498 sturtevant's notes on edible plants 



appetizer. In 1539, Ammonius * says " we cherish it in otir gardens," but adds nothing 

 of further interest in this connection. Fuchsius,* 1542, gives a figure which may be called 

 a poor specimen of the Common Red and which resembles certain seedlings which are 

 now frequently obtained. Tragus,' 1552, gives a figtire of the garden currant, which 

 may well be the Common Red. In 1558, Matthiolus * refers to it as common in gardens 

 and it is also spoken of by Mizaldus ' in 1560. Pinaeus, 1561,* gives a figure which may 

 be that of a Common Red, while Lobel,' 1576 and 1591, offers figiu-es which are to be called 

 Common Red, but which are of a far better appearance than those heretofore figiired 

 and mentions also a sweet kind. Lyte's translation of Dodoens, edition of 1 586, speaks of 

 the currant in England, but translates one name as " beyond the sea " gooseberry. This 

 same year, 1586, Camerarius * figures the Common Red, as does Dalechamp ' in 1587. 

 The next year, Camerarius *" gives directions for sowing the seed of the wild plant in 

 gardens and sa>-s these seedlings quickly come to fruit. We have hence the first clue as 

 to how new varieties might originate, if this recommendation was generally followed. 

 Camerarius also refers to a larger-fruited currant than common that was growing in the 

 gardens of the Archduke of Austria. This is the first indication of improvement in varie- 

 ties, such as might well be anticipated from the practice of growing seedlings. This Ribes 

 bacci rubris majoribus may perhaps be considered as the Red Dutch variety, or at least 

 its prototype. In 1597, Gerarde," as before stated, scarcely recognized the currant as 

 being iii general culture in England, but the next year, or 1598, brings us to what may well 

 be called a picture of the Red Dutch variety, given in Bauhin's edition of Matthiolus, 

 as also a mention of a white-fruited variety and another described as sweet. 



In these early days the exchange of plants might be expected to be in their most con- 

 densed state, that is as seeds. We have noted the appearance of a new variety of the 

 currant, and now, as we examine the records of the next century, we shall find additional 

 records of improved varieties just as if the advice of growing seedlings had been followed, 

 and the better forms gained had been propagated by cuttings. 



In 1601, Clusius '^ speaks of a sweet variety foimd growing wild upon the Alps and 

 differing not at all, as his figiire also shows, from the Common Red; and of a larger-fruited 

 sort with a red flower, which may not be our species, yet he believes the variety was grown 

 in the gardens of Brussels. He also refers to a white-fruited sort, but what this may be 

 is quite doubtful from the context. In 1613, we have some fine drawings of the currant 



' Ammonius Med. Hort. 310. 1539. 

 ' Fuchsius Hist. Stirp. 662. 1542. 

 ' Tragus Stirp. 994. 1552. 



* Matthiolus Comment. 10 1. 1558. 

 ' Mizaldus Secret. 105. 1560. 



Pinaeus Hist. PI. 67. 1561. 



' Lobel 06i. 615. 1576; /con. 2:202. 1591. 

 Camerarius Epit. 88. 1586. 

 Dalechamp Hist. Gen. PI. (Lugd.) 1:131. 1587. 

 "Camerarius Hort. Med. 141. 1588. 

 "Gerarde, J. if#r&. 1143. 1597. 

 " Clusius Hist. 1:119. 1 60 1 



