95 
able to see convinces me that the plant had a very early introduction 
to our flora, perhaps following the glacial period, and that under 
less favoring circumstances it is becoming more and more restricted, 
and must eventually be supplanted by more vigorous competitors for 
existence. ' 
The Botany of the Aztecs,— The various aspects of a scientific 
subject become in these days remarkably illustrated. We have seen 
an example of archaeological botany in the light thrown upon the 
ancient flora of Egypt by the discussions of the evidence afforded by 
a few withered wreaths disentombed with the mummy of a Pharaoh, 
Recently, a Spanish writer has occupied the pages of the Anales del 
Museo Nacional de Mexico with an elaborate examination of the 
botanical lore of the ancient Aztecs and other dwellers in Mexico 
at the time of the conquest, A brief resume of his conclusions may 
prove of interest in the pages of the Bulletin, as the Anales are not 
widely distributed, and are not generally supposed to contain matter 
of value to botanists. 
It seems conceded that the inhabitants of pre-Columbian Mexico 
had made very considerable progress in botanical study; they had, 
according to our author, formed an artificial classification, an extended 
glossology, and a system of iconographic representations by which 
they indicated plants by conventional symbols. At the time of the 
conquest, botanical science in Europe had itself made little progress 
beyond the limited developement that it had amongst the Greeks; 
the classification was largely medical, and trees and herbs constituted 
the two great divisions of the vegetable kingdom. At this time, in 
Mexico, the Aztecs and related tribes had established botanical 
gardens in which were grown plants that had been collected from the 
various districts of the kingdom, from newly acquired territories and 
from neighboring states or tribes. Thus, the handsome Bombacead 
known as Cheirostefnon^^ which was early found flourishing outside 
of the usual limit of its distribution, was regarded by Baron Hum- 
boldt as a plant transplanted by the ancient Matlatzincas. 
The author of this treatise has used the famous work on the 
natural history of Mexico by Hernandez in its re-edited form, sup- 
plementing it with the testimony of other authors, and personal 
search amongst Indian vocabularies. The synonomy of the Mexi- 
cans, he claims, was extended, indicating our distinction between a 
scientific and a common name; thus, the plant called totoycxitl, 
*bird's-foot,' in allusion to its quinquelobate leaves, was also called 
caxtlatlapan, which classed it with a botanical group— that of the 
Convolvulacc^e, it being an Ipommi. 
Quite frequently the various names of a plant arose from the form 
or other characteristic of some portion of it, or from its uses; thus, 
chapulxochitl, meaning ^locust-flower/ because of a resemblance of the 
flower to that insert w.-m nlso called tcnapalitLh also mincapatli, 'arrow- 
* Called by the Aztecs macpalxochitl , ' hand.flower/ from the peculiar shape 
and arrangement ot the stamens.— En. 
f A name for several plant, resembling Sedum, or life-cverlastm^.— Ld. 
