Origin of Cultivated Plants

Trifolium pratense is wild throughout Europe, in Algeria,[471 - Munby, Catal., edit. 2, p. 11.] on the mountains of Anatolia, in Armenia, and in Turkestan,[472 - Boissier, Fl. Orient., i. p. 115.] in Siberia towards the Altai Mountains,[473 - Ledebour, Fl. Ross., i. p. 548.] and in Kashmir and Garwhall.[474 - Baker, in Hooker’s Fl. of Brit. Ind., ii. p. 86.]

The species existed, therefore, in Asia, in the land of the Aryan nations; but no Sanskrit name is known, whence it may be inferred that it was not cultivated.

Crimson or Italian Clover—Trifolium incarnatum, Linnæus.

An annual plant grown for fodder, whose cultivation, says Vilmorin, long confined to a few of the southern departments, becomes every day more common in France.[475 - Bon Jardinier, 1880, pt. i. p. 618.] De Candolle, at the beginning of the present century, had only seen it in the department of Ariège.[476 - De Candolle, Fl. Franç., iv. p. 528.] It has existed for about sixty years in the neighbourhood of Geneva. Targioni does not think that it is of ancient date in Italy,[477 - Targioni, Cenni Storici, p. 35.] and the trivial name trafoglio strengthens his opinion.

The Catalan fé, fench,[478 - Costa, Intro. Fl. di Catal., p. 60.] and, in the patois of the south of France,[479 - Moritzi, Dict. MS., compiled from floras published before the middle of the present century.]farradje (Roussillon), farratage (Languedoc), feroutgé (Gascony), whence the French name farouch, have, on the other hand, an original character, which indicates an ancient cultivation round the Pyrenees. The term which is sometimes used, “clover of Roussillon,” also shows this.

The wild plant exists in Galicia, in Biscaya, and Catalonia,[480 - Willkomm and Lange, Prodr. Fl. Hisp., iii. p. 366.] but not in the Balearic Isles;[481 - Marès and Virgineix, Catal., 1880.] it is found in Sardinia[482 - Moris, Fl. Sard., i. p. 467.] and in the province of Algiers.[483 - Munby, Catal., edit. 2.] It appears in several localities in France, Italy, and Dalmatia, in the valley of the Danube and Macedonia, but in many cases it is not known whether it may not have strayed from neighbouring cultivation. A singular locality in which it appears to be indigenous, according to English authors, is on the coast of Cornwall, near the Lizard. In this place, according to Bentham, it is the pale yellow variety, which is truly wild on the Continent, while the crimson variety is only naturalized in England from cultivation.[484 - Bentham, Handbook Brit. Fl., edit. 4, p. 117.] I do not know to what degree this remark of Bentham’s as to the wild nature of the sole variety of a yellow colour (var. Molinerii, Seringe) is confirmed in all the countries where the species grows. It is the only one indicated by Moris in Sardinia, and in Dalmatia by Viviani,[485 - Moris, Fl. Sard., i. p. 467; Viviani, Fl. Dalmat., iii. p. 290.] in the localities which appear natural (in pascuis collinis, in montanis, in herbidis). The authors of the Bon Jardinier[486 - Bon Jardinier, 1880, p. 619.] affirm with Bentham that Trifolium Molinerii is wild in the north of France, that with crimson flowers being introduced from the south; and while they admit the absence of a good specific distinction, they note that in cultivation the variety Molinerii is of slower growth, often biennial instead of annual.

Alexandrine or Egyptian Clover—Trifolium Alexandrinum, Linnæus.

This species is extensively cultivated in Egypt as fodder. Its Arab name is bersym or berzun.[487 - Forskal, Fl. Egypt., p. 71; Delile, Plant. Cult. en Egypt., p. 10; Wilkinson, Manners and Customs of Ancient Egyptians, ii. p. 398.] There is nothing to show that it has been long in use; the name does not occur in Hebrew and Armenian botanical works. The species is not wild in Egypt, but it is certainly wild in Syria and Asia Minor.[488 - Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 127.]

Ervilia—Ervum Ervilia, Linnæus; Vicia Ervilia, Willdenow.

Bertoloni[489 - Bertoloni, Fl. It., vii. p. 500.] gives no less than ten common Italian names —ervo, lero, zirlo, etc. This is an indication of an ancient and general culture. Heldreich[490 - Nutzpflanzen Griechenlands, p. 71.] says that the modern Greeks cultivate the plant in abundance as fodder. They call it robai, from the ancient Greek orobos, as ervos comes from the Latin ervum. The cultivation of the species is mentioned by ancient Greek and Latin authors.[491 - See Lenz, Bot. d. Alten, p. 727; Fraas, Fl. Class., p. 54.] The Greeks made use of the seed; for some has been discovered in the excavations on the site of Troy.[492 - Wittmack, Sitzungsber Bot. Vereins Brandenburg, Dec. 19, 1879.] There are a number of common names in Spain, some of them Arabic,[493 - Willkomm and Lange, Prodr. Fl. Hisp., iii. p. 308.] but the species has not been so widely cultivated there for several centuries.[494 - Baker, in Hooker’s Fl. Brit. Ind.] In France it is so little grown that many modern works on agriculture do not mention it. It is unknown in British India.[495 - Herrera, Agricultura, edit. 1819, iv. p. 72.]

General botanical works indicate Ervum Ervilia as growing in Southern Europe, but if we take severally the best floras, it will be seen that it is in such localities as fields, vineyards, or cultivated ground. It is the same in Western Asia, where Boissier[496 - Baker, in Hooker’s Fl. Brit. Ind.] speaks of specimens from Syria, Persia, and Afghanistan. Sometimes, in abridged catalogues,[497 - For instance, Munby, Catal. Plant Algeriæ, edit. 2, p. 12.] the locality is not given, but nowhere do I find it asserted that the plant has been seen wild in places far from cultivation. The specimens in my own herbarium furnish no further proof on this head.

In all likelihood the species was formerly wild in Greece, Italy, and perhaps Spain and Algeria, but the frequency of its cultivation in the very regions where it existed prevent us from now finding the wild stocks.

Tare, or Common Vetch—Vicia sativa, Linnæus.

Vicia sativa is an annual leguminous plant wild throughout Europe, except in Lapland. It is also common in Algeria,[498 - Munby, Catal., edit. 2.] and to the south of the Caucasus as far as the province of Talysch.[499 - Ledebour, Fl. Ross., i. p. 666; Hohenacker, Enum. Plant. Talysch, p. 113; C. A. Meyer, Verzeichniss, p. 147.] Roxburgh pronounces it to be wild in the north-west provinces and in Bengal, but Sir Joseph Hooker admits this only as far as the variety called angustifolia[500 - Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., edit. 1832, iii. p. 323; Hooker, Fl. Brit. Ind., ii. p. 178.] is concerned. No Sanskrit name is known, and in the modern languages of India only Hindu names.[501 - Piddington’s Index gives four.] Targioni believes it to be the ketsach of the Hebrews.[502 - Targioni, Cenni Storici, p. 30.] I have received specimens from the Cape and from California. The species is certainly not indigenous in the two last-named regions, but has escaped from cultivation.

The Romans sowed this plant both for the sake of the seed and as fodder as early as the time of Cato.[503 - Cato, Be re Rustica, edit. 1535, p. 34; Pliny, bk. xviii. c. 15.] I have discovered no proof of a more ancient cultivation. The name vik, whence vicia, dates from a very remote epoch in Europe, for it exists in Albanian,[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).] which is believed to be the language of the Pelasgians, and among the Slav, Swedish, and Germanic nations, with slight modifications. This does not prove that the species was cultivated. It is distinct enough and useful enough to herbivorous animals to have received common names from the earliest times.

Flat-podded Pea—Lathyrus Cicera, Linnæus.

An annual leguminous plant, esteemed as fodder, but whose seed, if used as food in any quantity, becomes dangerous.[505 - Vilmorin, Bon Jardinier, 1880, p. 603.]

It is grown in Italy under the name of mochi.[506 - Targioni, Cenni Storici, p. 31; Bertoloni, Fl. Ital., vii. pp. 444, 447.] Some authors suspect that it is the cicera of Columella and the ervilia of Varro,[507 - Lenz, Botanik. d. Alten, p. 730.] but the common Italian name is very different to these. The species is not cultivated in Greece.[508 - Fraas, Fl. Class.; Heldreich, Nutzflanzen Griechenlands.] It is more or less grown in France and Spain, without anything to show that its use dates from ancient times. However, Wittmack[509 - Wittmack, Sitz. Ber. Bot. Vereins Brandenburg, Dec. 19, 1879.] attributes to it, but doubtfully, some seeds brought by Virchow from the Trojan excavations.

According to the floras, it is evidently wild in dry places, beyond the limits of cultivation in Spain and Italy.[510 - Willkomm and Lange, Prodr. Fl. Hisp., iii. p. 313; Bertoloni, Fl. Ital.] It is also wild in Lower Egypt, according to Schweinfurth and Ascherson;[511 - Schweinfurth and Ascherson, Aufzählung, etc., p. 257.] but there is no trace of ancient cultivation in this country or among the Hebrews. Towards the East its wild character becomes less certain. Boissier indicates the plant “in cultivated ground from Turkey in Europe, and Egypt as far as the south of the Caucasus and Babylon.”[512 - Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 605.] It is not mentioned in India either as wild or cultivated, and has no Sanskrit name.[513 - J. Baker, in Hooker’s Fl. of Brit. Ind.]

The species is probably a native of the region comprised between Spain and Greece, perhaps also of Algeria,[514 - Munby, Catal.] and diffused by a cultivation, not of very ancient date, over Western Asia.

Chickling Vetch—Lathyrus sativus, Linnæus.

An annual leguminous plant, cultivated in the South of Europe, from a very early age, as fodder, and also for the seeds. The Greeks called it lathyros[515 - Theophrastus, Hist. Plant., viii., c. 2, 10.] and the Latins cicercula.[516 - Columella, De rei rustica, ii. c. 10; Pliny, xviii. c. 13, 32.] It is also cultivated in the temperate regions of Western Asia, and even in the north of India;[517 - Roxburgh, Fl. Ind.; Hooker, Fl. Brit. Ind., ii. p. 178.] but it has no Hebrew[518 - Rosenmüller, Handb. Bibl. Alterth., vol. i.] nor Sanskrit name,[519 - Piddington, Index.] which argues a not very ancient cultivation in these regions.

Nearly all the floras of the south of Europe and of Algeria give the plant as cultivated and half-wild, rarely and only in a few localities as truly wild. It is easy to understand the difficulty of recognizing the wild character of a species often mixed with cereals, and which persists and spreads itself after cultivation. Heldreich does not allow that it is indigenous in Greece.[520 - Heldreich, Pflanz. d. Attisch. Ebene, p. 476; Nutzpf. Gr., p. 72.] This is a strong presumption that in the rest of Europe and in Algeria the plant has escaped from cultivation.

It is probable that this was not the case in Western Asia; for authors cite sufficiently wild localities, where agriculture plays a less considerable part than in Europe. Ledebour,[521 - Ledebour, Fl. Ross., i. p. 681.] for instance, mentions specimens gathered in the desert, near the Caspian Sea, and in the province of Lenkoran. Meyer[522 - C. A. Meyer, Verzeichniss, p. 148.] confirms the assertion with respect to Lenkoran. Baker, in his flora of British India, after indicating the species as scattered here and there in the northern provinces, adds, “often cultivated,” whence it may be inferred that he considers it as indigenous, at least in the north. Boissier asserts nothing with regard to the localities in Persia which he mentions in his Oriental flora.[523 - Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 606.]

To sum up, I think it probable that the species was indigenous before cultivation in the region extending from the south of the Caucasus, or of the Caspian Sea, to the north of India, and that it spread towards Europe in the track of ancient cultivation, mixed perhaps with cereals.

Ochrus—Pisum ochrus, Linnæus; Lathyrus ochrus, de Candolle.

Cultivated as an annual fodder in Catalonia, under the name of tapisots,[524 - Willkomm and Lange, Prodr. Fl. Hisp., iii. p. 312.] and in Greece, particularly in the island of Crete, under that of ochros,[525 - Lenz, Bot. d. Alten, p. 730; Heldreich, Nutzpfl. Gr., p. 72.] mentioned by Theophrastus,[526 - Lenz.] but without a word of description. Latin authors do not speak of it, which argues a rare and local cultivation in ancient times.

The species is certainly wild in Tuscany.[527 - Caruel, Fl. Tosc., p. 193; Gussone, Syn. Fl. Sic., edit. 2.] It appears to be wild also in Greece and Sardinia, where it is found in hedges,[528 - Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 602; Moris, Fl. Sard., i. p. 582.] and in Spain, where it grows in uncultivated ground;[529 - Willkomm and Lange, Prodr. Fl. Hisp.] but as for the south of France, Algeria, and Sicily, authors are either silent as to the locality, or mention only fields and cultivated ground. The plant is unknown further east than Syria,[530 - Boissier, Fl. Orient.] where probably it is not wild.

The fine plate published by Sibthorp, Flora Græca, 589, suggests that the species is worthy of more general cultivation.

Trigonel, or Fenugreek– Trigonella fænum-græcum, Linnæus.

The cultivation of this annual leguminous plant was common in ancient Greece and Italy,[531 - Theophrastus, Hist. Plant., viii. c. 8; Columella, De rei rustica, ii. c. 10; Pliny, Hist., xviii. c. 16.] either for spring forage, or for the medicinal properties of its seeds. Abandoned almost everywhere in Europe, and notably in Greece,[532 - Fraas, Syn. Fl. Class., p. 63; Lenz, Bot. der Alten, p. 719.] it is maintained in the East and in India,[533 - Baker, in Hooker’s Fl. Brit. Ind., ii. p. 57.] where it is probably of very ancient date, and throughout the Nile Valley.[534 - Schweinfurth, Beitr. z. Fl. Æthiop., p. 258.] The species is wild in the Punjab and in Kashmir,[535 - Baker, in Hooker’s Fl. Brit. Ind.] in the deserts of Mesopotamia and of Persia,[536 - Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 70.] and in Asia Minor,[537 - Boissier, ibid.] where, however, the localities cited do not appear sufficiently distinct from the cultivated ground. It is also indicated[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.] in several places in Southern Europe, such as Mount Hymettus and other localities in Greece, the hills above Bologna and Genoa, and a few waste places in Spain; but the further west we go the more we find mentioned such localities as fields, cultivated ground, etc.; and careful authors do not fail to note that the species has probably escaped from cultivation.[539 - Caruel, Fl. Tosc., p. 256; Willkomm and Lange.] I do not hesitate to say that if a plant of this nature were indigenous in Southern Europe, it would be far more common, and would not be wanting to the insular floras, such as those of Sicily, Ischia, and the Balearic Isles.[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).]

The antiquity of the species and of its use in India is confirmed by the existence of several different names in different dialects, and above all of a Sanskrit and modern Hindu name, methi.[541 - Piddington, Index.] There is a Persian name, schemlit, and an Arab name, helbeh;[542 - Ainslie, Mat. Med. Ind., i. p. 130.] but none is known in Hebrew.[543 - Rosenmüller, Bibl. Alterth.] One of the names of the plant in ancient Greek, tailis τηλις, may, perhaps, be considered by philologists as akin to the Sanskrit name,[544 - As usual, Fick’s dictionary of Indo-European languages does not mention the name of this plant, which the English say is Sanskrit.] but of this I am no judge. The species may have been introduced by the Aryans, and the primitive name have left no trace in northern languages, since it can only live in the south of Europe.

Bird’s Foot—Ornithopus sativus, Brotero; O. isthmocarpus, Cosson.

The true bird’s foot, wild and cultivated in Portugal, was described for the first time in 1804 by Brotero,[545 - Brotero, Flora Lusitanica, ii. p. 160.] and Cosson has distinguished it more clearly from allied species.[546 - Cosson, Notes sur Quelques Plantes Nouvelles ou Critiques du Midi de l’Espagne, p. 36.] Some authors had confounded it with Ornithopus roseus of Dufour, and agriculturists have sometimes given it the name of a very different species, O. perpusillus, which by reason of its small size is unsuited for cultivation. It is only necessary to see the pod of Ornithopus sativus to make certain of the species, for it is when ripe contracted at intervals and considerably bent. If there are in the fields plants of a similar appearance, but whose pods are straight and not contracted, they are the result of a cross with O. roseus, or, if the pod is curved but not contracted, with O. compressus. From the appearance of these plants, it seems that they might be grown in the same manner, and would present, I suppose, the same advantages.

The bird’s foot is only suited to a dry and sandy soil. It is an annual which furnishes in Portugal a very early spring fodder. Its cultivation has been successfully introduced into Campine.[547 - Bon Jardinier, 1880, p. 512.]

O. sativus appears to be wild in several districts of Portugal and the south of Spain. I have a specimen from Tangier; and Cosson found it in Algeria. It is often found in abandoned fields, and even elsewhere. It is difficult to say whether the specimens are not from plants escaped from cultivation, but localities are cited where this seems improbable; for instance, a pine wood near Chiclana, in the south of Spain (Willkomm).

Spergula, or Corn Spurry—Spergula arvensis, Linnæus.

This annual, belonging to the family of the Caryophylaceæ, grows in sandy fields and similar places in Europe, in North Africa and Abyssinia,[548 - Boissier, Fl. Orient., i. p. 731.] in Western Asia as far as Hindustan,[549 - Hooker, Fl. Brit. Ind., i. p. 243, and several specimens from the Nilgherries and Ceylon in my herbarium.] and even in Java.[550 - Zollinger, No. 2556 in my herbarium.] It is difficult to know over what extent of the old world it was originally indigenous. In many localities we do not know if it is really wild or naturalized from cultivation. Sometimes a recent introduction may be suspected. In India, for instance, numerous specimens have been gathered in the last few years; but Roxburgh, who was so diligent a collector at the end of the last and the beginning of the present century, does not mention the species. No Sanskrit or modern Hindu name is known,[551 - Piddington, Index.] and it has not been found in the countries between India and Turkey.

The common names may tell us something with regard to the origin of the species and to its cultivation.

No Greek or Latin name is known. Spergula, in Italian spergola, seems to be a common name long in use in Italy. Another Italian name, erba renaiola, indicates only its growth in the sand (rena). The French (spargoule), Spanish (esparcillas), Portuguese (espargata), and German (Spark), have all the same root. It seems that throughout the south of Europe the species was taken from country to country by the Romans, before the division of the Latin languages. In the north the case is very different. There is a Russian name, toritsa;[552 - Sobolewski, Fl. Petrop., p. 109.] several Danish names, humb or hum, girr or kirr;[553 - Rafn, Danmarks Flora, ii. p. 799.] and Swedish, knutt, fryle, nägde, skorff.[554 - Wahlenberg, quoted by Moritzi, Dict. MS.; Svensk Botanik, t. 308.] This great diversity shows that attention had long been drawn to this plant in this part of Europe, and argues an ancient cultivation. It was cultivated in the neighbourhood of Montbelliard in the sixteenth century,[555 - Bauhin, Hist. Plant., iii. p. 722.] and it is not stated that it was then of recent introduction. Probably it arose in the south of Europe during the Roman occupation, and perhaps earlier in the north. In any case, its original home must have been Europe.

Agriculturists distinguish a taller variety of spergula,[556 - Spergula Maxima, Böninghausen, an illustration published in Reichenbach’s Plantæ Crit., vi. p. 513.] but botanists are not agreed with them in finding in it sufficient characteristics of a distinct species, and some do not even make it a variety.

Guinea Grass—Panicum maximum, Jacquin.[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.]

This perennial grass has a great reputation in countries lying between the tropics as a nutritious fodder, easy of cultivation. With a little care a meadow of guinea grass will last for twenty years.[558 - In Dominica according to Imray, in the Kew Report for 1879, p. 16.]

Its cultivation appears to have begun in the West Indies. P. Browne speaks of it in his work on Jamaica, published in the middle of the last century, and it is subsequently mentioned by Swartz.

The former mentions the name guinea grass, without any remarks on the original home of the species. The latter says, “formerly brought from the coast of Africa to the Antilles.” He probably trusted to the indication given by the common name; but we know how fallacious such indications of origin sometimes are. Witness the so-called Turkey wheat, which comes from America.

Swartz, who is an excellent botanist, says that the plant grows in the dry cultivated pastures of the West Indies, where it is also wild, which may imply that it has become naturalized in places where it was formerly cultivated. I cannot find it anywhere asserted that it is really wild in the West Indies. It is otherwise in Brazil. From data collected by de Martius and studied by Nees,[559 - Nees, in Martius, Fl. Brasil., in 8vo, vol. ii. p. 166.] data afterwards increased and more carefully studied by Dœll,[560 - Dœll, in Fl. Brasil., in fol., vol. ii. part 2.]Panicum maximum grows in the clearings of the forests of the Amazon valley, near Santarem, in the provinces of Balria, Ceara, Rio de Janeiro, and Saint Paul. Although the plant is often cultivated in these countries, the localities given, by their number and nature, prove that it is indigenous. Dœll has also seen specimens from French Guiana and New Granada.

With respect to Africa, Sir William Hooker[561 - Sir W. Hooker, Niger Fl., p. 560.] mentioned specimens brought from Sierra Leone, from Aguapim, from the banks of the Quorra, and from the Island of St. Thomas, in Western Africa. Nees[562 - Nees, Floræ Africæ Austr. Gramineæ, p. 36.] indicates the species in several districts of Cape Colony, even in the bush and in mountainous country. Richard[563 - A. Richard, Abyssinie, ii. p. 373.] mentions places in Abyssinia, which also seem to be beyond the limits of cultivation, but he owns to being not very sure of the species. Anderson, on the contrary, positively asserts that Panicum maximum was brought from the banks of the Mozambique and of the Zambesi rivers by the traveller Peters.[564 - Peters, Reise Botanik, p. 546.]

The species is known to have been introduced into Mauritius by the Governour Labourdonnais,[565 - Bojer, Hortus Maurit., p. 565.] and to have become naturalized from cultivation as in Rodriguez and the Seychelles Isles. Its introduction into Asia must be recent, for Roxburgh and Miquel do not mention the species. In Ceylon it is only cultivated.[566 - Baker, Fl. of Mauritius and Seychelles, p. 436.]

On the whole, it seems to me that the probabilities are in favour of an African origin, as its name indicates, and this is confirmed by the general, but insufficiently grounded opinion of authors.[567 - Thwaites, Enum. Pl. Zeylaniæ.] However, as the plant spreads so rapidly, it is strange that it has not reached Egypt from the Mozambique or Abyssinia, and that it was introduced so late into the islands to the east of Africa. If the co-existence of phanerogamous species in Africa and America previous to cultivation were not extremely rare, it might be inferred in this case; but this is unlikely in the case of a cultivated plant of which the diffusion is evidently very easy.

Article III.—Various Uses of the Stem and Leaves