. Flora, edit. 4, p. 89.

[592] Planchon, ibid.

[593] Boissier, Fl. Or., i. p. 861.

[594] A. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. Rais., p. 833.

[595] Thomson, Annals of Philosophy, June, 1834; Dutrochet, Larrey, and Costaz, Comptes rendus de l’Acad. des. Sc., Paris, 1837, sem. i. p. 739; Unger, Bot. StreifzÜge, iv. p. 62.

[596] Other Hebrew words are interpreted “flax,” but this is the most certain. See Hamilton, La Botanique de la Bible, Nice, 1871, p. 58.

[597] Piddington, Index Ind. Plants; Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., edit. 1832, ii. p. 110. The name matusi indicated by Piddington belongs to other plants, according to Ad. Pictet, Origines Indo-Euro., edit. 2, vol. i. p. 396.

[598] Heer, Die Pflanzen der Pfahlbauten, 8vo pamphlet, ZÜrich, 1865, p. 35; Ueber den Flachs und die Flachskultur in Alterthum, pamphlet in 8vo, ZÜrich, 1872.

[599] Bertoloni, Fl. Ital., iv. p. 612.

[600] We have seen that flax is found towards the north-west of Europe, but not immediately north of the Alps. Perhaps the climate of Switzerland was formerly more equable than it is now, with more snow to shelter perennial plants.

[601] Mittheil. Anthropol. Gesellschaft, Wien, vol. vi. pp. 122, 161; Abhandl., Wien Akad., 84, p. 488.

[602] Sordelli, Sulle piante della torbiera e della stazione preistorica della Lagozza, pp. 37, 51, printed at the conclusion of Castelfranco’s Notizie alla stazione lacustre della Lagozza, in 8vo, Atti della Soc. Ital. Sc. Nat., 1880.

[603] The fowl was introduced into Greece from Asia in the sixth century before Christ, according to Heer, Ueb. d. Flachs, p. 25.

[604] These discoveries in the peat-mosses of Lagozza and elsewhere in Italy show how far Hehn was mistaken in supposing that (Kulturpfl., edit. 3, 1877, p. 524) the Swiss lake-dwellers were near the time of CÆsar. The men of the same civilization as they to the south of the Alps were evidently more ancient than the Roman republic, perhaps than the Ligurians.

[605] Ad. Pictet, Origines Indo-Europ., edit. 2, vol. i. p. 396.

[606] Van Eys, Dict. Basque-FranÇais, 1876; GÈze, ElÉments de Grammaire Basque suivis d’un vocabulaire, Bayonne, 1873; Salaberry, Mots Basques Navarrais, Bayonne, 1856; l’Ecluse, Vocab. FranÇ.-Basque, 1826.

[607] Nemnich, Poly. Lex. d. Naturgesch., ii. p. 420; Rafn, Danmark Flora, ii. p. 390.

[608] Nemnich, ibid.

[609] Ibid.

[610] Ibid.

[611] Fick, Vergl. Worterbuch. Ind. Germ., 2nd edit., i. p. 722. He also derives the name Lina from the Latin linum; but this name is of earlier date, being common to several European Aryan languages.

[612] Pliny, bk. xix. c. 1: Vere satum Æstate vellitur.

[613] Unger, Botanische StreifzÜge, 1866, No. 7, p. 15.

[614] A. Braun, Die Pflanzenreste des Ægyptischen Museums in Berlin, in 8vo, 1877, p. 4.

[615] Rosellini, pls. 35 and 36, quoted by Unger, Bot. StreifzÜge, No. 4, p. 62.

[616] W. Schimper, Ascherson, Boissier, Schweinfurth, quoted by Braun.

[617] Heer, Ueb. d. Flachs, p. 26.

[618] Maspero, Histoire Ancienne des Peuples de l’Orient., edit. 3, Paris, 1878, p. 13.

[619] Journal of the Royal Asiat. Soc., vol. xv. p. 271, quoted by Heer, Ueb. den Fl.

[620] Maspero, p. 213.

[621] The Greek texts are quoted in Lenz, Bot. der Alt. Gr. und RÖm., p. 672; and in Hehn, Culturpfl. und Hausthiere, edit. 3, p. 144.

[622] Ad. Pictet, Origines Indo-Europ.

[623] Dictionnaire FranÇ.-BerbÈre, 1 vol. in 8vo, 1844.

[624] Rumphius, Amboin, vol. v. p. 212; Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., ii. p. 581; Loureiro, Fl. Cochinchine, vi. p. 408.

[625] Blume, Bijdragen, i. p. 110.

[626] Zollinger, Nos. 1698 and 2761.

[627] Thwaites, Enum. Pl. Zeylan., p. 31.

[628] Edgeworth, LinnÆan Soc. Journ., ix.

[629] Masters, in Hooker’s Fl. Brit. Ind., i. p. 397.

[630] Loureiro, Fl. Cochin., i. p. 408.

[631] Franchet and Savatier, Enum., i. p. 66.

[632] RosenmÜller, Bibl. Naturgesch.

[633] Von Heldreich, Die NÜtzpfl. Griechenl., p. 53.

[634] Masters, in Hooker’s Fl. Brit. Ind., i. p. 397; Aitchison, Catal. Punjab, p. 23; Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., ii. p. 581.

[635] Piddington, Index.

[636] Schweinfurth, Beitr. z. Fl. Æthiop., p. 264.

[637] Grisebach, Fl. of Brit. West Ind., p. 97.

[638] Bosc, Dict. d’Agric., at the word “Sumac.”

[639] The conditions and methods of the culture of the sumach are the subject of an important paper by Inzenga, translated in the Bull. Soc. d’Acclim., Feb. 1877. In the Trans. Bot. Soc. of Edinburgh, ix. p. 341, may be seen an extract from an earlier paper by the author on the same subject.

[640] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., i. p. 509; Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 4.

[641] Nemnich, Polygl. Lexicon, ii. p. 1156; Ainslie, Mat. Med. Ind., i. p. 414.

[642] Fraas, Syn. Fl. Class., p. 85.

[643] Forskal, Flora Ægypto-Arabica, p. 65; Richard, Tentamen Fl. Abyss., i. p. 134, pl. 30; Botta, Archives du MusÉum, ii. p. 73.

[644] Hochstetter, Flora, 1841, p. 663.

[645] Schweinfurth and Ascherson, AufzÄhlung, p. 263; Oliver, Fl. Trop. Afr., i. p. 364.

[646] Aug. de Saint-Hilaire, MÉm. du MusÉum, ix. p. 351; Ann. Sc. Nat., 3rd series, xiv. p. 52; Hooker, London Journal of Botany, i. p. 34; Martius, Flora Brasiliensis, vol. ii. part 1, p. 119.

[647] Martinet, Bull. Soc. d’Acclim., 1874, p. 449.

[648] Particularly in Gosse’s Monographie de l’Erythroxylon Coca, in 8vo, 1861.

[649] Hooker, Comp. to the Bot. Mag., ii. p. 25.

[650] Peyritsch, in the Flora Brasil., fasc. 81, p. 156.

[651] Hooker, Comp. to the Bot. Mag.

[652] Gosse, Monogr., p. 12.

[653] Triana and Planchon, Ann. Sciences Nat., 4th series, vol. 18, p. 338.

[654] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., iii. p. 379.

[655] Wight, Icones, t. 365; Royle, Ill. Himal., t. 195; Baker, in Flora of Brit. Ind., ii. p. 98; Brandis, Forest Flora, p. 136.

[656] Guillemin, Perrottet, and Richard, FlorÆ Seneg. Tentamen, p. 178.

[657] Richard, Tentamen Fl. Abyss., i. p. 184; Oliver, Fl. of Trop. Afr., ii. p. 97; Schweinfurth and Ascherson, AufzÄhlung, p. 256.

[658] Unger, Pflanzen d. Alt. Ægyptens, p. 66; Pickering, Chronol. Arrang., p. 443.

[659] Reynier, Economie des Juifs, p. 439; des Egyptiens, p. 354.

[660] Hernandez, Thes., p. 108.

[661] Fortune, No. 32.

[662] Aitchison, Catal. of Pl. of Punjab and Sindh, p. 60; Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 744.

[663] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., ii. p. 258.

[664] Thwaites, Enum. Pl. Zeyl., p. 122.

[665] Clarke, in Hooker’s Fl. Brit. Ind., ii. p. 273.

[666] Rumphius, Amb., iv. p. 42.

[667] Grisebach, Fl. Brit. W. Ind., i. p. 271.

[668] Oliver, Fl. of Trop. Afr., ii. p. 483.

[669] Piddington, Index.

[670] Dioscorides, 1, c. 124; Lenz, Bot. d. Alten, p. 177.

[671] Tiedemann, Geschichte des Tabaks, in 8vo, 1854. For Brazil, see Martius, Beitrage zur Ethnographie und Sprachkunde Amerikas, i. p. 719.

[672] Tiedemann, p. 17, pl. 1.

[673] The drawings on these pipes are reproduced in Naidaillac’s recent work, Les Premiers Hommes et les Temps PrÉhistoriques, vol. ii. pp. 45, 48.

[674] Tiedemann, pp. 38, 39.

[675] Martius, Syst. Mat. Med. Bras., p. 120; Fl. Bras., vol. x. p. 191.

[676] A. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. RaisonnÉe, p. 849.

[677] FlÜckiger and Hanbury, Pharmacographia, p. 418.

[678] One of these is classed under the name Nicot. fruticosa, which in my opinion is the same species, tall, but not woody, as the name would lead one to believe. N. auriculata, Bertero, is also Tabacum, according to my authentic specimens.

[679] Hayne, Arzneikunde Gewachse, vol. xii t. 41; Miller, Figures of Plants, pl. 185, f. 1.

[680] The capsule is sometimes shorter and sometimes longer than the calix, on the same plant, in AndrÉ’s specimens.

[681] See the figures of N. rustica in PlÉe, Types de Familles Naturelles de France, SolanÉes; Bulliard, Herbier de France, t. 289.

[682] Asa Gray, Syn. Flora of North Amer.) (1878, p. 241.

[683] Martin de Moussy, Descr. de la Repub. Argent., i. p. 196.

[684] Bulliard, Herbier de France.

[685] CÆsalpinus, lib. viii. cap. 44; Bauhin, Hist., iii. p. 630.

[686] Tiedemann, Geschichte des Tabaks (1854), p. 208. Two years earlier, Volz, Beitrage zur Culturgeschichte, had collected a number of facts relative to the introduction of tobacco into different countries.

[687] According to an anonymous Indian author quoted by Tiedemann, p. 229.

[688] Tiedemann, p. 234.

[689] Rumphius, Herb. Amboin v. p. 225.

[690] Raffles, Descr. of Java, p. 85.

[691] Thunberg, Flora Japonica, p. 91.

[692] Klemm, quoted by Tiedemann, p. 256.

[693] Stanislas Julien, in de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. Rais., p. 851; Bretschneider, Study and Value, etc., p. 17.

[694] Piddington, Index.

[695] Forskal, p. 63.

[696] Lehmann, Historia Nicotinarum, p. 18. The epithet suffruticosa is an exaggeration applied to the tobaccos, which are always annual. I have said already that N. suffruticosa of different authors is N. Tabacum.

[697] Link and Otto, Icones Plant. Rar. Hort. Ber., in 4to, p. 63, t. 32. Sendtner, in Flora Brasil, vol. x. p. 167, describes the same plant as Sello, as it seems from the specimens collected by this traveller; and Grisebach, SymbolÆ Fl. Argent., p. 243, mentions N. alata in the province of Entrerios of the Argentine republic.

[698] Bertero, in De Cand., Prodr., xii., sect. 1, p. 568.

[699] Thwaites, Enum. Pl. ZelaniÆ, p. 252; Brandis, Forest Flora of India, p. 375.

[700] FlÜckiger and Hanbury, Pharmacographia, p. 467; Porter, The Tropical Agriculturist., p. 268.

[701] Brandis, Forest Flora; Grisebach, Flora of Brit. W. India Is., p. 179.

[702] De Malartic, Journ. d’Agric. Pratique, 1871, 1872, vol. ii. No. 31; de la Roque, ibid., No. 29, Bull. Soc. d’Acclim., 1872, p. 463; Vilmorin, Bon Jardinier, 1880, pt. 1, p. 700; Vetillart, Études sur les Fibres VÉgÉtales Textiles, p. 99, pl. 2.

[703] Loureiro, Fl. Cochin., ii. p. 683.

[704] Bentham, Fl. Hongkong, p. 331.

[705] Franchet and Savatier, Enum. Plant. Jap., i. p. 439.

[706] Blanco, Flora de Filip., edit. 2, p. 484.

[707] Rumphius, Amboin, v. p. 214.

[708] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., iii. p. 590.

[709] Miquel, Sumatra, Germ. edit., p. 170.

[710] Bretschneider, On the Study and Value, etc., pp. 5, 10, 48.

[711] Piddington, Index; Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., edit. 2, vol. iii. p. 772.

[712] Roxburgh, ibid.

[713] Reynier, Économie des Celtes, p. 448; Legonidec, Dict. Bas-Breton.

[714] J. Humbert, formerly professor of Arabic at Geneva, says the name is kannab, kon-nab, hon-nab, hen-nab, kanedir, according to the locality.

[715] AthenÆus, quoted by Hehn, Culturpflanzen, p. 168.

[716] RosenmÜller, Hand. Bibl. Alterth.

[717] Forskal, Flora; Delile, Flore d’Egypte.

[718] Reynier, Économie des Arabes, p. 434.

[719] Heer, Ueber d. Flachs, p. 25.

[720] Sordelli, Notizie sull. Staz. di Lagozza, 1880.

[721] Vol. xvi. sect. 1, p. 30.

[722] De Bunge, Bull. Soc. Bot. de Fr., 1860, p. 30.

[723] Ledebour, Flora Rossica, iii. p. 634.

[724] Bunge found hemp in the north of China, but among rubbish (Enum. No. 338).

[725] Seringe, Description et Culture des MÛriers.

[726] Bureau, in De Candolle, Prodromus, xvii. p. 238.

[727] Brandis, Forest Flora of North-West and Central India, 1874, p. 408. This variety has black fruit, like that of Morus nigra.

[728] Bureau, ibid., from the specimens of several travellers.

[729] Bretschneider, Study and Value, etc., p. 12.

[730] This name occurs in the Pent-sao, according to Ritter, Erdkunde, xvii. p. 489.

[731] Platt says (Zeitschrift d. Gesellsch. Erdkunde, 1871, p. 162) that its cultivation dates from 4000 years B.C.

[732] Franchet and Savatier, Enum. Plant. Jap., i. p. 433.

[733] Ant. Targioni, Cenni Storici sull’ Introduzione di Varie Piante nell’ Agricoltura Toscana, p. 188.

[734] Boissier, Fl. Orient., iv. p. 1153.

[735] Buhse, AufzÄhlung der Transcaucasien und Persien Pflanzen, p. 203.

[736] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., iii. p. 643.

[737] Steven, Verseichniss d. Taurisch. Halbins, p. 313; Heldreich, Pflanzen des Attischen Ebene, p. 508; Bertoloni, Fl. Ital., x. p. 177; Caruel, Fl. Toscana, p. 171.

[738] Bureau, de Cand., Prodr., xvii. p. 238.

[739] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind.; Piddington, Index.

[740] Reichenbach gives good figures of both species in his Icones Fl. Germ., 657, 658.

[741] Fraas, Syn. Fl. Class., p. 236; Lenz, Bot. der Alten Gr. und RÖm., p. 419; Ritter, Erdkunde, xvii. p. 482; Hehn, Culturpflanzen, edit. 3, p. 336.

[742] Boissier, Fl. Orient., iv. p. 1153 (published 1879).

[743] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., iii. p. 641.

[744] Steven, Verseichniss d. Taur. Halb. Pflan., p. 313.

[745] Tchihatcheff, trans. of Grisebach’s VÉgÉtation du Globe, i. 424.

[746] Heldreich, Nutzpflanzen Griechenlands, p. 19.

[747] Bertoloni, Flora Ital., x. p. 179; Viviani, Fl. Dalmat., i. p. 220; Willkomm and Lange, Prodr. Fl. Hisp., i. p. 250.

[748] Humboldt, Nouvelle Espagne, ed. 2, p. 487.

[749] Humboldt, in Kunth, Nova Genera, i. p. 297.

[750] Grisebach, Fl. of Brit. W. Ind. Is., p. 582.

[751] Alph. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. RaisonnÉe, p. 739; H. Hoffmann, in Regel’s Gartenflora, 1875, p. 70.

[752] K. Ritter, Ueber die Geographische Verbreitung des Zuckerrohrs, in 4to, 108 pages (according to Pritzel, Thes. Lit. Bot.); Die Cultur des Zuckerrohrs, Saccharum, in Asien, Geogr. Verbreitung, etc., etc., in 8vo, 64 pages, without date. This monograph is full of learning and judgment, worthy of the best epoch of German science, when English or French authors were quoted by all authors with as much care as Germans.

[753] Kunth, Enum. Plant. (1838), vol. i. p. 474. There is no more recent descriptive work on the family of the GramineÆ, nor the genus Saccharum.

[754] Miquel, FlorÆ IndiÆ BatavÆ, 1855, vol. iii. p. 511.

[755] Aitchison, Catalogue of Punjab and Sindh Plants, 1869, p. 173.

[756] Thwaites, Enum. PI. ZeyloniÆ.

[757] Crawfurd, Indian Archip., i. p. 475.

[758] Forster, De Plantis Esculentis.

[759] Vieillard, Annales des Sc. Nat., 4th series, vol. xvi. p. 32.

[760] Loureiro, Cochin-Ch., edit. 2, vol. i. p. 66.

[761] Forskal, Fl. Ægypto-Arabica, p. 103.

[762] Macfadyen, On the Botanical Characters of the Sugar-Cane, in Hooker’s Bot. Miscell., i. p. 101; Maycock, Fl. Barbad., p. 50.

[763] Rumphius, Amboin, vol. v. p. 186.

[764] Hehn, No. 480.

[765] Schacht, Madeira und Teneriffe, tab. i.

[766] Tussac, Flore des Antilles, i. p. 153, pl. 23.

[767] Piddington, Index.

[768] Bretschneider, On the Study and Value, etc., pp. 45-47.

[769] See the quotations from Strabo, Dioscorides, Pliny, etc., in Lenz, Botanik der Alten Griechen und RÖmer, 1859, p. 267; Fingerhut, in Flora, 1839, vol. ii. p. 529; and many other authors.

[770] RosenmÜller, Handbuch der Bibl. Alterth.

[771] Calendrier Rural de Harib, written in the tenth century for Spain, translated by Dureau de la Malle in his Climatologie de l’Italie et de l’Andalousie, p. 71.

[772] Von Buch, Canar. Ins.

[773] Piso, BrÉsil, p. 49.

[774] Humboldt, Nouv. Espagne, ed. 2, vol. iii. p. 34.

[775] Not. Stat. sur les Col. Franc., i. pp. 207, 29, 83.

[776] Macfadyen, in Hooker, Bot. Miscell., i. p. 101; Maycock, Fl. Barbad., p. 50.

[777] ii. p. 3.

[778] ii. tab. 3.

[779] Sonnerat, Voy. Nouv. Guin., tab. 119, 120.

[780] Thunberg, Diss., ii. p. 326; De Candolle, Prodr., iii. p. 262; Hooker, Bot. Mag., tab. 2749; Hasskarl, Cat. Hort. Bogor. Alt., p. 261.

[781] Roxburgh, Flora Indica, edit. 1832, vol. ii. p. 194.

[782] Alph. de Candolle, in Prodromus, vol. xvi., sect. 1, p. 29; Boissier, Fl. Orient., iv. p. 1152; Hohenacker, Enum. Plant. Talysch, p. 30; Buhse AufzÄhlung Transcaucasien, p. 202.

[783] An erroneous transcription of what Asa Gray (Botany of North. United States, edit. 5) says of the hemp, wrongly attributed to the hop in Prodromus, and repeated in the French edition of this work, should be corrected. Humulus Lupulus is indigenous in the east of the United States, and also in the island of Yeso, according to a letter from Maximowicz.—Author’s Note, 1884.

[784] Hehn, Nutzpflanzen und Hausthiere in ihren Uebergang aus Asien, edit. 3, p. 415.

[785] Pliny, Hist., bk. 21, c. 15. He mentions asparagus in this connection, and the young shoots of the hop are sometimes eaten in this manner.

[786] Tacitus, Germania, cap. 25; Pliny, bk. 18, c. 7; Hehn, Kulturpflanzen, edit. 3, pp. 125-137.

[787] Volz, Beitrage zur Culturgeschichte, p. 149.

[788] Ibid.

[789] Beckmann, Erfindungen, quoted by Volz.

[790] Piddington, Index; Fick, WÖrterb. Indo-Germ. Sprachen, i.; Ursprache.

[791] A. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. Rais., p. 857.

[792] Dict. MS., compiled from floras, Moritzi.

[793] Unger, Die Pflanzen des Alten Ægyptens, p. 47.

[794] Schweinfurth, in a letter to M. Boissier, 1882.

[795] Piddington, Index.

[796] Bretschneider, Study and Value, etc., p. 15.

[797] See Targioni, Cenni Storici, p. 108.

[798] Forskal, Fl. Ægypt., p. 73; Ebn Baithar, Germ. trans., ii. pp. 196, 293; i. p. 18.

[799] See Gasparin, Cours d’Agric., iv. p. 217.

[800] Boissier, Fl. Orient., iii. p. 710; Oliver, Flora of Trop. Afr., iii. p. 439.

[801] Clarke, CompositÆ IndicÆ, 1876, p. 244.

[802] Schweinfurth and Ascherson, AufzÄhlung, p. 283.

[803] Rohlfs, Kufra, in 8vo, 1881.

[804] Ebn Baithar, ii. p. 196.

[805] Pliny, bk. xxi. c. 6.

[806] Royle, Ill. Himal., p. 372.

[807] Index, p. 25.

[808] According to Forskal, Delile, Reynier, Schweinfurth, and Ascherson.

[809] Theophrastus, Hist., 1. 6, c. 6.

[810] J. Bauhin, Hist., ii. p. 637.

[811] Royle, Ill. Himal.

[812] Sibthorp, Prodr.; Fraas, Syn. Fl. Class., p. 292.

[813] J. Gay, quoted by Babington, Man. Brit. Fl.

[814] Maw, in the Gardener’s Chron., 1881, vol. xvi.

[815] Jacquemont, Voyage, vol. iii. p. 238.

[816] The word fruit is here employed in the vulgar sense, for any fleshy part which enlarges after the flowering. In the strictly botanical sense, the AnonaceÆ, strawberries, cashews, pine-apples, and breadfruit are not fruits.

[817] A. squamosa is figured in Descourtilz, Flore des Antilles, ii. pl. 83; Hooker’s Bot. Mag., 3095; and Tussac, Flore des Antilles, iii. pl. 4.

[818] A. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. Rais., p. 859.

[819] Aug. de Saint-Hilaire, Plantes usuelles des BrÉsiliens, bk. vi. p. 5.

[820] Alph. de Candolle, Mem. Soc. Phys. et d’Hist. Nat. de GenÈve.

[821] Ibid., p. 19 of Mem. printed separately.

[822] See Botany of Congo, and the German translation of Brown’s works, which has alphabetical tables.

[823] Royle, Ill. Himal., p. 60.

[824] Webb, in Fl. Nigr., p. 97.

[825] Ibid., p. 204.

[826] Thonning, Pl. Guin.

[827] Brown, Congo, p. 6.

[828] Guillemin, Perrottet, and Richard, Tentamen Fl. Seneg.

[829] Sloane, Jam., ii. p. 168.

[830] P. Brown, Jam., p. 257.

[831] Macfadyen, Fl. Jam., p. 9.

[832] Martius, Fl. Bras., fasc. ii. p. 15.

[833] Splitgerber, Nederl. Kruidk. Arch., ii. p. 230.

[834] A. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. Rais., chap. x.

[835] Rumphius, i. p. 139.

[836] Forster, PlantÆ EsculentÆ.

[837] Rheede, Malabar, iii. p. 22.

[838] Loureiro, Fl. Cochin., p. 427.

[839] Blanco, Fl. Filip.

[840] This depends upon the opinion formed with respect to A. glabra, Forskal (A. Asiatica, B. Dun. Anon., p. 71; A. Forskalii, D. C. Syst., i. p. 472), which was sometimes cultivated in gardens in Egypt when Forskal visited that country; it was called keschta, that is, coagulated milk. The rarity of its cultivation and the silence of ancient authors shows that it was of modern introduction into Egypt. Ebn Baithar (Sondtheimer’s German translation, in 2 vols., 1840), an Arabian physician of the thirteenth century, mentions no Anonacea, nor the name keschta. I do not see that Forskal’s description and illustration (Descr., p. 102. ic. tab. 15) differ from A. squamosa. Coquebert’s specimen, mentioned in the Systema, agrees with Forskal’s plate; but as it is in flower while the plate shows the fruit, its identity cannot be proved.

[841] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., edit. 1832, v. ii. p. 657.

[842] Piddington, Index, p. 6.

[843] Royle, Ill. Him., p. 60.

[844] Rheede and Rumphius, i. p. 139.

[845] Hernandez, pp. 348, 454.

[846] Dunal, Mem. Anon., p. 70.

[847] Martius, Fl. Bras., fasc. ii. p. 15.

[848] Hence the generic name Anona, which LinnÆus changed to Annona (provision), because he did not wish to have any savage name, and did not mind a pun.

[849] Martius, Fl. Bras., fasc. ii. p. 15.

[850] Marcgraf, Brazil, p. 94.

[851] See Baker, Flora of Mauritius, p. 3. The identity admitted by Oliver, Fl. Trop. Afr., i. p. 16, of the Anona palustris of America with that of Senegambia, appears to me very extraordinary, although it is a species which grows in marshes; that is, having perhaps a very wide area.

[852] Hooker, Fl. of Brit. Ind., i. p. 78; Miquel, Fl. Indo-Batava, i. part 2, p. 33; Kurz, Forest Flora of Brit. Burm., i. p. 46; Stewart and Brandis, Forests of India, p. 6.

[853] Grisebach, Fl. of Brit. W. I. Isles, p. 5.

[854] Eggers, Flora of St. Croix and Virgin Isles, p. 23.

[855] Triana and Planchon, Prodr. Fl. Novo-Granatensis, p. 29; Sagot, Journ. Soc. d’Hortic., 1872.

[856] Warming, SymbolÆ ad. Fl. Bras., xvi. p. 434.

[857] Figured in Descourtilz, Fl. Med. des. Antilles, ii. pl. 87, and in Tussac, Fl. des Antilles, ii. p. 24.

[858] Richard, Plantes Vasculaires de Cuba, p. 29; Swartz, Obs., p. 221; P. Brown, Jamaica, p. 255; Macfadyen, Fl. of Jam., p. 7; Eggers, Fl. of St. Croix, p. 23; Grisebach, Fl. Brit. W. I., p. 4.

[859] Martius, Fl. Brasil, fasc. ii. p. 4; Splitgerber, Pl. de Surinam, in Nederl. Kruidk. Arch., i. p. 226.

[860] Richard, Macfadyen, Grisebach, Eggers, Swartz, Maycock, Fl. Barbad., p. 233.

[861] Seemann, Bot. of the Herald, p. 75.

[862] Triana and Planchon, Prodr. Fl. Novo-Granat., p. 29.

[863] Oliver, Fl. Trop. Afr., i. p. 15.

[864] Sir J. Hooker, Fl. Brit. Ind., i. p. 78.

[865] De Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. Rais., p. 863.

[866] FeuillÉe, Obs., iii. p. 23, t. 17.

[867] Macfadyen, Fl. Jam., p. 10.

[868] Martius, Fl. Bras., fasc. iii. p. 15.

[869] Hooker, Fl. Nigr., p. 205.

[870] Nov. Act. Nat. Cur., xix. suppl. 1.

[871] Richard, Plant. Vasc. de Cuba; Grisebach, Fl. Brit. W. Ind. Is.; Hemsley, Biologia Centr. Am., p. 118; Kunth, in Humboldt and Bonpland, Nova Gen., v. p. 57; Triana and Planchon, Prodr. Fl. Novo-Granat., p. 28.

[872] Gay, Flora Chil., i. p. 66.

[873] Molina, French trans.

[874] Gallesio, TraitÉ du Citrus, in 8vo, Paris, 1811; Risso and Poiteau, Histoire Naturelle des Orangers, 1818, in folio, 109 plates.

[875] Hooker, Fl. of Brit. Ind., i. p. 515.

[876] Brandis, Forest Flora, p. 50.

[877] For a work of this nature, the first step would be to publish good figures of wild species, showing particularly the fruit, which is not seen in herbaria. It would then be seen which forms represented in the plates of Risso, Duhamel, and others, are nearest to the wild types.

[878] Bretschneider, On the Study and Value of Chinese Botanical Works, p. 55.

[879] Acosta, Hist. Nat. des Indes, Fr. trans. 1598, p. 187.

[880] Roxburgh, Flora Indica, edit. 1832 iii. p. 393.

[881] Rumphius, Hortus Ambeinensis, ii. p. 98.

[882] Miquel, Flora Indo-Batava, i. pt. 2, p. 526.

[883] Bretschneider, Study and Value, etc.

[884] Loureiro, Fl. Cochin., ii. p. 572. For another species of the genus, he says that it is cultivated and non-cultivated, p. 569.

[885] Forster, De Plantis Esculentis Oceani Australis, p. 35.

[886] Seemann, Flora Vitiensis, p. 33.

[887] Plukenet, Almagestes, p. 239; Sloane, Jamaica, i. p. 41.

[888] Cedrat À gros fruit of Duhamel, TraitÉ des Arbres, edit. 2, vii. p. 68, pl. 22.

[889] Royle, Ill. Himal., p. 129; Brandis, Forest Flora, p. 52; Hooker, Fl. of Brit. Ind., i. p. 514.

[890] Franchet and Savatier, Enum. Plant. Jap., p. 129.

[891] Miquel, Flora Indo-Batava, i. pt. 2, p. 528.

[892] Theophrastus, l. 4, c. 4.

[893] BodÆus, in Theophrastus, edit. 1644, pp. 322, 343; Risso, TraitÉ du Citrus, p. 198; Targioni, Cenni Storici, p. 196.

[894] Dioscorides, i. p. 166.

[895] Targioni, Cenni Storici.

[896] Targioni, p. 217.

[897] Gallesio, TraitÉ du Citrus, pp. 32, 67, 355, 357.

[898] Macfadyen, Flora of Jamaica, p. 129.

[899] Quoted in Grisebach’s Veget. Karaiben, p. 34.

[900] Ernst, in Seemann, Journ. of Bot., 1867, p. 272.

[901] Roxburgh, Fl. Indica, edit. 1832, vol. ii. p. 392; Piddington, Index.

[902] Gallesio, p. 122.

[903] In the modern languages of India the Sanskrit name has been applied to the sweet orange, so says Brandis, by one of those transpositions which are so common in popular language.

[904] Gallesio, pp. 122, 247, 248.

[905] Gallesio, p. 240. Goeze, Beitrag zur Kenntniss der OrangengewÄchse, 1874, p. 13, quotes early Portuguese travellers on this head.

[906] Wallich, Catalogue, No. 6384.

[907] Hooker, Fl. of Brit. Ind., i. p. 515.

[908] Loureiro, Fl. Cochin., p. 571.

[909] Royle, Illustr. of Himal., p. 129. He quotes Turner, Journey to Thibet, pp. 20, 387.

[910] Loureiro, Fl. Cochin., p. 569.

[911] Gallesio, p. 321.

[912] The date of this statuto is given by Targioni, on p. 205 of the Cenni Storici, as 1379, and on p. 213 as 1309. The errata do not notice this discrepancy.

[913] Goeze, Ein Beitrag zur Kenntniss der OrangengewÄchse. Hamburg, 1874, p. 26.

[914] Rumphius, Amboin., ii. c. 42.

[915] Forster, Plantis Esculentis, p. 35.

[916] Bretschneider, On the Study and Value, etc., p. 11.

[917] Rumphius, Amboin., ii. pls. 34, 35, where, however, the form of the fruit is not that of our mandarin.

[918] Loureiro, Fl. Cochin., p. 570.

[919] Kurz, Forest Fl. of Brit. Bur.

[920] Royle, Ill. Himal., p. 133, and Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., ii. p. 618.

[921] Macfadyen, Flora of Jamaica, p. 134.

[922] Rumphius, Amboin., i. p. 133; Miquel, PlantÆ Junghun., i. p. 290; Flora Indo-Batava, i. pt. 2, p. 506.

[923] Hooker, Flora of Brit. Ind., i. p. 260.

[924] Ernst in Seemann, Journal of Botany, 1867, p. 273; Triana and Planchon, Prodr. Fl. Novo-Granat., p. 285.

[925] Sloane, Jamaica, i. p. 123; Jacquin, Amer., p. 268; Grisebach, Fl. of Brit. W. Ind. Isles, p. 118.

[926] A. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. Rais., p. 768.

[927] Flora of Brit. Ind., i. p. 343.

[928] Jacquin, Observationes, iii. p. 11.

[929] Marcgraf, Hist. Plant., p. 32, with illustrations.

[930] Schweinfurth and Ascherson, AufzÄhlung, p. 265, under the name abelmoschus.

[931] FlÜckiger and Hanbury, Pharmacographia, p. 86. The description is in Ebn Baithar, Sondtheimer’s trans., i. p. 118.

[932] Unger, Die Pflanzen des Alten Ægyptens, p. 50.

[933] Grisebach, VÉgÉt. du Globe, French trans. by Tchihatcheff, i. pp. 162, 163, 442; Munby, Catal. Alger; Ball, Fl. Maroc. Spicel, p. 392.

[934] Adolphe Pictet, Origines Indo-Europ. edit. 2, vol. 1, p. 295. quotes several travellers for these regions, among others Wood’s Journey to the Sources of the Oxus.

[935] These are figured in Heer’s Pflanzen der Pfahlbauten, p. 24, fig. 11.

[936] Ragazzoni, Rivista Arch. della Prov. di Como, 1880, fasc. 17, p. 30.

[937] Heer, ibid.

[938] Planchon, Étude sur les Tufs de Montpellier, 1864, p. 63.

[939] De Saporta, La Flore des Tufs Quaternaires de Provence, 1867, pp. 15, 27.

[940] Kolenati, Bulletin de la SociÉtÉ ImpÉriale des Naturalistes de Moscou, 1846, p. 279.

[941] Regel, Acta Horti Imp. Petrop., 1873. In this short review of the genus, M. Regel gives it as his opinion that Vitis vinifera is a hybrid between two wild species, V. vulpina and V. labrusca, modified by cultivation; but he gives no proof, and his characters of the two wild species are altogether unsatisfactory. It is much to be desired that the wild and cultivated vines of Europe and Asia should be compared with regard to their seeds, which furnish excellent distinctions, according to Englemann’s observations on the American vines.

[942] Ad. Pictet, Origines Indo-Eur., 2nd edit., vol. i. pp. 298-321.

[943] M. Delchevalerie, in l’Illustration Horticole, 1881, p. 28. He mentions in particular the tomb of Phtah-Hotep, who lived at Memphis 4000 B.C.

[944] Bretschneider, Study and Value, etc., p. 16.

[945] Pliny, Hist., lib. 15, c. 14.

[946] Bertoloni, Fl. Ital., ii. p. 665; Gussone, Syn. Fl. Sicul., ii. p. 276.

[947] Willkomm and Lange, Prod. Fl. Hisp., iii. p. 480; Desfontaines, Fl. Atlant., i. p. 200; Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 12; J. Hooker, Fl. Brit. Ind., i. p. 633; Bunge, Enum. Pl. Chin., p. 14; Franchet and Savatier, Enum. Pl. Jap., i. p. 81.

[948] Bretschneider, Study and Value, etc., p. 11.

[949] Zizyphus chinensis of some authors is the same species.

[950] Brandis, Forest Flora of British India, p. 84.

[951] Lenz, Botanik der Alten, p. 651.

[952] Heldreich, Nutzpflanzen Griechenlands, p. 57.

[953] Munby, Catal., edit. 2, p. 9.

[954] Odyssey, bk. l, v. 84; Herodotos, l. 4, p. 177, trans. in Lenz, Bot. der Alt., p. 653.

[955] Theophrastus, Hist., l. 4, c. 4, edit. 1644. The edition of 1613 does not contain the words which refer to this detail.

[956] Schweinfurth and Ascherson, Beitr. zur Fl. Æthiop., p. 263.

[957] See the article on the carob tree.

[958] Desfontaines, Fl. Atlant., i. p. 200; Munby, Catal. Alger., edit. 2, p. 9; Ball, Spicilegium, Fl. Maroc., p. 301; Willkomm and Lange, Prodr. Fl. Hisp., iii. p. 481; Bertoloni, Fl. Ital., ii. p. 664.

[959] This name, which is little used, occurs in Bauhin, as Jujuba Indica.

[960] Sir J. Hooker, Fl. Brit. Ind., i. p. 632; Brandis, Forest Fl., i. 87; Bentham, Fl. Austral., i. p. 412; Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 13; Oliver, Fl. of Trop. Afr., i. p. 379.

[961] Received from Martius, No. 1070, from the Cabo frio.

[962] Bouton, in Hooker’s Journ. of Bot.; Baker, Fl. of Mauritius, p. 61; Brandis.

[963] Kurz, Forest Flora of Burmah, i. p. 266.

[964] Beddone, Forest Flora of India, i. pl. 149 (representing the wild fruit, which is smaller than that of the cultivated plant); Brandis.

[965] Rheede, iv. pl. 141.

[966] Piddington, Index.

[967] Rumphius, Amboyna, ii. pl. 36.

[968] Zizyphus abyssinicus, Hochst, seems to be a different species.

[969] Tussac, Flore des Antilles, iii. p. 55 (where there is an excellent figure, pl. 13). He says that it is an East Indian species, thus aggravating LinnÆus’ mistake, who believed it to be Asiatic and American.

[970] GÉogr. Bot. Rais., p. 873

[971] Piso and Marcgraf, Hist. rer. Natur. Brasil, 1648, p. 57.

[972] Vide Piso and Marcgraf; Aublet, Guyane, p. 392; Seemann, Bot. of the Herald, p. 106; Jacquin, AmÉr., p. 124; Macfadyen, Pl. Jamaic., p. 119; Greisbach, Fl. of Brit. W. Ind., p. 176.

[973] Ernst in Seemann, Journ. of Bot., 1867, p. 273.

[974] Rheede, Malabar, iii. pl. 54.

[975] Rumphius, Herb. Amboin., i. pp. 177, 178.

[976] Beddone, Flora Sylvatica, t. 163; Hooker, Fl. Brit. Ind., ii. p. 20.

[977] Loureiro, Fl. Cochin., p. 304.

[978] Brown, Congo, pp. 12, 49.

[979] Oliver, Fl. of Trop. Afr., i. p. 443.

[980] See plate 4510 of the Botanical Magazine.

[981] Roxburgh, Flora Indica, edit. 2, vol. ii. p. 435; Piddington, Index.

[982] Rumphius, Herb. Amboin., i. p. 95.

[983] Blanco, Fl. Filip., p. 181.

[984] Rumphius; Forskal, p. cvii.

[985] Thwaites, Enum. Plant. Ceyl., p. 75; Brandis, Forest Flora, p. 126; Hooker, Fl. Brit. Ind., ii. p. 13; Kurz, Forest Flora Brit. Burmah, i. p. 304.

[986] Oliver, Flora of Trop. Afr., i. p. 442; Baker, Fl. of Maur. and Seych., p. 63.

[987] Hughes, Barbados, p. 177.

[988] Macfadyen, Fl. of Jam., p. 221; Sir J. Hooker, Speech at the Royal Institute.

[989] Sagot, Jour. de la Soc. Centr. d’Agric. de France, 1872.

[990] Forster, De Plantis Esculentis Insularum Oceani Australis, p. 33; Seemann, Flora Vitiensis, p. 51; Nadaud, Enum. des Plantes de TaÏti, p. 75.

[991] There is a good coloured illustration in Tussac’s Fl. des Antilles, iii. pl. 28.

[992] Boyer, Hortus Mauritianus, p. 81.

[993] H. C. Watson, Compendium Cybele Brit., i. p. 160; Fries, Summa Veg. Scand., p. 44.

[994] Lowe, Man. Fl. of Madeira, p. 246; Willkomm and Lange, Prodr. Fl. Hisp., iii. p. 224; Moris, Fl. Sardoa, ii. p. 17.

[995] Boissier, Fl. Orient.

[996] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., ii. p. 64.

[997] Gay; Hooker, Fl. Brit. Ind., ii. p. 344; Franchet and Savatier, Enum. Pl. Japon., i. p. 129.

[998] Perny, Propag. de la Foi, quoted in Decaisne’s Jardin Fruitier du Mus., p. 27. Gay does not give China.

[999] Babington, Journ. of LinnÆan Society, ii. p. 303; J. Gay.

[1000] Asa Gray, Botany of the Northern States, edit. 1868, p. 156.

[1001] Sir W. Hooker, Fl. Bor. Amer., i. p. 184.

[1002] A. Gray, Bot. Calif., i. p. 176.

[1003] J. Gay, in Decaisne, Jardin Fruitier du MusÉum, Fraisier, p. 30.

[1004] Le Grand d’Aussy, Hist. de la Vie PrivÉe des FranÇais, i. pp. 233 and 3.

[1005] Olivier de Serres, ThÉÂtre d’Agric., p. 511; Gerard, from Phillips, Pomarium Britannicum, p. 334.

[1006] Purdie, in Hooker’s London Journal of Botany, 1844, p. 515.

[1007] Bojer, Hortus Mauritianus, p. 121.

[1008] Bory Saint-Vincent, Comptes Rendus de l’Acad. des. Sc. Nat., 1836, sem. ii. p. 109.

[1009] Asa Gray, Manual of Botany of the Northern States, edit. 1868, p. 155; Botany of California, i. p. 177.

[1010] Phillips, Romar. Brit., p. 335.

[1011] Cl. Gay, Hist. Chili, Botanica, ii. p. 305.

[1012] Ledebour. Fl. Ross., ii. p. 6; Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 649.

[1013] Ledebour, ibid.; Fries, Summa Scand., p. 46; Nyman, Conspec. Fl. Eur., p. 213; Boissier. ibid.; Willkomm and Lange, Prodr. Fl. Hisp., iii. p. 245.

[1014] Munby, Catal. Alger., edit. 2, p. 8.

[1015] As the cherries ripen after the season when birds migrate, they disperse the stones chiefly in the neighbourhood of the plantations.

[1016] Sir J. Hooker, Fl. of Brit. India.

[1017] Lowe, Manual of Madeira, p. 235.

[1018] Darlington, Fl. Cestrica, edit. 3, p. 73.

[1019] Ad. Pictet, Origines Indo-Europ., edit. 2, vol. i. p. 281.

[1020] Heer, Pflanzen der Pfahlbauten, p. 24, figs. 17, 18, and p. 26.

[1021] In Perrin, Études PrÉhist. sur la Savoie, p. 22.

[1022] Atte Soc. Ital. Sc. Nat., vol. vi.

[1023] For the numerous varieties which have common names in France, varying with the different provinces, see Duhamel, TraitÉ des Arbres, edit. 2, vol. v., in which are good coloured illustrations.

[1024] Hohenacker, PlantÆ Talysch., p. 128.

[1025] Koch, Dendrologie, i. p. 110.

[1026] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., ii. p. 6.

[1027] Grisebach, Spicil. Fl. Rumel., p. 86.

[1028] Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 649; Tchihatcheff, Asie Mineure, Bot., p. 198.

[1029] Sir J. Hooker, Fl. of Brit. India, ii, p. 313.

[1030] Steven, Verzeichniss Halbinselm, etc., p. 147.

[1031] Rehmann, Verhandl. Nat. Ver. Brunn, x. 1871.

[1032] Heldreich, Nutzpfl. Griech., p. 69; Pflanzen d’Attisch. Ebene., p. 477.

[1033] Viviani, Fl. Dalmat., iii. p. 258.

[1034] Bertoloni, Fl. Ital., v. p. 131.

[1035] Lecoc and Lamotte, Catal. du Plat. Centr. de la France, p. 148.

[1036] Theophrastes, Hist. Pl., lib. 3, c. 13; Pliny, lib. 15, c. 25, and others quoted in Lenz, Bot. der Alten Gr. and RÖm., p. 710.

[1037] Part of the description of Theophrastus shows a confusion with other trees. He says, for instance, that the nut is soft.

[1038] Ad. Pictet quotes forms of the same name in Persian, Turkish, and Russian, and derives from the same source the French word guigne, now used for certain varieties of the cherry.

[1039] Schouw, Die Erde, p. 44; Comes, Ill. delle Piante, etc., in 4to, p. 56.

[1040] Sordelli, Piante della torbiera di Lagozza, p. 40.

[1041] Caruel, Flora Toscana, p. 48.

[1042] Hist., lib. 15, c. 13.

[1043] Koch, Syn. Fl. Germ., edit. 2, p. 228; Cosson and Germain, Flore des Environs de Paris, i. p. 165.

[1044] Hudson, Fl. Anglic., 1778, p. 212, unites them under the name Prunus communis.

[1045] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., ii. p. 5; Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 652; K. Koch, Dendrologie, i. p. 94; Boissier and BÜhse, AufzÄhl Transcaucasien, p. 80.

[1046] Dioscorides, p. 174.

[1047] Bretschneider, On the Study, etc., p. 10.

[1048] Fraas, Syn. Fl. Class., p. 69.

[1049] Heldreich, Pflanzen Attischen Ebene.

[1050] Steven, Verzeichniss Halbinseln, i. p. 172.

[1051] Comes, Ill. Piante Pompeiane.

[1052] Insititia = foreign. A curious name, since every plant is foreign to all countries but its own.

[1053] Willkomm and Lange, Prodr. Fl. Hisp., iii. p. 244; Bertoloni, Fl. Ital., v. p. 135; Grisebach, Spicel. Fl. Rumel.,p. 85; Heldreich, Nutzpfl. Griech., p. 68.

[1054] Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 651; Ledebour, Fl. Ross., ii. p. 5; Hohenacker, Pl. Talysch, p. 128.

[1055] Dioscorides, p. 173; Fraas, Fl. Class., p. 69.

[1056] Heldreich, Nutzpflanzen Griechenlands, p. 68.

[1057] Ibid.

[1058] Heer, Pflanzen der Pfahlbauten, p. 27, fig. 16, c.

[1059] Dioscorides, lib. 1, c. 165.

[1060] Pliny, lib. 2, cap. 12.

[1061] The Latin name has passed into modern Greek (prikokkia). The Spanish and French names, etc. (albaricoque, abricot), seem to be derived from arbor prÆcox, or prÆcocium, while the old French word armegne, and the Italian armenilli, etc., come from mailon armeniacon. See further details about the names of the species in my GÉographie Botanique RaisonnÉe, p. 880.

[1062] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., ii. p. 3.

[1063] Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 652.

[1064] Tchihatcheff, Asie Mineure, Botanique, vol. i.

[1065] K. Koch, Dendrologie, i. p. 87.

[1066] Nouv. Ann. des Voyages, Feb., 1839, p. 176.

[1067] E. de Salle, Voyage, i. p. 140.

[1068] Spach, Hist. des VÉgÉt. PhanÉr., i. p. 389.

[1069] Boissier and Buhse, AufzÄhlung, etc., in 4to, 1860.

[1070] Reynier, Économie des Égyptiens, p. 371.

[1071] Munby, Catal. Fl. d’AlgÉr., edit. 2, p. 49.

[1072] Schweinfurth and Ascherson, Beitrage z. Fl. Æthiop., in 4to., 1867, p. 259.

[1073] Royle, Ill. of Himalaya, p. 205; Aitchison, Catal. of Punjab and Sindh, p. 56; Sir Joseph Hooker, Fl. of Brit. Ind., ii. p. 313; Brandis, Forest Flora of N. W. and Central India, 191.

[1074] Westmael, in Bull. Soc. Bot. Belgiq., viii., p. 219.

[1075] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., edit. 2, v. ii. p. 501.

[1076] Bretschneider, On the Study and Value, etc., pp. 10, 49.

[1077] Decaisne, Jardin Fruitier du MusÉum, vol. viii., art. Abricotier.

[1078] Dr. Bretschneider confirms this in a recent work, Notes on Botanical Questions, p. 3.

[1079] Prunus armeniaca of Thunberg is P. mume of Siebold and Zuccharini. The apricot is not mentioned in the Enumeratio, etc., of Franchet and Savatier.

[1080] Capus (Ann. Sc. Nat., sixth series, vol. xv. p. 206) found it wild in Turkestan at the height of four thousand to seven thousand feet, which weakens the hypothesis of a solely Chinese origin.

[1081] Piddington, Index; Roxburgh, Fl. Ind.; Forskal, Fl. Ægyp.; Delile Ill. Egypt.

[1082] Bretschneider, On the Study and Value, etc.

[1083] Bretschneider, Early European Researches, p. 149.

[1084] Bretschneider, Study and Value, etc., p. 10; and Early Europ. Resear., p. 149.

[1085] Brandis, Forest Flora; Sir J. Hooker, Fl. of Brit. Ind., iii. p. 313.

[1086] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., edit. 2, vol. ii. p. 500; Royle, Ill. Himal., p. 204.

[1087] Boissier, Fl. Orien., iii. p. 641.

[1088] K. Koch, Dendrologie, i. p. 80; Tchihatcheff, Asie Mineure Botanique, i. p. 108.

[1089] Ann. des Sc. Nat., 3rd series, vol. xix. p. 108.

[1090] Gussone, Synopsis FlorÆ SiculÆ, i. p. 552; Heldreich, Nutzpflanzen Griechenlands, p. 67.

[1091] Hiller, Hierophyton, i. p. 215; RosenmÜller, Handb. Bibl. Alterth., iv. p. 263.

[1092] Theophrastus, Hist., lib. 1, c. 11, 18, etc.; Dioscorides, lib. 1, c. 176.

[1093] Schouw, Die Erde, etc.; Comes, Ill. Piante nei dipinti Pomp., p. 13.

[1094] Pliny, Hist., lib. 16, c. 22.

[1095] Moris, Flora Sardoa, ii. p. 5; Willkomm and Lange, Prodr. Fl. Hisp., ii. p. 243.

[1096] Dictionnaire FranÇais BerbÈre, 1844.

[1097] Alph. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. Rais., p. 881.

[1098] Theophrastus, Hist., iv. c. 4; Dioscorides, lib. 1, c. 164; Pliny, Geneva edit., bk. 15, c. 13.

[1099] Royle, Ill. Him., p. 204.

[1100] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., 2nd. edit., ii. p. 500; Piddington, Index; Royle, ibid.

[1101] Sir Joseph Hooker, Journ. of Bot., 1850, p. 54.

[1102] Rose, the head of the French trade at Canton, collected these from Chinese manuscripts, and Noisette (Jard. Fruit., i. p. 76) has transcribed a part of his article. The facts are of the following nature. The Chinese believe the oval peaches, which are very red on one side, to be a symbol of a long life. In consequence of this ancient belief, peaches are used in all ornaments in painting and sculpture, and in congratulatory presents, etc. According to the work of Chin-noug-king, the peach Yu prevents death. If it is not eaten in time, it at least preserves the body from decay until the end of the world. The peach is always mentioned among the fruits of immortality, with which were entertained the hopes of Tsinchi-Hoang, Vouty, of the Hans and other emperors who pretended to immortality, etc.

[1103] Lindley, Trans. Hort. Soc., v. p. 121.

[1104] Trans. Hort. Soc. Lond., iv. p. 512, tab. 19.

[1105] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind.

[1106] Loureiro, Fl. Cochin., p. 386.

[1107] KÆmpfer, Amoen., p. 798; Thunberg, Fl. Jap., p. 199. KÆmpfer and Thunberg also give the name momu, but Siebold (Fl. Jap., i. p. 29) attributes a somewhat similar name, mume, to a plum tree, Prunus mume, Sieb. and Z.

[1108] Noisette, Jard. Fr., p. 77; Trans. Soc. Hort. Lond., iv. p. 513.

[1109] Pallas, Fl. Rossica, p. 13.

[1110] Shuft aloo is, according to Royle (Ill. Him. p. 204), the Persian name for the nectarine.

[1111] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., i. p. 3. See p. 228, the subsequent opinion of Koch.

[1112] Bosc, Dict. d’Agric., ix. p. 481.

[1113] Thouin, Ann. Mus., viii. p. 433.

[1114] Royle, Ill. Him., p. 204.

[1115] Bunge, Enum. Pl. Chin., p. 23.

[1116] Thunberg, Fl. Jap. 199.

[1117] Thunberg, Fl. Jap., 199.

[1118] The accounts about China which I have consulted do not mention the nectarine; but as it exists in Japan, it is extremely probable that it does also in China.

[1119] Noisette, Jard. Fr., p. 77; Trans. Hort. Soc., iv. p. 512, tab. 19.

[1120] Lindley, Trans. Hort. Soc., v. p. 122.

[1121] J. Bauhin, Hist., i. pp. 162, 163.

[1122] Dalechamp, Hist., i. p. 295.

[1123] Pliny, lib. xv. cap. 12 and 13.

[1124] Pliny, De Div. Gen. Malorum, lib. ii. cap. 14.

[1125] Dalechamp, Hist., i. p. 358.

[1126] Dalechamp, ibid.; Matthioli, p. 122; CÆsalpinus, p. 107; J. Bauhin, p. 163, etc.

[1127] Pliny, lib. xvii. cap. 10.

[1128] I have not been able to discover an Italian name for a glabrous or other fruit derived from tuber, or tuberes, which is singular, as the ancient names of fruits are usually preserved under some form or other.

[1129] Braddick, Trans. Hort. Soc. Lond., ii. p. 205.

[1130] Ibid., pl. 13.

[1131] Bertero, Annales Sc. Nat., xxi. p. 350.

[1132] Bretschneider, On the Study and Value, etc., p. 10.

[1133] Sir J. Hooker, Flora of Brit. Ind., ii. p. 313.

[1134] Brandis, Forest Flora, etc., p. 191.

[1135] Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 640.

[1136] K. Koch, Dendrologie, i. p. 83.

[1137] Decaisne, Jard. Fr. du Mus., PÊchers, p. 42.

[1138] Comes, Illus. Piante nei Dipinti Pompeiani, p. 14.

[1139] Darwin, Variation of Plants and Animals, etc., i. p. 338.

[1140] Decaisne, ubi supra, p. 2.

[1141] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., ii. p. 94; Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 653. He has verified several specimens.

[1142] Sir J. Hooker, Fl. Brit. Ind., ii. p. 374.

[1143] P. sinensis described by Lindley is badly drawn with regard to the indentation of the leaves in the plate in the Botanical Register, and very well in that of Decaisne’s Jardin Fruitier du MusÉum. It is the same species as P. ussuriensis, Maximowicz, of Eastern Asia.

[1144] Well drawn in Duhamel, TraitÉ des Arbres, edit. 2, vi. pl. 59; and in Decaisne, Jard. Frui. du Mus., pl. 1, figs. B and C. P. balansÆ, pl. 6 of the same work, appears to be identical, as Boissier observes.

[1145] This is the case in the forests of Lorraine, for instance, according to the observations of Godron, De l’Origine Probable des Poiriers CultivÉs, 8vo pamphlet, 1873, p. 6.

[1146] RosenmÜller, Bibl. Alterth.; LÖw, Aramaeische Pflanzennamen, 1881.

[1147] The spelling Pyrus, adopted by LinnÆus, occurs in Pliny, Historia, edit. 1631, p. 301. Some botanists, purists in spelling, write pirus, so that in referring to a modern work it is necessary to look in the index for both forms, or run the risk of believing that the pears are not in the work. In any case the ancient name was a common name; but the true botanical name is that of LinnÆus, founder of the received nomenclature, and LinnÆus wrote Pyrus.

[1148] Comes, Ill. Piante nei Dipinti Pompeiani, p. 59.

[1149] Heer, Pfahlbauten, pp. 24, 26, fig. 7.

[1150] Sordelli, Notizie Stat. Lacustre di Lagozza.

[1151] Nemnich, Polyglott. Lex. Naturgesch.; Ad. Pictet, Origines Indo-Europ., i. p. 277; and my manuscript dictionary of common names.

[1152] From a list of plant-names sent by M. d’Abadie to Professor Clos, of Toulouse.

[1153] Godron, ubi supra, p. 28.

[1154] Jacquin, Flora Austriaca, ii. pp. 4, 107.

[1155] Decaisne, Jardin Fruitier du MusÉum, Poiriers, pl. 21.

[1156] Decaisne, ibid., p. 18, and Introduction, p. 30. Several varieties of this species, of which a few bear a large fruit, are figured in the same work.

[1157] Boreau, Fl. du Centre de la France, edit. 3, vol. ii. p. 236.

[1158] Palladius, De re Rustica, lib. 3, c. 25. For this purpose “pira sylvestria vel asperi generis” were used.

[1159] The Chinese quince had been called by Thonin Pyrus sinensis. Lindley has unfortunately given the same name to a true pyrus.

[1160] Decaisne (Jardin Fruitier du MusÉum, Poiriers, pl. 5) saw specimens from both countries. Franchet and Savatier give it as only cultivated in Japan.

[1161] Nyman, Conspectus FlorÆ EuropeÆ, p. 240; Ledebour, Flora Rossica, ii. p. 96; Boissier, Flora Orientalis, ii. p. 656; Decaisne, Nouv. Arch. Mus., x. p. 153.

[1162] Boissier, ibid.

[1163] Maximowicz, Prim. Ussur.; Regel, Opit. Flori, etc., on the plants of the Ussuri collected by Maak; Schmidt, Reisen Amur. Franchet and Savatier do not mention it in their Enum. Jap. Bretschneider quotes a Chinese name which, he says, applies also to other species.

[1164] Koch, Syn. Fl. Germ., i. p. 261.

[1165] Boreau, Fl. du Centre de la France, edit. 3, vol. ii. p. 236.

[1166] Boissier, ubi supra.

[1167] Orig. Indo-Eur., i. p. 276.

[1168] Heldreich, Nutzpflanzen Griechenlands, i. p. 64.

[1169] Theophrastus, De Causis, lib. 6, cap. 24.

[1170] Heer, Pfahlbauten, p. 24, figs. 1-7.

[1171] Sordelli, Sulle Piante della Stazione di Lagozza, p. 35.

[1172] Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 656; Ledebour, Fl. Ross., ii. p. 55.

[1173] Steven, Verzeichniss Taurien, p. 150; Sibthorp, Prodr. Fl. GrÆcÆ, i. p. 344.

[1174] Boissier, ibid.

[1175] Nemnich, Polyglott Lexicon.

[1176] Nemnich, Poly. Lex.

[1177] Ibid.

[1178] Heldreich, Nutz. Griech., p. 64.

[1179] In 4to, Napoli, 1879.

[1180] De re Rustica, lib. 7, cap. 2.

[1181] Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 737; Sir J. Hooker, Fl. of Brit. Ind., ii. p. 581.

[1182] Quoted from Royle, Illus. Himal., p. 208.

[1183] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., ii. p. 104.

[1184] Munby, Fl. Alger., p. 49; Spicilegium Flora MaroccanÆ, p. 458.

[1185] Boissier, ibid.

[1186] Bretschneider, On Study and Value, etc., p. 16.

[1187] Piddington, Index.

[1188] RosenmÜller, Bibl. Naturge., i. p. 273; Hamilton, La Bot. de la Bible, Nice, 1871, p. 48.

[1189] Hehn, Kultur und Hausthiere aus Asien, edit. 3, p. 106.

[1190] Hehn, ibid.

[1191] Lenz, Bot. der Alten Grie. und RÖm., p. 681.

[1192] Heldreich, Die Nutzpflanzen Griechenlands, p. 64.

[1193] Fraas, Fl. Class., p. 79; Heldreich, ibid.

[1194] Hehn, ibid.

[1195] Pliny, lib. 13, c. 19.

[1196] Dictionnaire FranÇais-BerbÈre, published by the French Government.

[1197] De Saporta, Bull. Soc. GÉol. de France, April 5, 1869, pp. 767-769.

[1198] GÉogr. Bot. Rais., p. 191.

[1199] Descourtilz, Flore MÉdicale des Antilles, v. pl. 315.

[1200] Miquel, Sumatra, p. 118; Flora IndiÆ-BatavÆ, i. p. 425; Blume, Museum Lugd.-Bat., i. p. 93.

[1201] Hooker, Fl. Brit. Ind., ii. p. 474; Baker, Fl. of Maurit., etc., p. 115; Grisebach, Fl. of Brit. W. Ind. Isles, p. 235.

[1202] Rumphius, Amboin, i. p. 121, t. 37.

[1203] Tussac, Flore des Antilles, iii. p. 89, pl. 25.

[1204] Forster, Plantis Esculentis, p. 36.

[1205] Blume, Museum Lugd.-Bat., i. p. 91; Miquel, Fl. IndiÆ-Batav., i. p. 411; Hooker, Flora of British India, ii. p. 472.

[1206] Grisebach, Fl. Brit. W. Indies, p. 235; Baker, Fl. of Mauritius, p. 115.

[1207] Raddi, Di Alcune Specie di Pero Indiano, in 4to, Bologna, 1821, p. 1.

[1208] Martius, Syst. Nat. MedicÆ Bras., p. 32; Blume, Museum Lugd.-Bat., i. p. 71; Hasskarl, in Flora, 1844, p. 589; Sir J. Hooker, Fl. of Brit. Ind., ii. p 468.

[1209] GÉogr. Bot. Rais., p. 893.

[1210] Lowe, Flora of Madeira, p. 266.

[1211] See Blume, ibid.; Descourtilz, Flore MÉdicale des Antilles, ii. p. 20, in which there is a good illustration of the pyriform guava. Tussac, Flore des Antilles, gives a good plate of the round form. These two latter works furnish interesting details on the use of the guava, on the vegetation of the species, etc.

[1212] Rumphius, Amboin, i. p. 141; Rheede, Hortus Malabariensis, iii. t. 34.

[1213] Bojer, Hortus Mauritianus; Baker, Flora of Mauritius, p. 112.

[1214] All the floras, and Berg in Flora Brasiliensis, vol. xiv. p. 196.

[1215] GÉogr. Bot. Rais., p. 894.

[1216] Acosta, Hist. Nat. et Morale des Indes Orient. et Occid., French trans., 1598, p. 175.

[1217] Hernandez, Nova HispaniÆ Thesaurus, p. 85.

[1218] Piso, Hist. Brasil., p. 74; Marcgraf, ibid., p. 105.

[1219] The word gourd is also used in English for Cucurbita maxima. This is one of the examples of the confusion in common names and the greater accuracy of scientific terms.

[1220] Naudin, Annales des Sc. Nat., 4th series, vol. xii. p. 91; Cogniaux, in our Monog. PhanÉrog., iii. p. 417.

[1221] LinnÆus, Species Plantarum, p. 1434, under Cucurbita.

[1222] A. P. de Candolle, Flora FranÇaise (1805), vol. iii. p. 692.

[1223] Rheede, Malabar, iii. pls. 1, 5; Royle, Ill. Himal., p. 218.

[1224] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., edit. 1832, vol. iii. p. 719.

[1225] Rumphius, Amboin, vol. v. p. 397, t. 144.

[1226] Piddington, Index, at the word Cucurbita lagenaria; Ad. Pictet, Origines Indo-Europ., edit. 3, vol. i. p. 386.

[1227] Seemann, Flora Vitiensis, p. 106.

[1228] Bentham, Flora Australiensis, iii. p. 316.

[1229] Described first under the name Lagenaria idolatrica. A. Richard, Tentamen Fl. Abyss., i. p. 293, and later, Naudin and Cogniaux, recognized its identity with L. vulgaris.

[1230] Torrey and Gray, Fl. of N. Amer., i. p. 543; Grisebach, Flora of Brit. W. Ind. Is., p. 288.

[1231] Bretschneider, letter of the 23rd of August, 1881.

[1232] Tragus, Stirp., p. 285; Ruellius, De Natura Stirpium, p. 498; Naudin, ibid.

[1233] Pliny, Hist. Plant., l. 19, c. 5.

[1234] Ibn AlawÂm, in E. Meyer, Geschichte der Botanik, iii. p. 60; Ibn Baithar, Sondtheimer’s translation.

[1235] Unger, Pflanzen des Alten Ægyptens, p. 59; Pickering, Chronol. Arrang., p. 137.

[1236] In 8vo, 1877, p. 17.

[1237] Rauwolf, Fl. Orient., p. 125.

[1238] Piso, IndiÆ Utriusque., etc., edit. 1658, p. 264.

[1239] Marcgraf, Hist. Nat. BrasiliÆ, 1648, p. 44.

[1240] Naudin, ibid.; Cogniaux, Flora Brasil., fasc. 78, p. 7; and de Candolle, Monogr. PhanÉr., iii. p. 418.

[1241] Cl. Gay, Flora Chilena, ii. p. 403.

[1242] Jos. Acosta, French trans., p. 167.

[1243] Pickering, Chronol. Arrang., p. 861.

[1244] Pickering, ibid.

[1245] Ramusio, vol. iii. p. 112.

[1246] P. Brown, Jamaica, edit. ii. p. 354.

[1247] Elliott, Sketch of the Botany of South Carolina and Georgia, ii. p. 663.

[1248] Torrey and Gray, Flora of N. America, i. p. 544.

[1249] Asa Gray, in the American Journal of Science, 1857, vol. xxiv. p. 442.

[1250] Trumbull, in Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. vi. p. 69.

[1251] Naudin, Ann. Sc. Nat., 4th series, vol. vi. p. 5; vol. xii. p. 84.

[1252] Ibid., 4th series, vol. xviii. p. 160; vol. xix. p. 180.

[1253] As much as 200 lbs., according to the Bon Jardinier, 1850, p. 180.

[1254] Hooker, Fl. of Trop. Afr., ii. p. 555.

[1255] Lobel, Icones, t. 641. The illustration is reproduced in Dalechamp’s Hist., i. p. 626.

[1256] Clarke, Hooker’s Fl. Brit. Ind., ii. p. 622.

[1257] Bretschneider, letter of Aug. 23, 1881.

[1258] The list is given by E. Meyer, Geschichte der Botanik, iii. p. 401. The Cucurbita of which he speaks must have been the gourd, Lagenaria.

[1259] Piso, Brazil., edit. 1658, p. 264; Marcgraf, edit. 1648, p. 44.

[1260] Harris, American Journal, 1857, vol. xxiv. p. 441; Trumbull, Bull. of Torrey Bot. Club, 1876, vol. vi. p. 69.

[1261] Asa Gray, Botany of the Northern States, edit. 1868, p. 186.

[1262] Darlington, Flora Cestrica, 1853, p. 94.

[1263] GÉogr. Bot. RaisonnÉe, p. 902.

[1264] Naudin, Ann. Sc. Nat., 3rd series, vol. vi. p. 9; Cogniaux, in de Candolle, Monogr. PhanÉr., iii. p. 546.

[1265] Asa Gray, PlantÆ LindheimerianÆ, part ii. p. 198.

[1266] Molina, Hist. Nat. du Chili, p. 377.

[1267] Cogniaux, in Monogr. PhanÉr. and Flora Brasil., fasc. 78, p. 21.

[1268] Cogniaux, Fl. Bras. and Monogr. PhanÉr., iii., p. 547.

[1269] See the excellent plate in Wight’s Icones, t. 507, under the erroneous name of Cucurbita maxima.

[1270] Cogniaux, in Monogr. PhanÉr., iii. p. 547.

[1271] Miquel, Sumatra, under the name Gymnopetalum, p. 332.

[1272] Cogniaux, in Monogr. PhanÉr.

[1273] Gardener’s Chronicle, articles signed “I. H. H.,” 1857, p. 153; 1858, p. 130.

[1274] Cogniaux, Monogr. PhanÉr., iii. p. 485.

[1275] Naudin, Ann. Sc. Nat., 4th series, vol. xviii. p. 171.

[1276] Hooker, in Oliver, Fl. of Trop. Afr., ii. p. 546.

[1277] Schweinfurth and Ascherson, AufzÄhlung, p. 267.

[1278] Schumacher and Thonning, Guineiske Planten., p. 426.

[1279] Cogniaux, in de Candolle, Monogr. PhanÉr., p. 483.

[1280] Bretschneider, letter of Aug. 26, 1881.

[1281] Piddington, Index.

[1282] See the copy in Unger’s Pflanzen des Alten Ægyptens, fig. 25.

[1283] Galen, De Alimentis, l. 2, c. 5.

[1284] See all the Vergilian floras, and Naudin, Ann. Sc. Nat., 4th series, vol. xii. p. 111.

[1285] Comes, Ill. Piante nei Dipinti Pompeiani, in 4to, p. 20, in the Museo Nation., vol. iii. pl. 4.

[1286] Habitat in Apulia, Calabria, Sicilia (LinnÆus, Species, edit. 1763, p. 1435).

[1287] Seringe, in Prodromus, iii. p. 301.

[1288] Naudin, Ann. sc. Nat., 4th series, vol. xii. p. 101; Sir J. Hooker, in Oliver, Flora of Trop. Afr., ii. p. 549.

[1289] French trans., p. 56.

[1290] Unger has copied the figures from Lepsius’ work in his memoir Die Pflanzen des Alten Ægyptens, figs. 30, 31, 32.

[1291] Dictionnaire FranÇais-Berber, at the word pastÈque.

[1292] Moris, Flora Sardoa.

[1293] Piddington, Index.

[1294] Bretschneider, Study and Value, etc., p. 17.

[1295] Heldreich, Pflanz. d. Attisch. Ebene., p. 591; Nutzpfl. Griechenl., p. 50.

[1296] Langkavel, Bot. der SpÄt. Griechen.

[1297] Forskal, Flora Ægypto-Arabica, part i. p. 34.

[1298] Nemnich, Polyg. Lexic., i. p. 1309.

[1299] Piddington, Index; Pickering, Chronol. Arrang., p. 72.

[1300] Heldreich, Nutzpfl., etc., p. 50.

[1301]Sativa planta et tractu temporis quasi nativa facta” (Piso, edit. 1658, p. 233).

[1302] Naudin, in Ann. Sc. Nat., 4th series, vol. xi. p. 31.

[1303] Wildenow, Species, iv. p. 615.

[1304] Piddington, Index.

[1305] Bot. Mag., pl. 6206.

[1306] Cogniaux, in de Candolle, Monogr. PhanÉr., iii. p. 499.

[1307] Bretschneider, letters of Aug. 23 and 26, 1881.

[1308] Theophrastus, Hist., lib. 7, cap. 4; Lenz, Bot. der Alten, p. 492.

[1309] Heldreich, Nutzpfl. Griechen., p. 50.

[1310] Nemnich, Polygl. Lex., i. p. 1306.

[1311] Nemnich, ibid.

[1312] Forskal, Fl. Ægypt., p. 76.

[1313] RosenmÜller, Biblische Alterth., i. p. 97; Hamilton, Bot. de la Bible, p. 34.

[1314] Descourtilz, Fl. MÉd. des Antilles, v. pl. 329; Hooker, Bot. Mag., t. 5817; Cogniaux, in Fl. Brasil., fasc. 78, pl. 2.

[1315] Browne, Jamaica, edit. 2, p. 353.

[1316] Grisebach, Fl. of Brit. W. India Is., p. 288.

[1317] Cogniaux, ubi supra.

[1318] Guanerva-oba, in Piso, Brasil., edit. 1658, p. 264; Marcgraf, edit. 1648, p. 44, without illustration, calls it Cucumis sylvestris BrasiliÆ.

[1319] Naudin, Ann. Sc. Nat., 4th series, vol. ii. p. 12.

[1320] Darlington, Agric. Bot., p. 58.

[1321] Cucurbita Pepo of Loureiro and Roxburgh.

[1322] Clarke, in Fl. of Brit. Ind., ii. p. 616.

[1323] Cogniaux, in de Candolle, Monogr. PhanÉr., iii. p. 513.

[1324] Thunberg, Fl. Jap., p. 322; Franchet and Savatier, Enum. Pl. Jap., i. p. 173.

[1325] Hasskarl, Catal. Horti. Bogor. Alter., p. 190; Miquel, Flora Indo-Batav.

[1326] Mueller, Fragm., vi. p. 186; Forster, Prodr. (no description); Seemann, Jour. of Bot., ii. p. 50.

[1327] Nadeaud, Plan. Usu. des Taitiens, Enum. des Pl. Indig. À Taiti.

[1328] Bretschneider, letter of Aug. 26, 1881.

[1329] Naudin, Ann. Sc. Nat., 4th series, vol. xii. p. 121.

[1330] Cogniaux, Monogr. PhanÉr., iii. p. 458.

[1331] Rheede, Hort. Malab., viii. p. 15, t. 8; Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., iii. p. 714, as L. clavata; Kurz, Contrib., ii. p. 100; Thwaites, Enum.

[1332] Mueller, Fragmenta, iii. p. 107; Bentham, Fl. Austr., iii. p. 317, under names which Naudin and Cogniaux regard as synonyms of L. cylindrica.

[1333] Hooker, in Oliver, Fl. of Trop. Afr., ii. p. 530.

[1334] Schweinfurth and Ascheron, AufzÄhlung, p. 268.

[1335] Forskal, Fl. Ægypt., p. 75.

[1336] Naudin, Ann. Sc. Nat., 4th series, vol. xii. p. 122; Cogniaux, in de Candolle, Monogr. PhanÉr., iii. p. 459.

[1337] LinnÆus, Species, p. 1436, as Cucumis acutangulus.

[1338] Rheede, Hort. Malab., viii. p. 13, t. 7.

[1339] Thwaites, Enum. Ceylan, p. 126; Kurz, Contrib., ii. p. 101; Loureiro, Fl. Cochin., p. 727.

[1340] Rumphius, Amboin, v. p. 408, t. 149.

[1341] Clarke, in Fl. Brit. Ind., ii. p. 614.

[1342] Bojer, Hort. Maurit.

[1343] Schweinfurth and Ascherson, AufzÄhlung, p. 268.

[1344] Bretschneider, Study and Value, etc., p. 17.

[1345] Naudin, Ann. Sc. Nat., 4th series, vol. xviii. p. 190.

[1346] Rumphius, Amboin, v. pl. 148.

[1347] Grisebach, Flora of Brit. W. India Isl., p. 286.

[1348] Browne, Jamaica, p. 355.

[1349] Jacquin, Stirp. Amer. Hist., p. 259.

[1350] Naudin, Ann. Sc. Nat., 4th series, vol. xviii. p. 205.

[1351] In Monogr. PhanÉr., iii. p. 902.

[1352] Seemann, Bot. of Herald, p. 128.

[1353] Sagot, Journal de la Soc. d’Hortic. de France, 1872.

[1354] Cogniaux, Fl. Brasil, fasc. 78.

[1355] Sagot, ibid.

[1356] Webb and Berthelot, Phytog. Canar., sect. 1, p. 208.

[1357] Hernandez, Theo. NovÆ Hisp., p. 78.

[1358] Sloane, Jamaica, ii. p. 150.

[1359] Chapman, Flora of Southern States, p. 144.

[1360] The cactos of the Greeks was quite a different plant.

[1361] Steinheil, in Boissier, Voyage Bot. en Espagne, i. p. 25.

[1362] Webb and Berthelot, Phytog. Canar., vol. iii. sect. 1, p. 208.

[1363] Robson, quoted in English Botany, pl. 2057

[1364] Nyman, Conspectus Fl. EuropeÆ, p. 266; Boissier, Fl. Or., ii. p. 815.

[1365] Munby, Catal., edit. 2, p. 15.

[1366] Ball, Spicilegium Fl. Maroc., p. 449.

[1367] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., ii. p. 194; Boissier, ubi supra.

[1368] Clarke, in Hooker’s Fl. Brit. Ind., ii. p. 410.

[1369] Phillips, Account of Fruits, p. 174.

[1370] Moore and More, Contrib. to the Cybele Hybernica, p. 113.

[1371] Davies, Welsh Botanology, p. 24.

[1372] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., ii. p. 199.

[1373] Torrey and Gray, Fl. N. Amer., i. p. 150.

[1374] Dodoneus, p. 748.

[1375] Watson, Cybele Brit.

[1376] Brebisson, Flore de Normandie, p. 99.

[1377] Phillips, Account of Fruits, p. 136.

[1378] Gerard, Herbal, p. 1143.

[1379] That of currant is a later introduction, given from the resemblance to the grapes of Corinth (Phillips, ibid.).

[1380] Legonidec, Diction. Celto-Breton.

[1381] Moritzi, Dict. InÉdit des Noms Vulgaires.

[1382] LinnÆus, Flora Suecica, n. 197.

[1383] Watson, Compend. Cybele, i. p. 177; Fries, Summa Veg. Scand., p. 39; Nyman, Conspect. Fl. Europ., p. 266.

[1384] Boissier, Fl. Or., ii. p. 815.

[1385] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., p. 200; Maximowicz, PrimitiÆ Fl. Amur., p. 119; Clarke, in Hooker, Fl. Brit. Ind., ii. p. 411.

[1386] Boreau, Flore du Centre de la France, edit. 3, p. 262.

[1387] Bauhin, Hist. Plant., ii. p. 99.

[1388] This name Cassis is curious. LittrÉ says that it seems to have been introduced late into the language, and that he does not know its origin. I have not met with it in botanical works earlier than the middle of the seventeenth century. My manuscript collection of common names, among more than forty names for this species in different languages or dialects has not one which resembles it. Buchoz, in his Dictionnaire des Plantes, 1770, i. p. 289, calls the plant the Cassis or Cassetier des Poitevins. The old French name was Poivrier or groseillier noir. Larousse’s dictionary says that good liqueurs were made at Cassis in Provence. Can this be the origin of the name?

[1389] Aitchison, Catalogue, p. 86.

[1390] Lowe, Man. Fl. of Madeira, ii. p. 20; Webb and Berthelot, Hist. Nat. des Canaries, GÉog. Bot., p. 48; Ball, Spicil. Fl. Maroc., p. 565.

[1391] Cosson, Bull. Soc. Bot. France, iv. p. 107, and vii. p. 31; Grisebach, Spicil. Fl. RumelicÆ, ii. p. 71; Steven, Verzeich. der Taurisch. Halbins., p. 248; Ledebour, Fl. Ross., p. 38.

[1392] Bulletin, iv. p. 107.

[1393] RosenmÜller, Handbuch der Bibl. Alterth., vol. iv. p. 258; Hamilton, Bot. de la Bible, p. 80, where the passages are indicated.

[1394] Fr. Lenormand, Manuel de l’Hist. Auc. de l’Orient., 1869, vol. i. p. 31.

[1395] Fick, WÖrterbuch, Piddington, Index, only mentions one Hindu name, julpai.

[1396] Herodotus, Hist., bk. i. c. 193.

[1397] Boissier, Fl. Orient., iv. p. 36.

[1398] Ebn Baithar, Germ. trans., p. 569; Forskal, Plant. Egypt., p. 49.

[1399] Boissier, ibid.; Steven, ibid.

[1400] Unger, Die Pflanz. der Alten. Ægypt, p. 45.

[1401] De Candolle, Physiol. VÉgÉt., p. 696; Pleyte, quoted by Braun and Ascherson, Sitzber. Naturfor. Ges., May 15, 1877.

[1402] Hehn, Kulturpflanzen, edit. 3, p. 88, line 9.

[1403] Theophrastus, Hist. Plant., lib. iv. c. 3.

[1404] Kralik, Bull. Soc. Bot. Fr., iv. p. 108.

[1405] Beitrage zur Fl. Æthiopiens, p. 281.

[1406] Balansa, Bull. Soc. Bot. de Fr., iv. p. 107.

[1407] Moris, Fl. Sard., iii. p. 9; Bertoloni, Fl. Ital., i. p. 46.

[1408] Pliny, Hist., lib. xv. cap. 1.

[1409] Duveyrier, Les Touaregs du Nord (1864), p. 179.

[1410] Munby, Flore de l’Algerie, p. 2; Debeaux, Catal. Boghar, p. 68.

[1411] Boissier, Voyage Bot. en Espagne, edit. I, vol. ii. p. 407.

[1412] Willkomm and Lange, Prod. Fl. Hispan., ii. p. 672.

[1413] Webb and Berthelot, Hist. Nat. des Canaries, GÉog. Bot., pp. 47, 48.

[1414] Webb and Berthelot, ibid., Ethnographie, p. 188.

[1415] Seemann, Bot. of the Herald., p. 166.

[1416] Grisebach, Flora of Brit. W. Ind. Isl., p. 398.

[1417] Sloane, Jamaica, ii. p. 170; Jacquin, Amer., p. 52.

[1418] Flora Brasil., vol. vii. p. 88.

[1419] See the synonyms in the Flora Brasiliensis, vol. vii. p. 66.

[1420] Sagot, Journ. Soc. d’Hortic. de France, 1872, p. 347.

[1421] Blanco, Fl. de Filipinas, under the name Achras lucuma.

[1422] Nova Genera, iii. p. 240.

[1423] Dampier and Lussan, in Sloane’s Jamaica, ii. p. 172; Seemann, Botany of the Herald., p. 166.

[1424] Jacquin, Amer., p. 59; Humboldt and Bonpland, Nova Genera, iii. p. 239.

[1425] Grisebach, Flora of Brit. W. Ind., p. 399.

[1426] Sloane, ubi supra.

[1427] Dunal, Hist. des Solanum, p. 209.

[1428] Ebn Baithar, Germ. trans., i. p. 116.

[1429] Rauwolf, Flora Orient., ed. Groningue, p. 26.

[1430] Dict. Fr.-BerbÈre, published by the French Government.

[1431] Thonning, under the name S. edule; Hooker, Niger Flora, p. 473.

[1432] Trans. of Linn. Soc., xvii. p. 48; Baker, Fl. of Maurit., p. 215.

[1433] Bretschneider, On the Study and Value, etc., p. 17.

[1434] Forster, De Plantis Escul. Insul., etc.

[1435] Piddington, Index.

[1436] Piddington, at the word Capsicum.

[1437] Nemnich, Lexicon, gives twelve French and eight German names.

[1438] Piso, p. 107; Marcgraf, p. 39.

[1439] Descourtilz, Flore MÉdicale des Antilles, vi. pl. 423.

[1440] Fingerhuth, Monographia Gen. Capsici, p. 12; Sendtner, in Flora Brasil., vol. x. p. 147.

[1441] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., edit. Wall, ii. p. 260; edit. 1832, ii. p. 574.

[1442] Blume, Bijdr., ii. p. 704.

[1443] Sendtner, in Fl. Bras., x. p. 143.

[1444] Alph. de Candolle, Prodr., xiii. part 1, p. 26.

[1445] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., edit. 1832, vol. i. p. 565; Piddington, Index.

[1446] Rumphius, Amboin, v. p. 416.

[1447] Mala Peruviana, Pomi del Peru, in Bauhin’s Hist., iii. p. 621.

[1448] Hughes, Barbados, p. 148.

[1449] Humboldt, Espagne, edit. 2, vol. ii. p. 472.

[1450] Fl. Brasil., vol. x. p. 126.

[1451] The proportions of the calyx and the corolla are the same as those of the cultivated tomato, but they are different in the allied species S. Humboldtii, of which the fruit is also eaten, according to Humboldt, who found it wild in Venezuela.

[1452] Ruiz and Pavon, Flor. Peruv., ii. p. 37.

[1453] Spruce, n. 4143, in Boissier’s herbarium.

[1454] Asa Gray, Bot. of Califor., i. p. 538.

[1455] Baker, Fl. of Maurit., p. 216.

[1456] Clusius, Historia, p. 2.

[1457] For instance in Madeira, according to Grisebach, Fl. of Brit. W. Ind., p. 280; in Mauritius, the Seychelles and Rodriguez, according to Baker, Flora of Mauritius, p. 290.

[1458] It is not in Rumphius.

[1459] Aublet, Guyane, i. p. 364.

[1460] Meissner, in de Candolle, Prodromus, vol. xv. part 1, p. 52; and Flora Brasil., vol. v. p. 158. For Mexico, Hernandez, p. 89; for Venezuela and Para, Nees, LaurineÆ, p. 129; for Eastern Peru, Poeppig, Exsicc., seen by Meissner.

[1461] P. Browne, Jamaica, p. 214; Jacquin, Obs., i. p. 38.

[1462] Acosta, Hist. Nat. des Indes., edit. 1598, p. 176.

[1463] Laet, Hist. Nouv. Monde, i. pp. 325, 341.

[1464] See the fine plates in Tussac’s Flore des Antilles, iii. p. 45, pls. 10 and 11. The papaw belongs to the small family of the PapayaceÆ, fused by some botanists into the PassiflorÆ, and by others into the BixaceÆ.

[1465] R. Brown, Bot. of Congo, p. 52; A. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. Rais., p. 917.

[1466] Sagot, Journ. de la Soc. Centr. d’Hortic. de France, 1872.

[1467] Rumphius, Amboin, i. p. 147.

[1468] Sloane, Jamaica, p. 165.

[1469] Loureiro, Fl. Coch., p. 772.

[1470] Marcgraf, Brasil., p. 103, and Piso, p. 159, for Brazil; Ximenes in Marcgraf and Hernandez, Thesaurus, p. 99, for Mexico; and the last for St. Domingo and Mexico.

[1471] Clusius, CurÆ Posteriores, pp. 79, 80.

[1472] Martius, Beitr. z. Ethnogr., ii. p. 418.

[1473] P. Browne, Jamaica, edit. 2, p. 360. The first edition is of 1756.

[1474] The passage of Oviedo is translated into English by Correa de Mello and Spruce, in their paper on the Proceedings of the LinnÆan Society, x. p. 1.

[1475] De Candolle, Prodr., xv. part 1, p. 414.

[1476] Boissier, Fl. Orient., iv. p. 1154; Brandis, Forest Flora of India, p. 418; Webb and Berthelot, Hist. Nat. des Canaries, Botanique, iii. p. 257.

[1477] Count Solms Laubach, in a learned discussion (Herkunft, Domestication, etc., des Feigenbaums, in 4to, 1882), has himself observed facts of this nature already indicated by various authors. He did not find the seed provided with embryos (p. 64), which he attributes to the absence of the insect (Blastophaga), which generally lives in the wild fig, and facilitates the fertilization of one flower by another in the interior of the fruit. It is asserted, however, that fertilization occasionally takes place without the intervention of the insect.

[1478] Chabas, MÉlanges Egyptol., 3rd series (1873), vol. ii. p. 92.

[1479] Rosenmuller, Bibl. Alterth., i. p. 285; Reynier, Écon. Publ. des Arabes et des Juifs, p. 470.

[1480] Forskal, Fl. Ægypto-Arab., p. 125. Lagarde (Revue Critique d’Histoire, Feb. 27, 1882) says that this Semitic name is very ancient.

[1481] Bretschneider, in Solms, ubi supra, p. 51.

[1482] Herodotus, i. 71.

[1483] Lenz, Botanik der Griechen, p. 421, quotes four lines of Homer. See also Hehn, Culturpflanzen, edit. 3, p. 84.

[1484] Hehn, Culturpflanzen, edit. 3, p. 513.

[1485] No importance should be attached to the exaggerated divisions made by Gasparini in Ficus carica, LinnÆus. Botanists who have studied the fig tree since his time retain a single species, and name several varieties of the wild fig. The cultivated forms are numberless.

[1486] Gussone, Enum. Plant. Inarimensium, p. 301.

[1487] For the history of the fig tree and an account of the operation (of doubtful utility) which consists in planting insect-bearing Caprifici among the cultivated trees (caprification), see Solms’ work.

[1488] Pliny, Hist., lib. xv. cap. 18.

[1489] Hehn, Culturpflanzen, edit. 3, p. 513.

[1490] Webb and Berthelot, Hist. Nat. des Canaries Ethnogr., p. 186; Phytogr., iii. p. 257.

[1491] Duveyrier, Les Touaregs du Nord., p. 193.

[1492] Planchon, Étude sur les tufs de Montpellier, p. 63; de Saporta, La flore des tufs quaternaires en Provence, in Comptes rendus de la 32e Session du CongrÈs Scientifique de France; Bull. Soc. Geolog., 1873-74, p. 442.

[1493] See the fine plates published in Tussac’s Flore des Antilles, vol. ii. pls. 2 and 3; and Hooker, Bot. Mag., t. 2869-2871.

[1494] Voyages À la Nouvelle GuinÉe, p. 100.

[1495] Hooker, ubi supra.

[1496] Rumphius, Herb. Amboin, i. p. 112, pl. 33.

[1497] Flora Vitiensis, p. 255.

[1498] Seemann, Fl. Vit., p. 255; Nadeaud, Enum. des Pl. Indig. de Taiti, p. 44; Idem, Pl. usuelles des Taitiens, p. 24.

[1499] See Tussac’s plates, Flore des Antilles, pl. 4; and Hooker, Bot. Mag., t. 2833, 2834.

[1500] Rheede, Malabar, iii. p. 18; Wight, Icones, ii. No. 678; Brandis, Forest Flora of India, p. 426; Kurz, Forest Flora of Brit. Burmah, p. 432.

[1501] Tussac, Flore des Antilles, pl. 4.

[1502] Baker, Fl. of Maurit., p. 282.

[1503] Martius, Gen. et Spec. Palmarum, in folio, vol. iii. p. 257; C. Ritter, Erdkunde, xiii. p. 760; Alph. de Candolle, GÉog. Bot. Rais., p. 343.

[1504] Unger, Pflanzen d. Alt. Ægypt., p. 38.

[1505] Pliny, Hist., lib. vi. cap. 37.

[1506] Unger, ubi supra.

[1507] See C. Ritter, ubi supra.

[1508] Hehn, Culturpflanzen, edit. 3, p. 234.

[1509] C. Ritter, ibid., p. 828.

[1510] According to Roxburgh, Royle, etc.

[1511] Bretschneider, Study and Value, etc., p. 31.

[1512] According to Schmidt, Fl. d. Cap.-Verd. Isl., p. 168, the date-palm is rare in these islands, and is certainly not wild. Webb and Berthelot, on the contrary, assert that in some of the Canaries it is apparently indigenous (Hist. Nat. des Canaries, Botanique, iii. p. 289).

[1513] Humboldt, Nouvelle Espagne, 1st edit., ii. p. 360.

[1514] Oviedo, Hist. Nat., 1556, p. 112. Oviedo’s first work is of 1526. He is the earliest naturalist quoted by Dryander (Bibl. Banks) for America.

[1515] I have also seen this passage in the translation of Oviedo by Ramusio, vol. iii. p. 115.

[1516] Humboldt, Nouvelle Espagne, 2nd edit., p. 385.

[1517] Garcilasso de la Vega, Commentarios Reales, i. p. 282.

[1518] Acosta, Hist. Nat. De Indias, 1608, p. 250.

[1519] Desvaux, Journ. Bot., iv. p. 5.

[1520] Caldcleugh, Trav. in S. Amer., 1825, i. p. 23.

[1521] Stevenson, Trav. in S. Amer., i. p. 328.

[1522] Ibid., p. 363.

[1523] Boussingault, C. r. Acad. Sc. Paris, May 9, 1836.

[1524] Meyen, Pflanzen Geog., 1836, p. 383.

[1525] Ritter, Erdk., iv. p. 870.

[1526] Seemann, Bot. of the Herald, p. 213; Ernst, in Seemann’s Journ. of Bot., 1867, p. 289; Sagot, Journ. de la Soc. d’Hort. de Fr., 1872, p. 226.

[1527] Martius, Eth. Sprachenkunde Amer., p. 123.

[1528] Roxburgh and Wallich, Fl. Ind., ii. p. 485; Piddington, Index.

[1529] Pliny, Hist., lib. xii. cap. 6.

[1530] Unger, ubi supra, and Wilkinson, ii. p. 403, do not mention it. The banana is now cultivated in Egypt.

[1531] Forster, Plant. Esc., p. 28.

[1532] Clusius, Exot., p. 229; Brown, Bot. Congo, p. 51.

[1533] Roxburgh, Corom., tab. 275; Fl. Ind.

[1534] Rumphius, Amb., v. p. 139.

[1535] Loureiro, Fl. Coch., p. 791.

[1536] Loureiro, Fl. Coch., p. 791.

[1537] Blanco, Flora, 1st edit., p. 247.

[1538] Finlayson, Journey to Siam, 1826, p. 86, according to Ritter, Erdk., iv. p. 878.

[1539] Thwaites, Enum. Pl. Cey., p. 321.

[1540] Aitchison, Catal. of Punjab, p. 147.

[1541] Hughes, Barb., p. 182; Maycock, Fl. Barb., p. 396.

[1542] Sloane, Jamaica, ii. p. 148.

[1543] Piso, edit. 1648, Hist. Nat., p. 75.

[1544] Humboldt quotes the Spanish edition of 1608. The first edition is of 1591. I have only been able to consult the French translation of Regnault, published in 1598, and which is apparently accurate.

[1545] Acosta, trans., lib. iv. cap. 21.

[1546] That is probably Hispaniola or San Domingo; for if he had meant the Spanish language, it would have been translated by castillan and without the capital letter.

[1547] This is probably a misprint for Andes, for the word Indes has no sense. The work says (p. 166) that pine-apples do not grow in Peru, but that they are brought thither from the Andes, and (p. 173) that the cacao comes from the Andes. It seems to have meant hot regions. The word Andes has since been applied to the chain of mountains by a strange and unfortunate transfer.

[1548] I have read through the entire work, to make sure of this fact.

[1549] Prescott, Conquest of Peru. The author has consulted valuable records, among others a manuscript of Montesinos of 1527; but he does not quote his authorities for each fact, and contents himself with vague and general indications, which are very insufficient.

[1550] Marcgraf, Brasil., p. 33.

[1551] Oviedo, Ramusio’s trans., iii. p. 113; Jos. Acosta, Hist. Nat. des Indes, French trans., p. 166.

[1552] Thevet, Piso, etc.; Hernandez, Thes., p. 341.

[1553] Rheede, Hort. Malab., xi. p. 6.

[1554] Rumphius, Amboin, v. p. 228.

[1555] Royle, Ill., p. 376.

[1556] Kircher, Chine IllustrÉe, trans. of 1670, p. 253.

[1557] Clusius, Exotic., cap. 44.

[1558] Baker, Fl. of Maurit.

[1559] Royle, ubi supra.

[1560] Seemann, Bot. of the Herald, p. 215.

[1561] Humboldt, Nouv. Esp., 2nd edit., ii. p. 478.

[1562] Gardeners’ Chronicle, 1881, vol. i. p. 657.

[1563] Martius, letter to A. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. Rais., p. 927.

[1564] Humboldt, Voy., ii. p. 511; Kunth, in Humboldt and Bonpland, Nova Genera, v. p. 316; Martius, Ueber den Cacao, in BÜchner, Repert. Pharm.

[1565] Schach, in Grisebach, Flora of Brit. W. Ind. Is., p. 91.

[1566] Sloane, Jamaica, ii. p. 15.

[1567] G. Bernoulli. Uebersicht der Arten von Theobroma, p. 5.

[1568] Hemsley, Biologia Centrali Americana, part ii. p. 133.

[1569] Grisebach, ubi supra.

[1570] Triana and Planchon, Prodr. Fl. Novo Granatensis, p. 208.

[1571] Blanco, Fl. de Filipinas, edit. 2, p. 420.

[1572] Kunth, in Humboldt and Bonpland, ubi supra; Triana, ubi supra.

[1573] Bretschneider, letter of Aug. 23, 1881.

[1574] Roxburgh, Fl. Indica, ii. p. 269.

[1575] Blume, Rumphia, iii. p. 106.

[1576] Loureiro, Flora Coch., p. 233; Kurz, Forest Fl. of Brit. Burmah, p. 293.

[1577] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., ii. p. 271; Thwaites, Enum. Zeyl., p. 58; Hiern, in Fl. of Brit. Ind., i. p. 688.

[1578] Hiern, in Fl. of Brit. Ind., i. p. 687.

[1579] Blume, Rumphia, iii. p. 103; Miquel, Fl. Indo-Batava, i. p. 554.

[1580] Bossier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 5.

[1581] Pliny, Hist. Nat., lib. xiii. cap. 15; lib. xv. cap. 22; Galen, De Alimentis, lib. ii. cap. 30.

[1582] Lerche, Nova Acta Acad. Cesareo-Leopold, vol. v., appendix, p. 203, published in 1773. Maximowicz, in a letter of Feb. 24, 1882, tells me that Lerche’s specimen exists in the herbarium of the Imperial Garden at St. Petersburgh. It is in flower, and resembles the cultivated bean in all points excepting height, which is about half a foot. The label mentions the locality and its wild character without other remarks.

[1583] There are Transcaucasian specimens in the same herbarium, but taller, and they are not said to be wild.

[1584] Marschall Bieberstein, Flora Caucaso-Taurica; C. A. Meyer, Verzeichniss; Hohenacker, Enum. Plant. Talysch; Boissier, Fl. Orient., p. 578, Buhse and Boissier, Plant. TranscaucasiÆ.

[1585] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., i. p. 664, quotes de Candolle, Prodromus, ii. p. 354; now Seringe wrote the article Faba in Prodromus, in which the south of the Caspian is indicated, probably on Lerche’s authority.

[1586] Dict. d’Agric., v. p. 512.

[1587] Munby, Catal. Plant. in Alger. sponte nascent., edit. 2, p. 12.

[1588] Schweinfurth and Ascherson, AufzÄhlung, p. 256; Rohlfs, Kufra.

[1589] Loiscleur Deslongchamps, Consid. sur les CÉrÉales, part i. p. 29.

[1590] Bretschneider, Study and Value, etc., pp. 7, 15.

[1591] Iliad, 13, v. 589.

[1592] Wittmack, Sitz. bericht Vereins, Brandenburg, 1879.

[1593] Novitius Dictionnarium, at the word Faba.

[1594] Origines Indo-EuropÉennes, edit. 2, vol. i. p. 353.

[1595] Heer, Pflanzen der Pfahlbauten, p. 22, figs. 44-47.

[1596] Perrin, Étude PrÉhistorique sur la Savoie, p. 2.

[1597] Delile, Plant. Cult. en Égypte, p. 12; Reynier, Économie des Égyptiens et Carthaginois, p. 340; Unger, Pflan. d. Alt. Ægyp., p. 64; Wilkinson, Man. and Cus. of Anc. Egyptians, p. 402.

[1598] Reynier, ubi supra, tries to discover the reason of this.

[1599] Herodotus, Histoire, Larcher’s trans., vol. ii. p. 32.

[1600] 2 Sam. xvii. 28; Ezek. iv. 9.

[1601] Dict. FranÇais-BerbÈre, published by the French government.

[1602] Note communicated to M. Clos by M. d’Abadie.

[1603] A. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. Rais., chap. x.

[1604] Rhododendron ponticum now exists only in Asia Minor and in the south of the Spanish peninsula.

[1605] Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 577.

[1606] C. A. Meyer, Verzeichniss Fl. Caucas., p. 147.

[1607] Georgi, in Ledebour, Fl. Ross.

[1608] Forskal, Fl. Ægypt.; Delile, Plant. Cult. en Égypte, p. 13.

[1609] Ebn Baithar, ii. p. 134.

[1610] Reynier, Économie publique et rurale des Arabes et des Juifs, GenÈve, 1820, p. 429.

[1611] Dict. FranÇ.-BerbÈre, in 8vo, 1844.

[1612] Hehn, Culturpflanzen, etc., edit. 3, vol. ii. p. 188.

[1613] Ad. Pictet, Origines Indo-EuropÉennes, edit. 2, vol. i. p. 364; Hehn, ubi supra.

[1614] Heer, Pflanzen der Pfahlbauten, p. 23, fig. 49.

[1615] Theophrastus, Hist., lib. iv. cap. 5.

[1616] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., edit. 1832, vol. iii. p. 324; Piddington, Index.

[1617] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., i. p. 660, according to Pallas, Falk, and Koch.

[1618] Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 560; Steven, Verzeichniss des Taurischen Hablinseln, p. 134.

[1619] Iliad, bk. 13, verse 589; Theophrastus, Hist., lib. viii. c. 3.

[1620] Dioscorides, lib. ii. c. 126.

[1621] Heldreich, Nutzpflanzen Griechenlands, p. 71.

[1622] Nemnich, Polyglott. Lex., i. p. 1037; Bunge, in Goebels Reise, ii. p. 328.

[1623] ClÉment d’Alexandrie, Strom., lib. i., quoted from Reynier, Écon. des Égyp. et Carthag., p. 343.

[1624] Reynier, Écon. des Arabes et Juifs, p. 430.

[1625] RosenmÜller, Bibl. Alterth., i. p. 100; Hamilton, Bot. de la Bible, p. 180.

[1626] Rauwolf, Fl. Orient., No. 220; Forskal, Fl. Ægypt., p. 81; Dict. FranÇ.-BerbÈre.

[1627] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., iii. p. 324; Piddington, Index.

[1628] See Fraas, Fl. Class., p. 51; Lenz., Bot. der Alten, p. 73.

[1629] Heldreich, Nutzpflanzen Griechenlands, p. 69.

[1630] Olivier de Serres, ThÉÂtre de l’Agric., edit. 1529, p. 88.

[1631] Clusius, Hist. Plant., ii. p. 228.

[1632] Willkomm and Lange, Fl. Hisp., iii. p. 466.

[1633] Caruel, Fl. Toscana, p. 136.

[1634] Gussone, Fl. SiculÆ Syn., edit. 2, vol. ii. p. 466.

[1635] Grisebach, Spicil. Fl. Rumel., p. 11.

[1636] D’Urville, Enum., p. 86.

[1637] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., i. p. 510.

[1638] Caruel, Fl. Tosc., p. 136.

[1639] Gussone, Fl. Sic. Syn., ii. p. 267; Moris, Fl. Sardoa, i. p. 596.

[1640] Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 29.

[1641] AufzÄhlung, etc., p. 257.

[1642] Schweinfurth, PlantÆ Nilot. a Hartman Coll., p. 6.

[1643] Unger, Pflanzen d. Alt. Ægyp., p. 65.

[1644] Wilkinson, Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, ii. p. 403.

[1645] RosenmÜller, Bibl. Alterth., vol. i.

[1646] Muratori, Antich. Ital., i. p. 347; Diss., 24, quoted by Targioni, Cenni Storici, p. 31.

[1647] Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 623; Royle, Ill. Himal., p. 200.

[1648] Bertoloni, Fl. Ital., vii. p. 419; Caruel, Fl. Tosc., p. 184; Gussone, Fl. Sic. Synopsis, ii. p. 279; Moris, Fl. Sardoa, i. p. 577.

[1649] Steven, Verzeichniss, p. 134.

[1650] Alefeld, Bot. Zeitung., 1860, p. 204.

[1651] Darwin, Animals and Plants under Domestication, p. 326.

[1652] Theophrastus, Hist., lib. viii. c. 3 and 5.

[1653] Heldreich, Nutzpflanzen Griechenlands, p. 71.

[1654] Pliny, Hist., lib. xviii. c. 7 and 12. This is certainly P. sativum, for the author says it cannot bear the cold.

[1655] Ad. Pictet, Origines Indo-EuropÉennes, edit. 2, vol. i. p. 359.

[1656] Heer, Pflanzen der PfahlbaÜten, xxiii. fig. 48; Perrin, Études PrÉhistoriques sur la Savoie, p. 22.

[1657] Piddington, Index. Roxburgh does not give a Sanskrit name.

[1658] Bretschneider, Study and Value, etc., p. 16.

[1659] Ibid., p. 9.

[1660] See Pailleux, in Bull. de la Soc. d’Acclim., Sept. and Oct., 1880.

[1661] Rumphius, Amb., vol. v. p. 388.

[1662] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., iii. p. 314.

[1663] Piddington, Index.

[1664] Kaempfer, Amer. Exot., p. 837, pl. 838.

[1665] Haberlandt, Die Sojabohne, in 8vo, Vienna, 1878, quoted by Pailleux, ubi supra.

[1666] Loureiro, Fl. Cochin., ii. p. 538.

[1667] Bunge, Enum. Plant. Chin., p. 118; Maximowicz, Primit. Fl. Amur., p. 87.

[1668] Miquel, Prolusio, in Ann. Mus. Lugd. Bat., iii. p. 52; Franchet and Savatier, Enum. Plant. Jap., i. p. 108.

[1669] Junghuhn, PlantÆ Jungh., p. 255.

[1670] Soja angustifolia, Miquel; see Hooker, Fl. Brit. Ind., ii. p. 184.

[1671] Rumphius, Amb., vol. v. p. 388.

[1672] Tussac, Flore des Antilles, vol. iv. p. 94, pl. 32; Grisebach, Fl. of Brit. W. Indies, i. p. 191.

[1673] See Wight and Arnott, Prod. Fl. Penins. Ind., p. 256; Klotzsch, in Peters, Reise nach Mozambique, i. p. 36. The yellow variety is figured in Tussac, that with the red flowers in the Botanical Register, 1845, pl. 31.

[1674] Bentham, Flora Hongkongensis, p. 89; Flora Brasil., vol. xv. p. 199; Bentham and Hooker, i. p. 541.

[1675] Tussac, Flore des Antilles; Jacquin, Obs., p. 1.

[1676] Rheede, Roxburgh, Kurz, Burm. Fl., etc.

[1677] Thwaites, Enum. Pl Ceylan.

[1678] Loureiro, Fl. Cochin., p. 565.

[1679] Rumphius, Amb., vol. v. t. 135.

[1680] Seemann, Fl. Vitiensis, p. 74.

[1681] Junghuhn, PlantÆ Jungh., fasc. i. p. 241.

[1682] Piddington, Index; Rheede, Malab., vi. p. 23, etc.

[1683] Pickering, Chron. Arrang. of Plants, p. 442; Peters, Reise, p. 36; R. Brown, Bot. of Congo, p. 53; Oliver, Fl. of Trop. Afr., ii. p. 216.

[1684] Bulletin de la SociÉtÉ d’Acclimation, 1871, p. 663.

[1685] The species is given here in order not to separate it from the other leguminous plants cultivated for the seeds alone.

[1686] De Gasparin, Cours. d’Agric., iv. p. 328.

[1687] Schweinfurth and Ascherson, AufzÄhlung, p. 255; Richard, Tentamen Fl. Abyss.

[1688] Ascherson, etc., in Rohls, Kufra, 1 vol. in 8vo, 1881, p. 519.

[1689] Heldreich, Nutzpflanzen Griechenlands, p. 73; Die Pflanzen der Attischen Ebene, p. 477; Gussone, Syn. Fl. Sic., p. 646; Bianca, Il Carrubo, in the Giornale d’Agricoltura Italiana, 1881; Munby, Catal. Pl. in Alg. Spont., p. 13.

[1690] Hoefer, Hist. Bot. MinÉr. et GÉol., 1 vol. in 12mo., p. 20; BonnÉ, Le Caroubier, ou l’Arbre des Lotophages, Algiers, 1869 (quoted by Hoefer). See above, the article on the jujube tree.

[1691] Pliny, Hist., lib. i. cap. 30.

[1692] Theophrastus, Hist. Plant., lib. i. cap. 11; Dioscorides, lib. i. cap. 155; Fraas, Syn. Fl. Class., p. 65.

[1693] Ebn Baithar, German trans., i. p. 354; Forskal, Fl. Ægypt., p. 77.

[1694] Columna, quoted by Lenz, Bot. der Alten, p. 73; Pliny, Hist., lib. xiii. cap. 8.

[1695] Dict. FranÇ.-BerbÈre, at the word Caroube.

[1696] Lexicon Oxon., quoted by Pickering, Chron. Hist. of Plants, p. 141.

[1697] The drawing is reproduced in Unger’s Pflanzen des Alten Ægyptens, fig. 22. The observation which he quotes from Kotschy needs confirmation by a special anatomist.

[1698] A. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. Rais., p. 961.

[1699] Bentham, in Ann. Wiener Museum, vol. ii.; Martens, Die Gartenbohnen, in 4to, Stuttgart, 1860, edit. 2, 1869.

[1700] Savi, Osserv. sopra Phaseolus e Dolichos, 1, 2, 3.

[1701] Theophrastus, Hist., lib. viii. cap. 3; Dioscorides, lib. ii. cap. 130; Pliny, Hist., lib. xviii. cap. 7, 12, interpreted by Fraas, Syn. Fl. Class., p. 52; Lenz, Bot. der Alten, p. 731; Martens, Die Gartenbohnen, p. 1.

[1702] Wittmack, Bot. Vereins Brandenburg, Dec. 19, 1879.

[1703] Delile, Plantes CultivÉes en Égypte, p. 14; Piddington, Index.

[1704] Bretschneider does not mention any, either in his pamphlet On the Study and Value of Chinese Botanical Works, or in his private letters to me.

[1705] E. Meyer, Geschichte der Botanique, iii. p. 404.

[1706]Faseolus est species leguminis et grani, quod est in quantitate parum minus quam Faba, et in figura est columnare sicut faba, herbaque ejus minor est aliquantulum quam herba FabÆ. Et sunt faseoli multorum colorum, sed quodlibet granorum habet maculam nigram in loco cotyledonis” (Jessen, Alberti Magni, De Vegetabilibus, edit. critica, p. 515).

[1707] P. Crescens, French trans., 1539.

[1708] Macer Floridus, edit. 1485, and Choulant’s commentary, 1832.

[1709] De Rochebrune, Actes de la Soc. Linn. de Bordeaux, vol. xxxiii. Jan., 1880, of which I saw an analysis in Botanisches Centralblatt, 1880, p. 1633.

[1710] Wittmack, Sitzungsbericht des Bot. Vereins Brandenburg, Dec. 19, 1879, and a private letter.

[1711] Molina (Essai sur l’Hist. Nat. du Chili, French trans., p. 101) mentions Phaseoli, which he calls pallar and asellus, and Cl. Gay’s Fl. du Chili adds, without much explanation, Ph. Cumingii, Bentham.

[1712] A. de Candolle, GÉog. Bot. Rais., p. 691.

[1713] Tournefort ElÉments (1694), i. p. 328; Instit., p. 415.

[1714] Durante, Herbario Nuovo, 1585, p. 39; Matthioli ed Valgris, p. 322; Targioni, Dizion. Bot. Ital., i. p. 13.

[1715] FeuillÉe, Hist. des Plan. Medic. du PÉrou, etc., in 4to, 1725, p. 54.

[1716] A. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. Rais., chapter on disjunctive species.

[1717] Ph. bipunctatus, Jacqnin; Ph. inamoenus, LinnÆus; Ph. puberulus, Kunth; Ph. saccharatus, MacFadyen; etc., etc.

[1718] Bentham, in Fl. Brasil., vol. xv. p. 181.

[1719] Roxburgh, Piddington, etc.

[1720] Royle, Ill. Himalaya, p. 190.

[1721] AufÄzhlung, etc., p. 257.

[1722] Oliver. Fl. of Trop. Afr., p. 192.

[1723] Wittmack, Sitz. Bot. Vereins Branden., Dec. 19, 1879.

[1724] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind. edit. 1832, vol. iii. p. 299; Aitchison, Catal. of Punjab, p. 48; Sir J. Hooker, Fl. of Brit. Ind., ii. p. 202.

[1725] Sir J. Hooker, Fl. of Brit. Ind., ii. p. 201.

[1726] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., p. 299.

[1727] Schweinfurth, Beitr. z. Fl. Ethiop., p. 15; AufzÄhlung, p. 257; Oliver, Fl. Trop. Afr., p. 194.

[1728] See authors quoted for P. tribolus.

[1729] Sir J. Hooker, Fl. Brit. Ind., ii. p. 209; Junghuhn, PlantÆ Jungh., fasc. ii. p. 240.

[1730] Baker, Fl. of Mauritius, p. 83.

[1731] Oliver, Fl. of Trop. Africa, ii. p. 210.

[1732] Forskal, Descript., p. 133; Delile, Plant. Cult. en Égypte, p. 14.

[1733] Schweinfurth and Ascherson, AufzÄhlung, p. 256.

[1734] Dict. FranÇ.-BerbÈre, at the word haricot; Willkomm and Lange, Prod. Fl. Hisp., iii. p. 324. The common haricot has no less than five different names in the Iberian peninsula.

[1735] Piddington, Index.

[1736] Lenz, Bot. der Alt. Gr. und RÖm., p. 732.

[1737] Langkavel, Bot. der SpÄteren Griechen, p. 4; Heldreich, Nutzpfl. Griechenl., p. 72.

[1738] Sir J. Hooker, Flora of Brit. Ind., ii. p. 205; Miquel, Fl. Indo-Batava, i. p. 175.

[1739] LinnÆus, junr., Decad., ii. pl. 19, seems to have confounded this plant with Arachis, and he gives, perhaps because of this error, Voandzeia as cultivated at his time in Surinam. Modern writers on America either have not seen it or have omitted to mention it.

[1740] Gardener’s Chronicle, Sept. 4, 1880.

[1741] Loureiro, Fl. Cochin., ii. p. 523.

[1742] Guillemin, Perottet, Richard, Fl. Senegambia Tentamen, p. 254.

[1743] AufzÄhlung, p. 259.

[1744] Maximowicz, PrimitiÆ Fl. Amur., p. 236.

[1745] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., iii. 517.

[1746] Meissner, in De Candolle, Prodr., xiv. p. 143.

[1747] Bretschneider, On Study, etc., p. 9.

[1748] Madden, Trans. Edinburgh Bot. Soc., v. p. 118.

[1749] The English name buckwheat and the French name of some localities, buscail, come from the German.

[1750] Boissier, Fl. Orient.; Buhse and Boissier, Pflanzen Transcaucasien.

[1751] Pritzel, Sitzungsbericht Naturforsch. freunde zu Berlin, May 15, 1866.

[1752] Reynier, Économie des Celtes, p. 425.

[1753] I have given the vernacular names at greater length in GÉogr. Bot. Rais., p. 953.

[1754] Nemnich, Polyglott. Lexicon, p. 1030; Bosc, Dict. d’Agric., xi. p. 379.

[1755] Franchet and Savatier, Enum. Pl. Japon., i. p. 403.

[1756] Royle, Ill. Himal., p. 317.

[1757] Gmelin, Flora Sibirica, iii. p. 64; Ledebour, Fl. Rossica, iii. p. 576.

[1758] Maximowicz, PrimitiÆ; Regel, Opit. Flori, etc.; Schmidt, Reisen in Amur, do not mention it.

[1759] Royle, Ill. Himal., p. 317; Madden, Trans. Bot. Soc. Edin., v. p. 118.

[1760] Roth, Catalecta Botanica, i. p. 48.

[1761] Don, Prodr. Fl. Nepal., p. 74.

[1762] Molina, Hist. Nat. du Chili, p. 101.

[1763] Moquin, in De Candolle, Prodromus, xiii. part 1, p. 67.

[1764] A. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. Rais., p. 952.

[1765] Bon Jardinier, 1880, p. 562.

[1766] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., edit. 2, vol. iii. p. 609; Wight, Icones, pl. 720; Aitchison, Catalogue of Punjab Plants, p. 130.

[1767] Madden, Trans. Edin. Bot. Soc., v. p. 118.

[1768] Don, Prodr. Fl. Nepal, p. 76.

[1769] Wallich, List, No. 6903; Moquin, in D. C., Prodr., xiii. sect. 2, p. 256.

[1770] For further details, see my article in Prodromus, vol. xvi. part 2, p. 114; and Boissier, Flora Orientalis, iv. p. 1175.

[1771] Pliny, Hist. Nat., lib. xix. c. 23.

[1772] Olivier de Serres, ThÉÂtre de l’Agric., p. 114.

[1773] Lyons marrons now come chiefly from DauphinÉ and Vivarais. Some are also obtained from Luc in the department of Var (Gasparin, TraitÉ d’Agric., iv. p. 744).

[1774] Targioni, Cenni Storici, p. 180.

[1775] Vilmorin, Essai d’un Catalogue MÉthodique et Synonymique des Froments, Paris, 1850.

[1776] The best drawings of the different kinds of wheat may be found in Metzger’s EuropÆische Cerealien, in folio, Heidelberg, 1824; and in Host. GraminÆ, in folio, vol. iii.

[1777] Tessier, Dict. d’Agric., vi. p. 198.

[1778] Loiseleur Deslongchamps, Consid. sur les CÉrÉales, 1 vol. in 8vo, p. 219.

[1779] These questions have been discussed with learning and judgment by four authors: Link, Ueber die Ältere Geschichte der Getreide Arten, in Abhandl. der Berlin Akad., 1816, vol. xvii. p. 122; 1826, p. 67; and in Die Urwelt und das Alterthum, 2nd edit., Berlin, 1834, p. 399; Reynier, Économie des Celtes et des Germains, 1818, p. 417; Dureau de la Malle, Ann. des Sciences Nat., vol. ix. 1826; and Loiseleur Deslongchamps, Consid. sur les CÉrÉales, 1812, part i. p. 52.

[1780] Heer, Pflanzen der Pfahlbauten, p. 13, pl. 1, figs. 14-18.

[1781] Sordelli, Sulle piante della torbiera di Lagozza, p. 31.

[1782] Heer, ibid.; Sordelli, ibid.

[1783] Nyari, quoted by Sordelli, ibid.

[1784] Bretschneider, Study and Value, etc., pp. 7 and 8.

[1785] Bretschneider, Study and Value, etc.; Ad. Pictet, Les Origines Indo-Euro., edit. 2, vol. i. p. 328; RosenmÜller, Bibl. Naturgesch., i. p. 77; Pickering, Chronol. Arrang., p. 78; Webb and Berthelot, Canaries, Ethnogr., p. 187; D’Abadie, Notes MSS. sur les Noms Basques; De Charencey, Recherches sur les Noms Basques, in Actes Soc. Philolog., March, 1869.

[1786] Nemnich, Lexicon, p. 1492.

[1787] G. Syncelli, Chronogr., fol. 1652, p. 28.

[1788] Strabo, edit. 1707, vol. ii. p. 1017.

[1789] Ibid., vol. i. p. 124; ii. p. 776.

[1790] Lib. ix. v. 109.

[1791] Diodorus, Terasson’s trans., ii. pp. 186, 190.

[1792] Bretschneider, ibid., p. 15.

[1793] Parlatore, Fl. Ital., i. pp. 46, 568. His assertion is the more worthy of attention that he was a Sicilian.

[1794] Strobl, in Flora, 1880, p. 348.

[1795] Inzenga, Annali Agric. Sicil.

[1796] Bull. de la Soc. Bot. de France, 1854, p. 108.

[1797] J. Gay, Bull. Soc. Bot. de France, 1860, p. 30.

[1798] Olivier, Voy. dans l’Emp. Othoman (1807), vol. iii. p. 460.

[1799] LinnÆus, Sp. Plant., edit. 2, vol. i. p. 127.

[1800] Bunge, Bull. Soc. Bot. France, 1860, p. 29.

[1801] De Candolle, Physiologie Botanique, ii. p. 696.

[1802] Unger, Die Pflanzen des Alten Ægyptens, p. 31.

[1803] See RosenmÜller, Bibl. Naturgesch.; and LÖw, Aramaische Pflanzen Namen, 1881.

[1804] Delile, Pl. Cult, en Égypte, p. 3; Fl. Ægypt. Illus., p. 5.

[1805] Dict. Fr.-Berb., published by the Government.

[1806] Heer, Pflanzen der Pfahlbauten, p. 5, fig. 4; p. 52, fig. 20.

[1807] Messicommer, in Flora, 1869, p. 320.

[1808] Quoted from Sordelli, Notizie sull. Lagozza, p. 32.

[1809] Heer, ubi supra, p. 50.

[1810] Heldreich, Die Nutzpflanzen Griechenlands, p. 5.

[1811] Pliny, Hist., lib. xviii. cap. 10.

[1812] Koch, LinnÆa, xxi. p. 427.

[1813] Letter from Ascherson, 1881.

[1814] Dict. MS. of Vernacular Names.

[1815] Debeaux, Catal. des Plan. de Boghar, p. 110.

[1816] Delile says (ubi supra) that wheat is called qamh, and a red variety qamh-ahmar.

[1817] Nemnich, Lexicon, p. 1488.

[1818] Alefeld, Bot. Zeitung, 1865, p. 9.

[1819] H. Vilmorin, Bull. Soc. Bot. de France, 1881, p. 356.

[1820] Journal, Flora, 1835, p. 4.

[1821] See the plates of Metzger and Host, in the works previously quoted.

[1822] Essai d’un Catal. Method. des Froments, Paris, 1850.

[1823] Seringe, Monogr. des CÉrÉ. de la Suisse, in 8vo, Berne, 1818.

[1824] Fraas, Syn. Fl. Class., p. 307; Lenz, Bot. der Alten, p. 257.

[1825] Dioscorides, Mat. Med., ii., 111-115.

[1826] Pliny, Hist., lib. xviii. cap. 7; Targioni, Cenni Storici, p. 6.

[1827] Heer, Pflanzen der Pfahlbauten, p. 6; Unger, Pflanzen des Alten Ægyptens, p. 32.

[1828] Delile, Pl. Cult, en Égypte, p. 5.

[1829] Reynier, Écon. des Égyptiens, p. 337; Dureau de la Malle, Ann. Sc. Nat., ix. p. 72; Schweinfurth and Ascherson, AufzÄh. Tr. spelta of Forskal is not admitted by any subsequent author.

[1830] GÉogr. Bot. Rais., p. 933.

[1831] Exod. ix. 32; Isa. xxviii. 25; Ezek. iv. 9.

[1832] RosenmÜller, Bibl. Alterth., iv. p. 83; Second, Trans, of Old Test., 1874.

[1833] Ad. Pictet, Orig. Indo-Europ., edit. 2, vol. i. p. 348.

[1834] Ad. Pictet, ibid.; Nemnich., Lexicon.

[1835] Willkomm and Lange, Prodr. Fl. Hisp., i. p. 107.

[1836] Olivier, Voyage, 1807, vol. iii. p. 460.

[1837] Lamarck, Dict. Encycl., ii. p. 560.

[1838] H. Vilmorin, Bull. Soc. Bot. de France, 1881, p. 858.

[1839] Heer, Pflanz. der. Pfahlb., p. 5, fig. 23, and p. 15.

[1840] Fraas, Syn. Fl. Class., p. 307.

[1841] Dioscorides, Mat. Med., 2, c. iii. 155.

[1842] Heldreich, Nutz. Griech.

[1843] Bieberstein, Fl. Tauro-Caucasaica, vol. i. p. 85.

[1844] Steven, Verzeichniss Taur. Halbins. Pflan., p. 354.

[1845] Bull. Soc. Bot. Fran., 1860, p. 30.

[1846] Boissier, Diagnoses, 1st series, vol. ii. fasc. 13, p. 69.

[1847] Balansa, 1854, No. 137 in Boissier’s Herbarium, in which there is also a specimen found in the fields in Servia, and a variety with brown beards sent by Pancic, growing in Servian meadows. The same botanist (of Belgrade) has just sent me wild specimens from Servia, which I cannot distinguish from T. monococcum, which he assures me is not cultivated in Servia. Bentham writes to me that T. boeoticum, of which he saw several specimens, is, he thinks, the same as T. monococcum.

[1848] Bretschneider, On the Study, etc., p. 8.

[1849] A specimen determined by Reuter in Boissier’s Herbarium.

[1850] Figari and de Notaris, AgrostologiÆ Ægypt. Fragm., p. 18.

[1851] A very starved plant gathered by Kotschy, No. 290, of which I possess a specimen. Boissier terms it H. distichon, varietas.

[1852] C. A. Meyer, Verzeichniss, p. 26, from specimens seen also by Ledebour, Fl. Ross., iv. p. 327.

[1853] Ledebour, ibid.

[1854] Regel, Descr. Plant., Nov., 1881, fasc. 8, p. 37.

[1855] Willdenow, Sp. Plant., i. p. 473.

[1856] Theophrastus, Hist. Plant., lib. viii. cap. 4.

[1857] Heer, Pflanzen der Pfahlbauten, p. 13; Messicommer, Flora Bot. Zeitung, 1869, p. 320.

[1858] Theophrastus, Hist., lib. viii. cap. 4.

[1859] Willdenow, Species Plant., i. p. 472.

[1860] Unger, Pflanzen des Alten Egyptens, p. 33; Ein Ziegel der Dashur Pyramide, p. 109.

[1861] Heer, Pflanzen der Pfahlbauten, p. 5, figs. 2 and 3; p. 13, fig. 9; Flora Bot. Zeitung, 1869, p. 320; de Mortillet, according to Perrin, Études prÉhistoriques sur la Savoie, p. 23; Sordelli, Sulle piante della torbiera di Lagozza, p. 33.

[1862] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., edit. 1832, vol. i. p. 358.

[1863] Ad. Pictet, Origines Indo-Europ., edit. 2, vol. i. p. 333.

[1864] Bretschneider, On Study and Value, etc., pp. 18, 44.

[1865] Pliny, Hist., lib. xviii. c. 16.

[1866] Galen, De Alimentis, lib. xiii., quoted by Lenz, Bot. de Alten, p. 259.

[1867] Heer, Die Pflanzen der Pfahlbauten, p. 16.

[1868] Ad. Pictet, Origines Indo-Europ., edit. 2, vol. i. p. 344.

[1869] Nemnich, Lexicon Naturgesch.

[1870] Ad. Pictet, ubi supra.

[1871] Secale fragile, Bieberstein; S. anatolicum, Boissier; S. montanum, Gussone; S. villosum, LinnÆus. I explained in my GÉogr. Botanique, p. 936, the errors which result from this confusion, when rye was said to be wild in Sicily, Crete, and sometimes in Russia.

[1872] Flora, Bot. Zeitung, 1856, p. 520.

[1873] Flora, Bot. Zeitung, 1869, p. 93.

[1874] Kunth, Enum., i. p. 449.

[1875] Sadler, Fl. Pesth., i. p. 80; Host, Fl. Austr., i. p. 177; Baumgarten, Fl. Transylv., p. 225; Neilreich, Fl. Wien., p. 58; Viviani, Fl. Dalmat., i. p. 97; Farkas, Fl. Croat., p. 1288.

[1876] Strobl saw it, however, in the woods on the slopes of Etna, a result of its introduction into cultivation in the eighteenth century (Œster. Bot. Zeit., 1881, p. 159).

[1877] Schweinfurth and Ascherson, Beitrage zur Fl. Æthiop., p. 298.

[1878] Royle, Ill., p. 419.

[1879] Bretschneider, On Study and Value, etc., pp. 18, 44.

[1880] Fraas, Syn. Fl. Class., p. 303; Lenz, Bot. der Alten, p. 243.

[1881] Pliny, Hist., lib. xviii. cap. 17.

[1882] Galen, De Alimentis, lib. i. cap. 12.

[1883] Heer, Pflanzen der Pfahlbauten, p. 6, fig. 24.

[1884] Lenz, Bot. der Alten, p. 245.

[1885] Ad. Pictet, Orig. Indo.-Europ., edit. 2, vol. i. p. 350.

[1886] Notes communicated by M. Clos.

[1887] Ad. Pictet, ubi supra.

[1888] Nemnich, Polyglott. Lexicon, p. 548.

[1889] Dict. Fr.-BerbÈre, published by the French Government.

[1890] LinnÆus, Species, p. 118; Lamarck, Dict. Enc., i. p. 431.

[1891] Phillips, Cult. Veget., ii. p. 4.

[1892] Munby, Catal. Alger., edit. 2, p. 36; Franchet and Savatier, Enum. Pl. Jap., ii. p. 175; Cosson, Fl. Paris, ii. p. 637; Bunge, Enum. Chin., p. 71, for the variety nuda.

[1893] Lamarck, Dict. Encycl., i. p. 331.

[1894] Viviani, Fl. Dalmat., i. p. 69; Host, Fl. Austr., i. p. 138; Neilreich, Fl. Wien., p. 85; Baumgarten, Enum. Transylv., iii. p. 259; Farkas, Fl. Croatica, p. 1277.

[1895] Bentham, Handbook of British Flora, edit. 4, p. 544.

[1896] The passages from Theophrastus, Cato, and others, are translated in Lenz, Botanik der Alten, p. 232.

[1897] Heer. Pflanzen der Pfahlbauten, p. 17.

[1898] Regazzoni. Riv. Arch. Prov. di Como, 1880, fasc. 7.

[1899] Unger, Pflanzen des Alten Ægyptens, p. 34.

[1900] Bretschneider, Study and Value of Chinese Botanical Works, pp. 7, 8, 45.

[1901] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., edit. 1832, p. 310; Piddington, Index.

[1902] RosenmÜller, Bibl. Alterth.; Dict. FranÇ.-BerbÈre.

[1903] Delile, Fl. Ægypt., p. 3; Forskal, Fl. Arab., civ.

[1904] Ad. Pictet, Origines Indo-EuropÉennes, edit. 2, vol. i. p. 351.

[1905] Ibid.

[1906] LinnÆus, Spec. Plant., i. p. 86.

[1907] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., edit. 1832, p. 310; Aitchison, Cat. of Punjab Pl., p. 159.

[1908] Bunge, Enum., No. 400.

[1909] Maximowicz, Primitioe Amur., p. 330.

[1910] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., iv. p. 469.

[1911] Hohenacker, Plant. Talysch., p. 13.

[1912] Steven, Verzeich. Halb. Taur., p. 371.

[1913] Mutel, Fl. FranÇ., iv. p. 20; Parlatore, Fl. Ital., i. p. 122; Viviani, Fl. Damat., i. p. 60; Neilreich, Fl. Nied. Œsterr., p. 32.

[1914] Heldreich, Nutz. Griechenl., p. 3; Pflanz. Attisch. Ebene., p. 516.

[1915] M. Ascherson informs me in a letter that in his AufzÄhlung the word cult. has been omitted by mistake after Panicum miliaceum.

[1916] Forskal, Fl. Arab., p. civ.

[1917] Bretschneider, Study and Value, etc., pp. 7, 8.

[1918] Bretschneider, ibid.

[1919] According to Unger, Pflanz, d. Alt. Ægypt., p. 34.

[1920] Heer, Pflanzen d. Pfahlbaut., p. 5, fig. 7; p. 17, figs. 28, 29; Perrin, Études PrÉhistoriques sur la Savoie, p. 22.

[1921] Heldreich, Nutzpfl. Griech.

[1922] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., edit. 1832, vol. i. p. 302; Rumphius, Amboin., v. p. 202, t. 75.

[1923] Roxburgh, ibid.

[1924] Ainslie, Mat. Med. Ind., i. p. 226.

[1925] “Obeurrit in Baleya,” etc. (Rumphius, v. p. 202).

[1926] “Habitat in Indiis” (LinnÆus, Species, i. p. 83).

[1927] Aitchison, Catal. of Punjab Pl., p. 162.

[1928] Bentham, Flora Austral., vii. p. 493.

[1929] Franchet and Savatier, Enum. Japon., ii. p. 262.

[1930] Bunge, Enum., No. 399; Maximowicz, PrimitiÆ Amur., p. 330.

[1931] Buhse, AufzÄhlung, p. 232.

[1932] See Parlatore, Fl. Ital., i. p. 113; Mutel, Fl. FranÇ., iv. p. 20, etc.

[1933] Delile, Plantes Cult. en Égypte, p. 7; Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., edit. 1832, vol. i. p. 269; Aitchison, Catal. of Punjab Pl., p. 175; Bretschneider, Study and Value, etc., p. 9.

[1934] Pliny, Hist., lib. xviii. c. 7.

[1935] Quoted by Unger, Die Pflanzen des Alten Egyptens, p. 34.

[1936] S. Birch, in Wilkinson, Man. and Cust. of Anc. Egyptians, 1878, vol. ii. p. 427.

[1937] Lepsius’ drawings are reproduced by Unger and by Wilkinson.

[1938] Ezek. iv. 9.

[1939] Brown, Bot. of Congo, p. 544.

[1940] Schmidt, BeitrÄge zur Flora Capverdischen Inseln, p. 158.

[1941] See Host, GraminÆ AustriacÆ, vol. iv. pl. 4.

[1942] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., edit. 2, vol. i. p. 271; Rumphius, Amboin., v. p. 194, pl. 75, fig. 1; Miquel, Fl. Indo-Batava, iii. p. 503; Bretschneider, Study and Value, etc., pp. 9, 46; Loureiro, Fl. Cochin., ii. p. 792.

[1943] Forskal, Delile, Schweinfurth, and Ascherson, ubi supra.

[1944] Herodotus, lib. i. cap. 193.

[1945] Pliny, Hist., lib. xviii. cap. 7. This may also be the variety or species known as bicolor.

[1946] W. Hooker, Niger Flora.

[1947] Schweinfurth and Ascherson, AufzÄhlung, p. 299.

[1948] Bon Jardinier, 1880, p. 585.

[1949] Franchet and Savatier, Enum. Plant. Japon., ii. p. 172.

[1950] Bon Jardinier, ibid.

[1951] Roxburgh, Fl. Indica, edit. 2, vol. i. p. 343.

[1952] Boyle, Ill. Him. Plants.

[1953] Thwaites, Enum. Pl. Zeylan., p. 371

[1954] Several synonyms and the Arabic name in LinnÆus, Delile, etc., apply to Dactyloctenium Ægyptiacum, Willdenow, or Eleusine Ægyptiaca of some authors, which is not cultivated.

[1955] Fresenius, Catal. Sem. Horti. Francof., 1834, Beitr. z. Fl. Abyss., p. 141.

[1956] Stanislas Julien, in Loiseleur, Consid. sur les CÉrÉales, part i. p. 29; Bretschneider, Study and Value of Chinese Botanical Works, pp. 8 and 9.

[1957] Loureiro, Fl. Cochin., i. p. 267.

[1958] Piddington, Index; Hehn, Culturpflanzen, edit. 3, p. 437.

[1959] Theophrastus, Hist., lib. iv. cap. 4, 10.

[1960] Strabo, GÉographie, Tardieu’s translation, lib. xv. cap. 1, § 18; lib. xv. cap. 1. § 53.

[1961] Reynier, Économie des Arabes et des Juifs (1820), p. 450; Économie Publique et Rurale des Égyptiens et des Carthaginois (1823), p. 324.

[1962] Unger mentions none; Birch, in 1878, furnishes a note to Wilkinson’s Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, ii. p. 402, “There is no proof of the cultivation of rice, of which no grains have been found.”

[1963] Reynier, ibid.

[1964] Targioni, Cenni Storici.

[1965] Crawfurd, in Journal of Botany, 1866, p. 324.

[1966] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., edit. 1832, vol. ii. p. 200.

[1967] Aitchinson, Catal. Punjab., p. 157.

[1968] Nees, in Martius, Fl. Brasil., in 8vo, ii. p. 518; Baker, Fl. of Mauritius, p. 458.

[1969] Von Mueller writes to me that rice is certainly wild in tropical Australia. It may have been accidentally sown, and have become naturalized.—Author’s note, 1884.

[1970] Bonafous, Hist. Nat. Agric. et Économique du MaÏs, 1 vol. in folio, Paris and Turin. 1836.

[1971] A. de Candolle, BibliothÈque Universelle de GenÈve, Aug. 1836, GÉogr. Bot. Rais., p. 942.

[1972] Molinari, Storia d’Incisa, Asti, 1816.

[1973] Riant, La Charte d’Incisa, 8vo pamphlet, 1877, reprinted from the Revue des Questions Historiques.

[1974] Ruellius, De Natura Stirpium, p. 428, “Hanc quoniam nostrorum Ætate e GrÆcia vel Asia venerit Turcicum frumentum nominant.” Fuchsius, p. 824, repeats this phrase in 1543.

[1975] Tragus, Stirpium, etc., edit. 1552, p. 650.

[1976] Dodoens, Pemptades, p. 509; Camerarius, Hort., p. 94; Matthiole, edit. 1570, p. 305.

[1977] P. Martyr, Ercilla, Jean de Lery, etc., 1516-1578.

[1978] Hernandez, Thes. Mexic., p. 242.

[1979] LasÈgue, MusÉe Delessert, p. 467.

[1980] FÉe, Souvenirs de la Guerre d’Espagne, p. 128.

[1981] BibliothÈque Orientale, Paris, 1697, at the word Rous.

[1982] Kunth, Ann. Sc. Nat., sÉr. 1, vol. viii. p. 418; Raspail, ibid.; Unger, Pflanzen des Alten Ægyptens; A. Braun, Pflanzenreste Ægypt. Mus. in Berlin; Wilkinson, Manners and Customs of Ancient Egyptians.

[1983] Forskal, p. liii.

[1984] Crawfurd, History of the Indian Archipelago, Edinburgh, 1820, vol. i., Journal of Botany, 1866, p. 326.

[1985] Roxburgh, Flora Indica, edit. 1832, vol. iii. p. 568.

[1986] Bretschneider, Study and Value, etc., pp. 7, 18.

[1987] Ibid.

[1988] The article is in the Pharmaceutical Journal of 1870; I only know it from a short extract in Seemann’s Journal of Botany, 1871, p. 62.

[1989] Rumphius, Amboin., vol. v. p. 525.

[1990] Malte-Brun, GÉographie, i. p. 493.

[1991] A plant engraved on an ancient weapon which Siebold had taken for maize is a sorghum, according to Rein, quoted by Wittmack, Ueber Antiken MaÏs.

[1992] See Martius, BeitrÄge zur Ethnographie Amerikas, p. 127.

[1993] Darwin, Var. of Plants and Anim. under Domest., i. p. 320.

[1994] A. de Saint-Hilaire, Ann. Sc. Nat., xvi. p. 143.

[1995] Lindley, Journ. of the Hortic. Soc., i. p. 114.

[1996] I quote these facts from Wittmack, Ueber Antiken MaÏs aus Nord und Sud Amerika, p. 87, in Berlin Anthropol. Ges., Nov. 10, 1879.

[1997] Rochebrune, Recherches Ethnographiques sur les SÉpultures PÉruviennes d’Ancon, from an extract by Wittmack in Uhlworm, Bot. Central-Blatt., 1880, p. 1633, where it may be seen that the burial-ground was used before and after the discovery of America.

[1998] Sagot, Cult. des CÉrÉales de la Guyane FranÇ. (Journ. de la Soc. Centr. d’Hortic. de France, 1872, p. 94).

[1999] De Naidaillac, in his work entitled Les Premiers Hommes et les Temps PrÉhistoriques, gives briefly the sum of our knowledge of these migrations of the ancient peoples of America in general. See especially vol. ii. chap. 9.

[2000] De Naidaillac, ii. p. 69, who quotes Bancroft, The Native Races of the Pacific States.

[2001] Willkomm and Lange., Prodr. Fl. Hisp., iii. p. 872.

[2002] Boissier, Fl. Orient.; Tchihatcheff, Asie Mineure; Ledebour, Fl. Ross., and others.

[2003] Heer, Pflanzen der Pfahlbauten, p. 32, figs. 65, 66.

[2004] De Lanessan, in his translation from FlÜckiger and Hanbury, Histoire des Drogues d’Origine VÉgÉtale, i. p. 129.

[2005] Dioscorides, Hist. Plant., lib. iv. c. 65.

[2006] Pliny, Hist. Plant., lib. xx. c. 18.

[2007] Unger, Die Pflanze als Errerungs und BetaÜbungsmittel, p. 47; Die Pflanzen des Alten Ægyptens, i. p. 50.

[2008] Ebn Baithar, German trans., i. p. 64.

[2009] Ad. Pictet, Origines Indo-EuropÉennes, edit. 3, vol. i. p. 366.

[2010] Ainslie, Mat. Med. Indica, i. p. 326.

[2011] Nemnich, Polygl. Lexicon, p. 848.

[2012] Martin, in Bull. Soc. d’Acclimatation, 1872, p. 200.

[2013] Sir J. Hooker, Flora of Brit. Ind., i. p. 117; Bretschneider, Study and Value, etc., 47.

[2014] Ebn Baithar, i. p. 64.

[2015] FlÜckiger and Hanbury, Pharmacographia, p. 40.

[2016] Barbosa’s work was published in 1516.

[2017] Hughes, Trade Report, quoted by FlÜckiger and Hanbury.

[2018] Sloane, Jamaica, ii. p. 53.

[2019] Sloane, ibid.; Clos, Ann. Sc. Nat., 4th. series, vol. viii. p. 260; Grisebach, Fl. of Brit. W. Ind. Is., p. 20.

[2020] Seemann, Bot. of Herald., pp. 79, 268; Triana and Planchon, Prodr. Fl. Novo-Granat., p. 94; Meyer, Essequebo, p. 202; Piso, Hist. Nat. Brasil, edit. 1648, p. 65; Claussen, in Clos, ubi supra.

[2021] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., ii. p. 581; Oliver, Fl. Trop. Africa, i. p. 114.

[2022] GÉogr. Bot. Rais., p. 971.

[2023] Parlatore, Le Specie dei Cotoni, text in 4to, plates in folio, Florence, 1866.

[2024] Todaro, Relazione della Coltura dei Cotoni in Italia, segnita da una Monographia del Genere Gossypium, text large 8vo, plates in folio, Rome and Palermo, 1877-78; a work preceded by several others of less importance, which were known to Parlatore.

[2025] Masters, in Oliver, Fl. Trop. Afr., i. p. 210; and in Sir J. Hooker, Fl. Brit. Ind., i. p. 346.

[2026] Kurz, Forest Flora of British Burmah, i. p. 129.

[2027] Piddington, Index.

[2028] Theophrastus, Hist. Plant., lib. iv. cap. 5.

[2029] Ibid., lib. iv. cap. 9.

[2030] Bretschneider, Study and Value, etc., p. 7.

[2031] Pausanias, lib. v., cap. 5; lib. vi. cap. 26; Pliny, lib. xix. cap. 1. See Brandes, Baumwolle, p. 96.

[2032] C. Ritter, Die Geographische Verbreitung der Baumwolle, p. 25.

[2033] It is impossible not to remark the resemblance between this name and that of flax in Arabic, kattan or kittan; it is an example of the confusion which takes place in names where there is an analogy between the products.

[2034] De Lasteyrie, Du Cotonnier, p. 290.

[2035] Torrey and Asa Gray, Flora of North America, i. p. 230; Darlington, Agricultural Botany, p. 16.

[2036] Schouw, Naturschilderungen, p. 152.

[2037] Masters, in Oliver, Fl. Trop. Afr., i. p. 211; Hooker, Fl. of Brit. Ind., i. p. 347; Schweinfurth and Ascherson, AufzÄhlung, p. 265 (under the name Gossypium nigrum); Parlatore, Specie dei Cotoni, p. 25.

[2038] Rosellini, Monumenti dell’ Egizia, p. 2; Mon. Civ., i. p. 60.

[2039] Parlatore, Specie dei Cotoni, p. 16.

[2040] Pliny, Hist. Plant., lib. xix. cap. 1.

[2041] Pollux, Onomasticon, quoted by C. Ritter, ubi supra, p. 26.

[2042] Reynier, Économie des Arabes et des Juifs., p. 363; Bertoloni, Noc. Act. Acad. Bonon., ii. p. 213, and Miscell. Bot., 6; Viviani, in Bibl. Ital., vol. lxxxi. p. 94; C. Ritter, GÉogr. Verbreitung der Baumwolle, in 4to.; Targioni, Cenni Storici, p. 93; Brandis, Der Baumwolle in Alterthum, in 8vo. 1880.

[2043] Masters, in Oliver, Flora of Trop. Africa, i. p. 322; and in Hooker, Flora of Brit. India, i. p. 347.

[2044] He says, for instance, of Gossypium herbaceum, which is certainly of the old world, as facts known before his time show, “habitat in America.”

[2045] Nascitur in calidis humidisque cultis prÆcipue locis (Hernandez, NovÆ HispaniÆ Thesaurus, p. 308).

[2046] Hemsley, Biologia Centrali-Americana, i. p. 123.

[2047] Macfadyen, Flora of Jamaica, p. 72.

[2048] Grisebach, Flora of Brit. W. India Is., p. 86.

[2049] Triana and Planchon, Prodr. Fl. Novo-Granatensis, p. 170.

[2050] The MalvaceÆ have not yet appeared in the Flora Brasiliensis.

[2051] Cl. Gay, Flora Chilena, i. p. 312.

[2052] The Gardener’s Chronicle of Sept. 4, 1880, gives details about the cultivation of this plant, the use of its seeds, and the extensive exportation of them from the west coast of Africa, Brazil, and India to Europe.

[2053] A. de Candolle, GÉographie Botanique RaisonnÉe, p. 962.

[2054] LinnÆus, Species Plantarum, p. 1040.

[2055] R. Brown, Botany of Congo, p. 53.

[2056] Bentham, in Trans. Linn. Soc., xviii. p. 159; Walpers, Repertorium, i. p. 727.

[2057] Maregraf and Piso, Brasil., p. 37, edit. 1648.

[2058] Ibid., edit. 1638, p. 256.

[2059] Acosta, Hist. Nat. Ind., French, trans., 1598, p. 165.

[2060] Aublot, Pl. Guyan, p. 765.

[2061] Sloane, Jamaica, p. 184.

[2062] Guillemin and Perrottet, Fl. Senegal.

[2063] Loureiro, Fl. Cochin.

[2064] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., iii. p. 280; Piddington, Index.

[2065] Rumphius, Herb. Amb., v. p. 426.

[2066] Rochebrune, from the extract in the Botanisches Centralblatt, 1880, p. 1634.

[2067] Study and Value of Chinese Botanical Works, p. 18.

[2068] Grisebach, Fl. Brit. W. Ind. Is., p. 189.

[2069] Richard, Tentamen Fl. Abyss., i. p. 349; Oliver, Fl. Trop. Afr., iii. p. 180.

[2070] Ritter, quoted in Flora, 1846, p. 704.

[2071] Meyen, GÉogr. Bot., English trans., p. 384; Grisebach, Fl. of Brit. W. Ind. Is., p. 338.

[2072] H. Welter, Essai sur l’Histoire du CafÉ, 1 vol. in 8vo, Paris, 1868.

[2073] Ellis, An Historical Account of Coffee, 1774.

[2074] Ebn Baithar, Sondtheimer’s trans., 2 vols. 8vo, 1842.

[2075] Bellus, Epist. ad Clus., p. 309.

[2076] Rauwolf, Clusius.

[2077] Rauwolf; Bauhin, Hist., i. p. 422.

[2078] Bellus, ubi supra.

[2079] Richard, Tentamen Fl. Abyss., p. 350.

[2080] An extract from the same author in Playfair, Hist. of Arabia Felix, Bombay, 1859, does not mention this assertion.

[2081] Nouv. Dict. d’Hist. Nat., iv. p. 552.

[2082] Ellis, ubi supra; Nouv. Dict., ibid.

[2083] This detail is borrowed from Ellis, Diss. Caf., p. 16. In the Notices Statistiques sur les Colonies FranÇaises (ii. p. 46) I find: “About 1716 or 1721, fresh seeds of the coffee having been brought secretly from Surinam, in spite of the precautions of the Dutch, the cultivation of this colonial product became naturalized at Cayenne.”

[2084] The name of this sailor has been spelt in several ways—Declieux, Duclieux, Desclieux. From the information supplied me at the ministÈre de la guerre, I learn that de Clieu was a gentleman, and a connection of the Comte de Maurepas. He was born in Normandy, went into the navy in 1702, and retired in 1760, after a distinguished career. He died in 1775. The official reports have not neglected to mention the important fact that he introduced the coffee plant into the French colonies.

[2085] Deleuze, Hist. du MusÉum, i. p. 20.

[2086] Not. Stat. Col. FranÇ., i. p. 30.

[2087] Ibid., i. p. 209.

[2088] Martin, Stat. Col. Brit. Emp.

[2089] Nouv. Dict. Hist. Nat., iv. p. 135.

[2090] Not. Stat. Col. FranÇ., ii. p. 84.

[2091] H. Welter, Essai sur l’Histoire du CafÉ, 1 vol. 8vo, Paris, 1868.

[2092] In Hiern, Trans. Linn. Soc., 2nd series, vol. i. p. 171, pl. 24. This plate is reproduced in the Report of the Royal Botanical Gardens at Kew for 1876.

[2093] Oliver, Fl. Trop. Afr., iii. p. 181.

[2094] Cl. Gay, Fl. Chilena, iv. p. 268.

[2095] Asa Gray, in Watson, Bot. of California, i. p. 359.

[2096] A. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. Rais., p. 1047.

[2097] Rumphius, Amboin., ii. p. 17; Blume, Rhumphia, i. p. 180.

[2098] Roxburgh, Fl. Indica, iii. p. 845.

[2099] Bentham and Hooker, Genera Pl., ii. p. 1059.

[2100] Pickering, Chronol. History of Plants, p. 223; Rumphius, Herb. Amb., v. p. 204; Miquel, Flora Indo-Batava, ii. p. 760; Schweinfurth and Ascherson, AufzÄhlung, p. 273; Grisebach. Fl. Brit. W. Ind. Is., p. 458.

[2101] Blume, Bijdragen, p. 778.

[2102] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., edit. 1832, vol. iii. p. 100; Piddington, Index.

[2103] Thunberg, Fl. Jap., p. 254.

[2104] Bretschneider, letter of Aug. 23, 1801.

[2105] Ibid., On Study, etc., p. 16.

[2106] Theophrastus, lib. viii. cap. 1, 5; Dioscorides, lib. ii. cap. 121; Pliny, Hist., lib. xviii. cap. 10.

[2107] Pliny, Hist., lib. xv. cap. 7.

[2108] Wilkinson, Manners and Customs of Ancient Egyptians, vol. ii.; Unger, Pflanzen des Alten Ægyptens, p. 45.

[2109] Reynier, Écon. Pub. des Arabes et des Juifs, p. 431; LÖw, AramÄeische Pflanzennamen, p. 376.

[2110] E. Meyer, Geschichte der Botanik, iii. p. 75.

[2111] Herodotus, lib. i. cap. 193.

[2112] Thwaites, Enum., p. 209.

[2113] Piso, Brazil., edit. 1658, p. 211.

[2114] Ball, FlorÆ MaroccanÆ Spicilegium, p. 664.

[2115] MÜller, Argov., in D.C., Prodromus, vol. xv. part 2, p. 1017.

[2116] Richard, Tentamen Fl. Abyss., ii. p. 250; Schweinfurth, PlantÆ NiloticÆ a Hartmann, etc., p. 13.

[2117] Schweinfurth and Ascherson, AufzÄhlung, p. 262.

[2118] Forskal, Fl. Arabica, p. 71.

[2119] Boissier, Fl. Orient., iv. p. 1143.

[2120] Rheede, Malabar, ii. p. 57, t. 32.

[2121] Rumphius, Herb. Amb., vol. iv. p. 93.

[2122] Franchet and Savatier, Enum. Japon., i. p. 424.

[2123] Unger, Pflanzen des Alten Ægyptens, p. 61.

[2124] Theophrastus, Hist., lib. i. cap. 19; Dioscorides, lib. iv. cap. 171; Fraas, Syn. Fl Class., p. 92.

[2125] Nemnich, Polyglott. Lexicon; Forskal, Fl. Ægypt., p. 75.

[2126] Jonah iv. 6. Pickering, Chron. His. Plants, p. 225, writes kykwyn.

[2127] FlÜckiger and Haubury, Pharmacographia, p. 511.

[2128] A. de Candolle, Prodr., xvi. part 2, p. 136; Tchihatcheff, Asie Mineure, i. p. 172; Ledebour, Fl. Ross., i. p. 507; Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., iii. p. 630; Boissier, Fl. Orient., iv. p. 1160; Brandis, Forest Flora of N.W. India, p. 498; Kurz, Forest Flora of Brit. Burmah, p. 390.

[2129] C. Koch, Dendrologie, i. p. 584.

[2130] Franchet and Savatier, Enum, Plant. Jap., i. 453.

[2131] Loureiro, Fl. Cochin., p. 702; Bunge, Enum., p. 62.

[2132] Heldreich, Verhandl. Bot. Vereins Brandenb., 1879, p. 147.

[2133] Theophrastus, Hist. Plant., lib. iii. cap. 3, 6. These passages, and others of ancient writers, are quoted and interpreted by Heldreich better than by Hehn and other scholars.

[2134] Heuffel, Abhandl. Zool. Bot. Ges. in Wien, 1853, p. 194.

[2135] De Saporta, 33rd Sess. du Congres Scient. de France.

[2136] Dioscorides, lib. i. cap. 176.

[2137] Pliny, Hist. Plant., lib. xv. cap. 22.

[2138] Pliny, Hist. Plant., lib. xv. cap. 22.

[2139] Heer, Pflanzen der Pfahlbauten, p. 31.

[2140] Sordelli, Sulle piante della torbiera, etc., p. 39.

[2141] Bretschneider, Study and Value, etc., p. 16; and letter of Aug. 23, 1881.

[2142] Ad. Pictet, Origines Indo-Europ., edit. 2, vol. i. p. 289; Hehn, Culturpflanzen und Hausthiere, edit. 3, p. 341.

[2143] Martius, Hist. Nat. Palmarum, in folio, vol. iii. p. 170 (published without date, but before 1851).

[2144] Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., iii. p. 616; Brandis, Forest Fl. of India, p. 551; Kurz, Forest Fl. of Brit. Burmah, p. 537; Thwaites, Enum. Zeylan., p. 327; Loureiro, Fl. Cochin-Ch., p. 695.

[2145] Blume, Rumphia, ii. p. 67; Miquel, Fl. Indo-Batava., iii. p. 9; suppl. de Sumatra, p. 253.

[2146] Bretschneider, Study and Value, etc., p. 28.

[2147] Blanco, Fl. di Filipinas, edit. 2.

[2148] Da Mosto, in Ramusio, i. p. 104, quoted by R. Brown.

[2149] Brown, Bot. of Congo, p. 55.

[2150] Martius, Hist. Nat. Palmarum, ii. p. 62; Drude, in Fl. Brasil., fasc. 85, p. 457. I find no author who asserts that this palm is wild in Guiana, as Martius affirms it to be in Brazil.

[2151] ElÆis melanocarpa, GÆrtner. The fruit also contains oil, but it does not appear that the species is cultivated, as the number of oleaginous plants is considerable in all countries.

[2152] Sloane, Nat. Hist. of Jamaica, ii. p. 113.

[2153] Grisebach, Flora of Brit. W. Ind. Is., p. 522.

[2154] Piso, Brasil., p. 65; Marcgraf, p. 138.

[2155] Martius, Hist. Nat. Palmarum, 3 vols. in folio; see vol. ii. p. 125.

[2156] Aublet, Guyane, suppl., p. 102.

[2157] Sloane, Jamaica, ii. p. 9.

[2158] J. Acosta, Hist. Nat. des Indes, French trans., 1598, p. 178.

[2159] Vafer, Voyage de Dampier, edit. 1705, p. 186; Vancouver, French edit., p. 325, quoted by de Martius, Hist. Nat. Palmarum, i. p. 188.

[2160] Seemann, Bot. of Herald., p. 204.

[2161] Hernandez, Thesaurus Mexic., p. 71. He attributes the same name, p. 75, to the cocoa-nut palm of the Philippine Islands.

[2162] Oviedo, Ramusio’s trans., iii. p. 53.

[2163] A. de Candolle, GÉogr. Bot. RaisonnÉe, p. 976.

[2164] Grisebach, Vegetation der Erde, pp. 11, 323.

[2165] Seemann, Flora Vitiensis, p. 275.

[2166] The cocoa-nut called Maldive belongs to the genus Lodoicea. Coco mamillaris, Blanco, of the Philippines is a variety of the cultivated Cocos nucifera.

[2167] Drude, in Bot. Zeitung, 1876, p. 801; and Flora Brasiliensis, fasc. 85, p. 405.

[2168] Stieler, Hand Atlas, edit. 1867, map 3.

[2169] Stieler, ibid., map 9.

[2170] Grisebach, Flora of Brit. W. Indies, p. 552.

[2171] EugÈne Fournier has indicated to me, for instance, drdapala (with hard fruit), palakecara (with hairy fruit), jalakajka (water-holder), etc.

[2172] Blume, Rumphia, iii. p. 82.

[2173] Forster, De Plantis Esculentis, p. 48; Nadeaud, Enum. des Plantes de Taiti, p. 41.

[2174] Blume, ubi supra.

[2175] Bretschneider, Study and Value, etc., p. 24.

[2176] Seemann, Fl. Vitiensis, p. 276; Pickering, Chronol. Arrangement, p. 428.

[2177] Dr. Bretschneider writes to me from Pekin, Dec. 22, 1882, that the species is mentioned in the Ryd, a work of the year 1100 B.C. I do not know if we must suppose the original habitat to be China or western Asia.

[2178] Essai sur la GÉographie des Plantes, p. 28.

[2179] Counting two or three forms which are perhaps rather very distinct races.

[2180] See the list of the useful plants of Australia by Sir J. Hooker, Flora Tasmania, p. cx.; and Bentham, Flora Australiensis, vii. p. 156.

[2181] The proportions which I give for the Phanerogams collectively are based upon an approximative calculation, made with the aid of the first two hundred pages of Steudel’s Nomenclator. They are justified by the comparison with several floras.

[2182] The species in italics are of very ancient cultivation (A or D), those marked with an asterisk have been less than two thousand years in cultivation (C or F).

[2183] Since this list was printed, I have been informed that the quinoa is wild in Chili. Some of the figures need modification in consequence of this error.

[2184] For reasons which I cannot here express, monotypical genera are for the most part in process of extinction.


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           

Clyx.com


Top of Page
Top of Page