236 IN A GLOUCESTERSHIRE GARDEN 



writing in 1587 on the plant* of the Bible, says no 

 more than what later travellers have noticed, that 



4 Thyslles, brier*, and brembles, which grow out of the 

 ground themselves, without planting or hubanding, yeelde in 

 a manner no kind of commodity for the uo of man, but rather 

 detriment and annoyance both to man by their prickle*, and 

 to gnvine both by their ill company and neighbourhood.' 



Arid so, having taken the palms and Kimboos a* type* 

 of all that is most beautiful and useful in the vegetable 

 world, I will now take brambles and thistle* as being 

 the proverbial tvjxjs of usclessness and annoyance. 



lut it in only as proverbial t VJRS drawn from Biblical 

 associations that bramble* and thistles are thus at once 

 condemned, for as s<*>n as we get away from Eastern 

 and Hiblical associations the case is changed. To begin 

 with brambles. Without quoting many passages in 

 which /^'rc>< and Hulmji arc mentioned, and never in 

 contempt, and without entering into the question how 

 far they are identical with our bramble, I will only 

 name one line in Virgil where he connect* the bramble 

 with the delicate a 



' Rubua ct fcrat aper amomum ' (Ed. hi. 99): 

 and one in Pliny 



* Neither hath Nature produced bramble* for nothing els 

 but to pricke and do hurt ; but such i* her bounty that the 



