CHAP. II. BRITISH ISLANDS. Zt 
first existence; and thus, that the tendency even of nature, 
independently of human art, is to equalise the productions of 
similar climates. 
Ceesar, in his Commentaries, states that he found the woods of 
Britain to contain the same trees as those of Gaul, with the ex- 
ception of the abies and the fagus: ‘* Materia cujusque generis, 
ut in Gallia est, preter fagum et abietem.” ‘This passage has 
given rise to much controversy, some authors supposing that 
Cesar, by the word abietem, meant the wild or Scotch pine, 
which is a native of Britain. As, however, the Romans de- 
signated the silver fir abies, there can be little doubt that this 
was the tree alluded to by Czesar; which not only does not grow 
wild in England, but was not introduced into this country till 
modern times. This solution of the passage is so simple, that 
it is difficult to imagine how any mistake can have arisen, par- 
ticularly as Pliny speaks of the Scotch pine expressly as Pinus 
sylvéstris (Nat. Hist., lib. xv. and xvi.) ‘The only reason appears 
to be, that the Scotch pine was formerly called the Scotch fir; 
and that the word abies, being considered to signify fir, was, 
without further examination, supposed to apply to that tree. 
It is more difficult to reconcile Czesar’s assertion that he did 
not find the fagus in Britain, as that name is generally supposed 
to have been applied by the Romans to the common beech. 
Belon informs us that, in his time (Les Obs., &c., en Gréce, en 
Asie, et autres Pays étrangers, 1554), on Mount Athos and in 
Macedonia, the beech was called phega. It is wonderful, there- 
fore, says Ray, that Caesar should deny the beech to Britain: 
his doing so can only be satisfactorily accounted for, by sup~ 
posing that by the word fagus he meant the Quéreus 4 ’sculus, 
the phagos of Theophrastus. Mr. Long, in his Observations 
on certain Roman Roads, and Towns, in the South of Britain, 
p..36., asserts that the tree Ceesar called fagus was the sweet 
chestnut, Fagus Castanea Z. Mr. Long does not state his 
grounds for this opinion; but should the fagus of the Romans 
be our chestnut, and their castanea our beech, it would not 
_ only explain this difficulty, but do much to reconcile that 
passage in the Georgics, lib. ii. v. 71., where the fruit of 
the fagus appears preferred to that of the castanea. If we 
consider that by fagus Caesar meant our common beech, all 
that can be concluded from his remark is, that the beech was 
not, in his time, discoverable in large masses in Kent; where, 
though it grows naturally, it is only found on the hills and not in 
the plains. Mr. Whitaker, in his History of Manchester, con- 
cludes that the Romans introduced the beech, partly from the 
assertion of Czesar above alluded to, and partly from the name 
for the beech in the British language, foighe, faghe, faydh, 
being obviously derived from fagus. The name in the Anglo- 
*c4 
