316 



THE BEECH. 



This assertion has appeared so strange and unac- 

 countable to commentators, that some have got 

 rid of the difficulty at once by supposing that 

 the passage is corrupt^ and that Virgil meant 

 to say, the Chestnut is often grafted on the 

 Beech:" others have jumped to an e equally un- 

 warrantable conclusion, that the Beech was called 

 by the Romans Castanea," and the Chestnut 

 ^'Fagus;'' and that, accordingly, C^sar asserted 

 that the Chestnut did not grow in Britain. This 

 ingenious explanation is so satisfactory, that it 

 might be adopted at once, if sufficient evidence of 

 the fact could be adduced. But tliis is not the 

 case, for Pliny's description of the Castanea agrees 

 as exactly with the Chestnut, as that of the 

 Fagus does with the Beech. The fruit of the 

 Castanea,"' he says, we call also a nut, though 

 it approaches nearer in character to mast. It is 

 protected by a case beset ^vith strong prickles. 

 It is sirange that we hold as of no value a fruit 

 which Nature has so carefully guarded from in- 

 jury. As many as three nuts frequently grow 

 together in one case. The proper rind of the 

 nut is tough, and with hi this is a thin skin closely 

 attached to the substance of the nut, as in the 

 walnut, which, unless it be removed, spoils the 

 flavour of the fruit. The best way of preparing 

 them for food is by roasting. They are some- 

 times ground into meal, svhich is converted by 

 women into a wreched substitute for bread, and 

 eaten during their religious fasts." 



From a comparison of these passages, it will 

 plainly appear that the tree which we call Beech 

 was undoubtedly the Fagus of the Romans, and 

 the Chestnut, Castanea. Xor will there be any 



