228 



THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY 





Fig. 3. An Ancient Indian Flint Type Above, with its Modern Successor Below. 



by which its varieties are differentiated and endeavor to find out how 

 the features peculiar to it have originated. He may then be able log- 

 ically to connect it with very distant relatives. 



Now to turn to the collateral evidence. Collateral evidence on dis- 

 tribution and relationship is furnished by paleontology. Such data are 

 really direct and important when fossil remains occur in sufficient 

 quantities, but this is not often the case. It is usually fragmentary and 

 can be classed with that of archeology. Neither archeology nor history 

 furnishes certain proof of plant origin, however, as we shall see. Their 

 evidence must simply be given the weight it deserves when considered 

 with other facts. Lastly, philology furnishes indications as to the his- 

 tory of a species, for common names of cultivated plants are well pre- 

 served in the languages of the people who have used them. But, like 

 other evidence, it must be accepted with caution. The cashew is called 

 by the French pomme de Maliogani, which is all right except that it is 

 not an apple and has nothing to do with mahogany. This shows how 

 much worse a compound name is than a simple name, since with a 

 simple name there can be but one error. 



We shall endeavor to construct our history and evolution of maize 

 along these lines, though not keeping the same order. 



Maize has not been found in the wild state, although it is such a 

 remarkable plant it seems improbable that with our present knowledge 

 of plant distribution it should remain undiscovered if in existence. 

 This fact has made the problem of its nativity very difficult, even 

 though Americans have been satisfied of its new-world origin for some 

 time. Competent critics have skillfully argued old-world origin, and 

 from the strictly historical point of view there was earlier much to be 



