to the correlation of Goodman, Martinez and Thompson, 
would be about 900 A.D. 
There has long been widespread confusion and doubt 
regarding the nomenclature and classification of the cu- 
curbits. Recent works (1) (6) (18) have so simplified the 
characters that it is now comparatively easy to differen- 
tiate between the annual cultivated species of Cucurbita. 
With very distinct characters in the leaves, fruit-stalks 
and seeds, the separation of the species C. Pepo, C. mos- 
chata and C.maxima is now possible even though the ma- 
terial is only a fragment of the complete plant. 
The carbonized peduncle examined by the writer is 
distinctly five-sided, regularly grooved, and flaring at the 
point of attachment to the fruit. From its carbonized 
condition it may also be assumed that it was hard. These 
characters, checked with the keys and descriptions (1) (6) 
(11) (18), have allowed the writer to identify the specimen 
as Cucurbita moschata Poiret. 
The characters of the specimen under consideration 
appear to match exactly those described for the typical 
C. moschata. These characters, however, seem to be de- 
pendable in such a pronounced way only in the Cheese 
Group of this species (6) (8), which have a shape similar 
to that of a cheese-box much flattened at both ends. 
Other varieties may have fruit-stalks which are not dis- 
tinctly five-sided nor noticeably enlarged at the point of 
attachment with the fruit. This has led to the following 
statement by Erwin (7): ‘‘The identity of the peduncles, 
if considered alone, might raise a question as to whether 
they are moschata or pepo’’. However, the characters of 
this specimen seem to exclude this difficulty by being es- 
sentially like the figures given in the literature (1) (2) 
(6) (8) (18), which the authors consider typical of the 
species. 
Although A. de Candolle (5) was undecided as to 
[ 66 | 
