i8 82.] 
Analyses of Boohs. 365 
or Marfield, and bearing the title “ Breviarium Bartholomei,” 
from the monastery of St. Bartholomew’s in London. The 
language is a curious mixture of Mediaeval Latin, Arabic, and 
old English. In many cases the names assigned to plants and 
drugs would be quite unintelligible without the appended 
explanation. In the author’s time, it appears that alcohol or 
alcofol signified a powder for the eyes; “ abarath” stood for 
white lead, and “ almahar” for litharge. As instances how the 
names of plants have changed, we may mention Ligustrum, 
which then signified the wildwhite convolvulus, though others 
used the same word for “ hunnisuccles,” and even for the “ prime- 
rose” and “ cowyslepe.” Oleander was then the wild olive-tree, 
Gladiolus was the sweet flag or acorus. The question may be 
raised why the cyclamen was called by our forefathers swine’s- 
bread, panis porcinus , or herthenote. The root is decidedly 
poisonous to man, and would probably not agree with pigs. Being 
mentioned more than once in this glossary under different names, 
it seems to have been regarded as of considerable medical im- 
portance. There is the remark appended, “ nascitur in locis 
ubi crescunt castaneas,” referring, of course, to the sweet chest- 
nut. The dodtrine of four cardinal properties in medicinal 
agents, i.e., heat, cold, moisture, and dryness, upon the mutual 
adtion of which their efficacy was supposed to depend, is, as a 
matter of course, accepted by the author. We commend this 
old notion to the neo-mystics of the day. It is, at least, as 
worthy of their notice as the notion of the four elements which 
they seem bent on reviving. 
The Glossary may be pronounced a curious and interesting 
contribution to the history of medical science. 
Land Nationalisation , its Necessity and its Aims. Being a 
Comparison of the System of Landlord and Tenant with 
that of Occupying Ownership in their Influence on the 
Wellbeing of the People. By Alfred Russel Wallace. 
London : Triibner and Co. 
We are second to no man living in our respedt and admiration 
for Mr. Wallace. But he has unfortunately chosen a subjedt 
which lies entirely outside the competence of the “ Journal of 
Science,” and which we are therefore quite unable to discuss. 
