Origin of Cultivated Plants

Chapter II 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 schœnoprasum, 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).

Notes

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, Hœdic 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, Amœn., 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 5^e 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, Primitiœ 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 Dœll, 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, Amœn., 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, Pœppig, 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 Hœfer, Hist. Bot. Minér. et Géol., 1 vol. in 12mo., p. 20; Bonné, Le Caroubier, ou l’Arbre des Lotophages, Algiers, 1869 (quoted by Hœfer). 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. inamœnus, 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. bœoticum, 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, Primitiœ 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.