ORIGIN OF CULTIVATED PLANTS. 341 



of size, shape, and color, " some as great as our pompions, 

 some as small as an apple, some discolored on the outside, 

 green with whitish or yellowish stripes, . . . some also reddish, 

 spotted, or striped, and some of a deep yellow." 



Piso and Marcgrav (Hist. Nat. Brasil., 1648, p. 44) de- 

 scribe and figure a plant called '' lurumu " [ = Yurumu] by 

 the Brazilians, and by the Portuguese, "Bobora." M. De 

 Candolle, p. 201, is inclined to agree with modern botanists in 

 referring this to C. maxima ; but, as he remarks, it appears 

 to have been a cultivated plant. If introduced from abroad, 

 the name given it by the Tupis was probably formed, by pre- 

 fix or affix, from that of some native (or naturalized) species 

 to which it had some resemblance. In Montoya's ''Tesoro," 

 1639, we find"Yurua" " calaba^'illos silvestres," small wild 

 calabazas; but the name "Yurumu" did not yet appear. 

 Almost a century before the visit of Piso and Marcgrav, Jean 

 de Lery saw in Brazil (1557) " certains citrouilles rondes, 

 fort douce a manger," called by the natives " Maurongaus " 

 (Voyage, ed. 1578, p. 217). The Tupi name "moranga" 

 (the first two vowels nasal) denotes a " handsome fruit." 



Lycopei'sicum escidentu7n^ Tomato. — We have only to note 

 an oversight in respect to the Mexican cultivation of the 2Iala 

 Peruviana., as it was named by some botanists of the 16th 

 century. De Candolle refers to Humboldt's statement that 

 the cultivation of this esculent was ancient in Mexico, but 

 adds that there is no mention of it in the earliest work on the 

 plants of that country, namely : Hernandez, " Historia." But 

 Hernandez (ed. 1651, p. 295 ff.) actually has a chapter " De 

 Tomatl, sen planta acinosa vel Solano," and describes several 

 sorts under their ^Mexican names. ^ 



^ I find only one writer in the 16th century who gave the Tomato a 

 name indicating a Peruvian origin — namely, Anguillara, whose treatise 

 " De Simplicibus" was first printed in Italian, at Venice, 1561. On his 

 authority the name Poma Peruviana is introduced in the synonymy by C. 

 Bauhin, in his annotations on Matthioli, 1598 (p. 761), and the "Hortus 

 Eystettensis " (attributed to Besler), published in 1613, is referred to by 

 the same writer (Pinax, 1771, p. 167) an authority for the names, inter alia, 

 " Poma amoris fructu rubro «&; Mala Peruviana." The "Hortus Eystet- 

 tensis " is the only authority cited for Mala Peruviana in the work to 



