153 
our native Chestnut was the plant in hand. In first characterizing 
the European plant thus, — 
“FAGUS-CASTANEA. The CHESTNUT TREE. The characters 
are nearly the same of the Beech, except the Male flowers being 
disposed in cylindrical katkins. The Szy/es more in number and 
bristly. The Capsules much larger, round, and set very thick 
with long prickly spines; containing from one to four or five, 
but generally two or three nuts, filled with sweet kernel —” 
he shows clearly enough that he was at least thinking chestnut 
and nothing else. Following the above remarks he writes con- 
cerning the American tree: 
“ The Species of Chestnut with us are, Fagus-Castanea dentata, 
American Chestnut Tree. This often becomes a large tree, 
growing to a height of sixty or eighty feet, and four to five feet in 
diameter, sending out but few branches, garnished with long 
spear-shaped leaves, toothed or notched on their edges. The 
timber is used much for rails, splitting free and outlasting most 
of our Oaks. The kernel of the nuts are dried and used by some 
as a substitute for coffee. The wood is also burnt into coals for 
the use of blacksmiths, etc., but not much esteemed for common 
fuel.” : 
The distinctive features pointed out in this description are 
perhaps badly stated, yet they are sufficient to indicate beyond a 
reasonable doubt that Fagus Castanea dentata was applied to our 
Chestnut ; hence if we still consider our tree a variety, its name 
should be Castanea Castanea (L.), var. dentata (Marsh.) = Fagus- 
Castanea dentata, Marshall, 1. c.= Castanea sativa, Mill., var. 
Americana, Sargent. : 
It would seem, though, in respect to the rank of our native 
Chestnut, that there is very good reason for considering it a spe- 
cies, distinct from the European type. Rafinesque (New Sylva 
N. Am. 82, 18 36) appears to have been the first to separate our 
tree as a species under Michaux’s varietal name, calling it Cas- 
tanea Americana. WWilldenow (1813), Nuttall (Sylva 1842), and 
Koch in 1373 (Drendrologie ii. 23) followed Rafinesque in main- 
taining it as a species and under this name ; as also has Dr. Dip- 
Pel very recently (Handbuch der Laubholzkunde ii. 57, 1892). 
It is quite probable that Marshall’s earlier name was unknown to 
these authors, as it is nowhere cited. 
