BXTUACTS. 209 



when Simon de Tov.vr haJ .already cuUivated it at Seville, and according to 

 Reuonte, it was not ijlaiited in his garden at Boisgencier, by Father MlNliTl, 

 till ltJo2, whom that author makes to have broiii;ht it from Persia: I only 

 infer, however, that he travelled from Hindustan over land. Redonte more- 

 over asserts, that the authors of the Flora Peruviana found it wild in America, 

 but in the work itself they say, cultivated in gardens. Hernaisdez' evidence, 

 however, I think, takes away all doubt about the matter : he says, ' provenit 

 in frigidis et temperatis regionibus, veteri incogniia muudo,' and as the Agave, 

 to which the 'I'uberose is more immediately allied, is also a native of Mexico, 

 I am fully of opinion that it is indigenous there. 



" 'I'he description giveu by the venerable L'EcLUSE of his specimen, half 

 dried, and battered by the journey, with only the lowest flower of the spike 

 expanded, ati'ords a memorable instance of his accuracy and discernment. 

 The size, the stem, insertion and figure of the leaves, and their hempy texture, 

 are particularly noticed; the shape of the corolla, with its general similarity 

 to that of the Asiatic Hyacinths, but in consistence rather to that of the 

 Orange, is next remarked ; and having no knowledge of the root to guide this 

 judgment, but what he derived from Simon de Tovar's appellation of Bulbus 

 Jndicns tlorem Album profereus Hyacinthi Orientalis wuiulum, he guesses it 

 may possibly belong to the same geuns with the Bulbus eriophorus, or Peru- 

 vian Hyacinth, though not without some doubts raised by its stem being 

 covered with leaves, and its tubular corolla. Two years afterwards, these 

 doubts were corroborated by his receiving roots both from Simon de Tovar 

 and the Comte d'AREMi'.ERG, which by August were full of leaves; and I 

 think it worth noticing, that his figure of the plant appears evidently to have 

 been made up from the original specimen sent by Bernard Paludanus, and 

 one of these growing roots, which he expressly mentions did not flower : he 

 concludes with observing, that if it is still to remain in the genus, it may be 

 called Hyacinthus Indicus tuberosa radice. 



" From this Latin phrase, no doubt, our silly appellation of Tuberose, and 

 the more accurate French name, Tubereuse, originated; but in the East Indies 

 it is distinguished by the poetical title of Sandal Malam, or hitriguar of the 

 night; in Spain, where, at the period of this plant's being discovered, it was 

 the fashion to give both places and things religious names, it is called Vara 

 de S. Jusef. 



" Soon after L'F.cli'se's figure, an excellent one by Vallet, the embroi- 

 derer, came out at Paris in 1()03, and both these were copied and published 

 as dirt'erent s])ecies, by S«ektiu«, in his Florilcijhtm. An original figure, 

 which has great merit (or that day, though not equal to Vallet's, uext 

 appeared in the Thcalnim Florie, in 1622 : it shews many roots flowering in 

 one pot. From Ferrauius's pompous book on the culture of flowers, we 

 learn it was still regarded as a rarity in the Barberini gardens, at Rome, in 

 1633, but that it increased abundantly, and was taken out of the ground 

 every year in March, to separate the offsets. Our countryman Parkinson, 

 more than half a century after its being first described by L'F.cluse, is the 

 uext author who treats of this plant; but valuable as many of his quaint 

 observations still are to the horticulturist, his account of the 'I'nberose does 

 him little credit ; he makes two species of it, saying, he thinks L'EcLl'SE 

 never saw the first, though ho owns 'some do doubt that they are not two 

 plants several as of greater and lesser, but that the greatness is caused by the 

 fertility of the soil;' his figures arc wretchedly copied from Swerths, and 

 by his calling it the Indian knobbed Jacinth, it appears not to have been 

 known here then by its modern name. Gasper Baimiin, with his usual care- 

 Ifssness, also takes it up as two species from Swertii's, and even the learned 

 Kav seems to have known as little about it in IG93, adding, however, to his 

 second species, the title of Tuberose. 



" I meet with nothing more of any consequence respecting it, till Philip 

 Miller, the pride of every British gaidenrr, published the lirst edition of his 

 Dictionary in 1731. He makes it a distinct genus from the Hyaeinlhns, and 

 describes the variety with double (lowers, now so common, but then only to 

 be seen In M. Di: LA ('ol'ht's garden, near I.eydcii, whose memory is most 

 justly consigned to iufauiy by uur author, for destroying uiany hundreds ')f 



2 B 



