ABIES ORIENTALIS. 
3 
belong to it; and one of them certainly does not. Confequently, the habitat of this fpecies, fo far as 
yet known, does not extend greatly beyond the regions to the eaft of the Black Sea, Trebizond not 
lying very far from its fouth-eaft corner. 
Hijlory. —This tree was firft noticed by Belon (latinifed Bellonius) in 1553. A work publifhed by 
him in the following year, “ Les Obfervations de plufieurs fingularites trouves en Grece, Afie, J udee, 
Egypte, Arabie,” fhews that he had travelled in or near the country where it is found. It was next noticed 
by Tournefort; and although his defcription is not fo minute in its details as the botanical defcriptions of 
the prefent day, there is no reafon to doubt that this is the fpecies referred to by him, independently of its 
geographical pofition, which correfponds fo nearly with that fubfequently affigned to it by Steven. There 
is only one doubtful expreffion in Tournefort’s defcription which would feem to point to the Silver Firs 
inftead of the Spruces. He fays “that the leaves are ranged like thofe of our Firs, that is to fay, ‘en branch 
aplatie.’ ” It is not quite clear what this means. It cannot, however, mean that the leaves are dichoto- 
moufly fpread out flat on each fide like the leaves in Silver Firs, becaufe the reft of the defcription dis- 
tindfly gives it all the characters of the Spruce fection of Fir, fuch as pendent cones, tetragonal rigid leaves, 
&c.; and Lambert having “been fortunate enough to obtain a copy of the drawing of Picea Orientalis, made 
by Aubriet, under the eye of Tournefort himfelf,” and having publifhed it, we know beyond doubt that the 
fpecies defcribed by Tournefort is that which is now introduced into this country under that name. Lin¬ 
naeus and Beiberftein, in their notices of the fpecies, merely copied Tournefort’s defcription above referred 
to, and another fhort defcription given by him in the “ Corollary” appended to his Injlitutiones rei 
Herbarii. Lambert was the next author who contributed anything original on the fubjedt of this fpecies. 
He had never feen either frefh or dried fpecimens of it, but he gave us the figure above referred to, taken 
from the drawing in the poffefflon of M. de Juffteu himfelf. The copy, he tells us, was made by M. 
Marefchal, painter to the Mufeum at Paris, “ whofe talents are well known,” and it was communicated to 
him by M. Latreille. The drawing in Lambert’s “Genus Pinus” is very charadteriftic, and perfedly corre¬ 
fponds with more recently received fpecimens, and with the young plants introduced into this country, feveral 
of which have already fruited. In addition to his drawing of Tournefort’s P. Orientalis , Mr Lambert gives 
figures of the cones, and branches of two other cones received by him, the one from Tiflis, from Sir Gore 
Oufeley, and the other from China, and both of which he fuppofed to be the fame as this. One of them, 
that from China, is obvioufly different, and appears to belong to Ledebour’s Picea obovata (Picea being 
ufed by him in the fenfe of Abies). The other, from Tiflis, is more doubtful; but it alfo feems cliftindt. 
We have never feen a leaf of A. Orientalis fo long as that from Sir Gore Oufeley’s fpecimen, figured by 
Lambert. The fcales of the cone are rhomboidal inftead of rounded, and the wing of the feed is differently 
proportioned, being comparatively longer. Fig. 14 fhews the outline of the feed and its wing in all the 
three figured by Lambert: the unbroken line giving the outline of the true A. Orientalis; the CCAX 
coarfely dotted line that of the Chinefe fpecimen which we refer to, viz. A. obovata; and the \ y 
finely dotted line that of the fpecimen from Tiflis, which is probably undefcribed. Steven is Kg. 14. 
the next author who fpeaks of it; but the additional information he gives is confined to its geographical 
diftribution. The remaining writers content themfelves with repeating the information of thofe who have 
preceded them. 
Properties and U/es. —We as yet know little from perfonal experience regarding this fpecies; but 
from the quotations above, taken from Tournefort, it would appear that it is ufed in the fame way as the 
Common Spruce, and may therefore be inferred to have the fame properties. 
Culture. —It appears to have been introduced into this country about 1838 or 1839. It thrives well, 
is perfectly hardy, and requires no particular attention or mode of cultivation. Mr Palmer received thirty- 
fix reports upon it, relating to the effedts of the winter of i860, and in no inftance were any of the plants 
[ I4 ] ‘ b injured. 
