124 THE FIG: ITS HISTORY, CULTURE, AND CURING. 
had been deseribed and generally accepted, no one had thought of 
the possibility of an insect transmitting the pollen from one flower to 
another and thus causing fecundation. As Pliny of old had foreshad- 
owed the theory of evolution, so did Linnzeus a century before its 
rediscovery indicate how, at least in one instance, flowers were depend- 
ent on insects for their pollination. Linnzeus points out how, in order 
that the female flowers of the fig may be properly fecundated, it 
becomes absolutely necessary for the pollen of the anthers to be dis- 
tributed through the cavity of the fig. And this could not be aceom- 
plished if nature had not supplied the fig with a wasp which could 
earry the pollen from the male flowers to the female tree. And this 
wasp, he says, is the ‘‘psen” of the ancients, or the fig insect. The 
opinion of Linnzeus was published in 1749. But Linnzeus was not 
aware of the fact that some figs ripened their fruit without fecunda- 
tion; want of material for investigation caused him to think that the 
fig was absolutely dicecious—in other words, that it possessed sexes 
distinctly separate, but on different trees. 
John Hill, again, who published his great work, ‘‘A History of 
Plants,” in London, 1751, refers only briefly to the fig and its caprifica- 
tion. He condemns Tournefort’s theory of puncture and irritation, and 
states that pollination is the real effect of caprification; but he does not 
refer to Linnzeus, though it is probable that he must have heard of 
the latter’s views upon the subject. 
Later in the century both Milne and Cavolini, independently of 
each other, discovered that a difference must be made between the 
maturing of the seed and the maturing of the receptacle, and that 
the former maturity, at least, must require pollination, even if the 
latter (or pomological maturity) could be accomplished without: it. 
Milne clearly defines this by saying: 
The question supposes that the fig trees in this country bring fruit to maturity 
without assistance of caprification, and the fact can not be denied. The same 
thing, we have seen, obtains in Spain, Provence, and Malta: but the fruit, or more 
properly, the fruit vessel, isin all cases to be distinguished from the seed contained 
within it. If the male be wanting. the seed will not vegetate when sown; but the 
fruit may, nevertheless, swell and come to an appearance of per.ection; and so it 
is observed to do in the instance in question, and in many others, especially when 
the fruit is formed of une of the parts less connected with seed, as the calyx, 
receptacle, etc. 
Filippo Cavolini published his work on caprification in 1782, or 
twelve years later than Milne, whose opinion he had, however, not 
read. Cavolini believes the caprifig to be the male tree and the fig 
the female of the same species. He further notes the difference 
between the fig receptacle and the seed, and how the former can 
come to maturity on account of its stronger attachment to the stem of 
the tree, while the seed, which is only attached to the pericarp by its 
vessels, requires pollination in order to mature. This pollination 
causes the juices in the fig to flow more freely, bringing both the 
