PHANEROGAMIA : FLOWERS. 449 



C. a. Spikes with woody bracts. 



37. Strobilus, e. g. Betula. 



b. Spikes with woody bracts and perianths. 



38. Strobilus, e. g. Casuarina. 



V. Spurious fruits (fructus spurius). 



39. Cynarhodon, free, one-seeded achaenia, surrounded by a 

 fleshy disc, e. g. Rosa. 



40. Pom urn, many-seeded acha3nia in one circle, blended 

 with the fleshy disc, e. g. Mains. 



41. Balausta, many-seeded achaenia in two circles, blended 

 with the fleshy disc, e. g. Punica. 



42. Diclesium, achaenia enclosed in a hardened perianth or 

 corolla, e. g. Spinacia, Mirabilis. 



43. Sphalerocarpium, achaenia enclosed in a drupaceous pe- 

 rianth, e. g. Hippophde. 



I did not intend to give a complete enumeration in the paragraphs of 

 all the names of fruits hitherto proposed : many of them would be too 

 much honoured by being named merely to be thrown away. I have 

 here only retained those most in use, and introduced by at least one 

 botanist of consideration (besides the author) ; in the first place, in order 

 to show how they range themselves under those which appear to me fully 

 sufficient for the present, partly to make the beginner at least ac- 

 quainted with the generally accepted words, and partly to allow of connect, 

 ing with them some critical observations on the whole theory of the forms 

 of fruits. I will first endeavour to exhibit, in a brief sketch, howMthe 

 matter has historically developed itself, since only in this way can the 

 total insufficiency of this theory be in some measure comprehended. 



Besides the expressions of common life, which defined useful fruits 

 partly according to their outward, readily perceived differences, partly 

 according to the diversity of the plants called by different names, of which 

 the itself yet unscientific Science took up some, certain other names were 

 very early made, necessarily requisite to denominate things for which 

 common language naturally had no expressions, because they did not 

 immediately serve any of the purposes of life. Thus little juicy fruits 

 were, without distinction, called berries, but malus and pyrus were dis- 

 tinguished as apple and pear : apple, as a kind of fruit, has never been the 

 language of common life. Expressions like acinus, pilula, folliculus, &c., 

 which occur in authors anterior to Linnaeus, were never vernacular 

 words. Up to his time any scientific treatment of the general part of 

 Botany was out of the question ; the forms were conceived diagram- 

 matically, and described somewhat in the same manner. Linnaeus first 

 gave definitions, and an arrangement deduced from a general survey of 

 the conditions known to him. He distinguished the fruit (fructus) from 

 the seed (semen), and combined under the latter head, also, all one- seeded 

 splitting and closed fruits (schizocarps and achaenia, &c.). The former 

 he divided according to its composition from different parts and their 

 structural condition, in which he gave in far too much to the common 

 custom of language, and thus obtained sections of very unequal value. 

 He had no correct principle of division, and, in his imperfect knowledge 

 of the development of the fruit, he could by no means find such. On 

 his foundations others afterwards built, and untenably, since the only 



G G 



