& 
2 
PINETUM BRITANNICUM. 
+***S30&* **S^ 
im&&Slm 
rnfsyA 
-t-.xW"" Wws, 
ally very familiar with all forms of the cone. The largest of these he considers remarkably large ; 
the middle-sized ones a fair average type of cones. He informs us that, although picked from many 
hundreds, both larger and smaller could 
be found. “ A glance at them, how¬ 
ever,” says he, “ will be enough to con¬ 
vince you that on an average they are 
much smaller than cones of C. Libani ; 
and I consider this to be a fair and 
constant character to distinguish the two 
species. Instances may be adduced, of 
course, where cones of C. Libani are 
the smaller of the two, but such cases 
are exceptional, and cannot be depended 
upon. They are to be found, even 
in forests, much more different in size: 
I have seen, for instance, walnuts smaller 
than common hazel - nuts without my 
opinion of the relative size of the two being thereby affeCted in the least.” The scales are smaller 
than those of the others, and triangular, instead of being somewhat quadrangular [figs. 5 and 6]. 
The seeds, figs. 7 and 8, are con¬ 
siderably shorter than, but shaped as 
those of the Deodar; that is, the wing 
slopes gradually from the seed on the 
outer edge. (See comparative sketch 
under the article Cedar of Lebanon.) 
In other respeCts we see no difference between this Cedar and the other two. 
M. Cosson, who explored the botany of Algeria, and was familiar with the Cedar which grows there, 
unites, in his “ Indications of Geographic Botany,” the Cedar of Algeria and the Cedar of Lebanon, 
considering them to belong to the same species. 
Fig. 4 . 
Group of Cones of Cedrus Atlantica. 
Fig- 5- 
Fig. 6. 
Fig. 7. 
“ The Cedar of Algeria,” says he, “ only differs from the Cedar of Lebanon by its leaves being ordinarily shorter. As to the form and size 
of the cones, they furnish no distinctive character : for the Cedar of Algeria is only a variety of the Cedar of Lebanon, of which latter we have 
received authentic specimens from Lebanon and Taurus. Our view is confirmed by the opinion of Messrs Antoine and Kotschy, who equally refer 
the Cedar of Algeria to the Cedar of Lebanon, and we have seen specimens of that variety collected in the Taurus by MM. Kotschy and Balansa. 
The Cedar of Algeria appears under two forms : one, the most widely spread, is characterized by its shorter leaves generally arched, and almost 
connivent, and, above all, by their glaucous silvery hue ( Cedrus argentea, Renou, Annal. Forest., iii. pi. 2); the other is characterized by the leaves 
being a little longer, generally straight, divergent, and green ( Cedrus Libani, var. Renou, loc. cit., pi. 1). The study of the Cedars in the different 
forests of Algeria has brought us to consider the C. Libani and argentea of Renou as only modifications or sub-varieties due to local circumstances : 
in fact, generally, the young trees and the sheltered individuals have green and straight leaves; while'the leaves, on the contrary, are glaucous and 
connivent in the adult trees, and those exposed to the influence of wind and heat. We ought to add that sometimes we have found the two 
kinds of leaves growing together on the same plant. Under the influence of the local conditions just mentioned, the Cedar presents itself under 
two very different aspeCts. During its youth, or in ravines, it often affeCts the pyramidal form, while on the slopes it more commonly crowns itself 
and spreads out like a pyramid. The Pinus Halepensis, which equally appears under these two states, and which, both in Algeria and in Lebanon 
and Taurus, is found growing next the Cedar, shews the little importance that ought to be attached to the circumstance.” 
M. Decaisne, however, contends for the distinctness of C. Atlantica as a species ; and in a paper in 
the Revue Horticole, 1853, quotes a letter from M. Jamin, Director of the Nursery of Biskra, in which 
he gives the following information :— 
“ M. P. Jamin 
* Cosson, “ Rapport sur un Voyage Botanique en Algerie de Philipsville a Boskra, et dans les Monts Aures, entrepris en 1863, sous le 
patronage du Ministere de la Guerre,” in Annal. Science Nat., 4 ser., iv. p. 67. 
