BOOK III. X. 18-21 



It is to be understood that this was said, not merely 

 of the seeds of legumes, but of the whole matter of 

 agriculture. If only we have discovered by a long 19 

 period of observation, as we certainly have dis- 

 covered, that a shoot which has borne four clusters, 

 when it is cut off and put into the ground, degenerates 

 so far from the fruitfulness of the parent stock as to 

 produce sometimes one, occasionally even two clusters 

 fcAver than before, to what extent do we think that 20 

 they will fall short which have produced two clusters 

 or usually one on the parent stock, when even the 

 most fruitful shoots often dread transplanting ? And 

 so I gladly profess myself a demonstrator of this 

 method, rather than its inventor, lest anyone should 

 think that our ancestors are unjustly deprived of the 

 praise that is their due. For there is no doubt that 

 they knew of it, even though it has been handed 

 down in no writing except those lines of Vergil which 

 we have quoted, and yet in such a way as to give 

 directions for the seed of legumes.*^ For why did they 21 

 reject the rod sprung from the hard wood, or even the 

 " arrow"* cut from the fruitful mallet-shoot which 

 they had approved, if they considered that it made no 

 difference from what place the cuttings were 

 gathered ? Was it because they had no doubt that 

 the power of fruitfulness was present in certain mem- 

 bers, so to speak, that they very wisely condemned 

 the stock shoot and the arrow as useless for plant- 

 ing ? If this is the case, there is no doubt that 



" Columella seems to refer to his previous quotation of 

 Vergil {Georg. I. 197-200) in II. 9. 12. 



* The arrow is defined in Chap. 17, sec. 2, of this book; 

 cf. Isidore, Orig. XVII. 5. 7, Sa^ittam rustici vocant novissimam 

 partem surctdi sive qui longius recessit a matre et quasi prosili- 

 vit, seu quia acuminis tenuitate teli speciem praefert. 



297 



