192 ORIGIN OF CULTIVATED PLANTS. 



perhaps before the existence of man in Europe or even 

 in Asia. Nevertheless, the frequency of cultivation, and 

 the multitude of forms of the cultivated grape, may have 

 extended naturalization and introduced among wild vines 

 varieties which originated in cultivation. In fact, natural 

 agents, such as birds, winds, and currents, have always 

 widened the area of species, independently of man, as far 

 as the limits imposed in each age by geographical and 

 physical conditions, together with the hostile action of 

 other plants and animals, allow. An absolutely primitive 

 habitation is more or less mythical, but habitations 

 successively extended or i*estricted are in accordance 

 with the nature of things. They constitute areas more 

 or less ancient and real, provided that the species has 

 maintained itself wild w^ithout the constant addition ot 

 fresh seed. 



Concerning the vine, we have proofs of its great 

 antiquity in Europe as in Asia. Seeds ot* the grape have 

 been found in the lake-dwelUngs of Castione, near Parma, 

 which date from the age of bronze,^ in a prehistoric settle- 

 ment of Lake Varese,^ and in the lake-dwellino^s of 

 Wangen, Switzerland, but in the latter instance at an un- 

 certain depth.^ And, what is more, vine-leaves have been 

 found in the tufa round Montpellier, where they were 

 probably deposited before the historical epoch, and in the 

 tufa of Meyrargue in Provence, which is certainly prehis- 

 toric,^ though later than the tertiary epoch of geologists.^ 



A Russian botanist, Kolenati,*^ has made some very 

 interesting observations on the different varieties of the 

 vine, both wild and cultivated, in the country which may 

 be called the central, and perhaps the most ancient home 

 of the species, the south of the Caucasus. I consider his 

 opinion the more important that the author has based 



* These are fig^nred in Heer's Pflanzen der Pfahlhauien, p. 24, fig. 11, 



* Eagazzoni, Rivista Arch, della Prov. di Conio, 1880, fasc. 17, p. 30. 

 ^ Heer, ibid. 



* Planchon, Etude sur les Tufs de Montpellier, 1864, p. 63. 



* De Saporta, La Flore des Tufs Quaternaires de Provence, 1867, pp. 

 15, 27. 



* Kolenati, Bulletin de la SociCte Imp4riale des Naturalistes de 

 Moscou, 1846, p. 279. 



