116 ESSA YS. 



the Christian era. Perhaps this is as great an age as we are 

 warranted in assuming for the Cypress of Montezuma ; but 

 old trunks increase so much the more slowly as they advance 

 in age, that we must certainly assign a vastly higher antiquity 

 to the trees of Atlisco and Santa Maria del Tule. Yet far 

 the most important element in the calculation is wanting ; 

 namely, the actual present rate of growth of these monstrous 

 trunks, or of other old trees of the same species. In default 

 of this essential evidence, De Candolle has instituted a com- 

 parison between these trees and the famous Baobabs of Sen- 

 egal, upon which we place no great reliance, but from which 

 he infers that the great Cypress of Santa Maria del Tule, if 

 really the growth of a single trunk, is from four to six thou- 

 sand years old, and perhaps dates its existence as far back as 

 the actual creation of the world. 1 



We trust that the next intelligent traveler who visits this 

 most ancient living monument, or any other Cypress of re- 

 markable size, will not fail to complete the evidence that is 

 needed, as the full solution of this curious problem may throw 

 light upon some interesting questions respecting the physical 

 history of the world. One or more lateral incisions, not at 

 all endangering the existence of the tree, would at once reveal 

 its actual growth for the last few centuries. And if made at 

 proper points, and carried to a sufficient depth, they might 

 enable the judicious operator to disprove or confirm the sur- 

 mise, that this huge bole may consist of the trunks of two or 

 three original trees, long since united and blended into one. 

 This conjecture is by no means very improbable, although 

 there is nothing in the external appearance of the trunk to 

 confirm it. 2 



Meanwhile, the Cypresses of our southern States, although 

 of more moderate dimensions, afford important assistance in 

 this inquiry. It is generally known that old trees of the 



1 Alphonse De Candolle, in " Bibl. Univ.," xlvi. p. 393. Aug. Pyr. De 

 Candolle, « Phys. Veg.," ii. p. 1000. 



2 In opposition to the remark of M. Anza, cited by Humboldt (Essai 

 Polit., the Engl, transl., ii. p. 190), we may adduce the account of Mr. 

 Exter, and the negative testimony of M. Galeotti. 



