Remarks on the natural Family of the Grasses.

From the Latin of Alexander Baron Von Humboldt.

Paris, 1817.

I HAVE, in a former part of this work, classed the Orders Gramineæ (Grasses,) Cyperaceœ (Club-rushes,) and Junceœ (Rushes,) in one natural family, under the denomination of Glumaceœ (the plants with a chaffy flower,) and shall now proceed to a summary notice of the species, in regard to number, configuration, and geographical distribution.

We may form a conception of the richness of America in plants of this nature, and of the smallness of the proportion of those which had come to the knowledge of the botanists of Europe, when we find, that of 343 species, observed by M.

Bonpland and myself in the course of our travels, scarcely a fifth or sixth part had been recorded.

In casting up the Glumaceœ, enumerated in Persoon’s Synopsis Plantarum, those found by Mr. Brown in New Holland and Van Diemen’s Island, and the new ones published by myself and fellow-traveller, we find that we are now acquainted with about 1200 Gramineæ, 900 Cyperaceœ, and 100 Junceœ, forming a total of 2200 Glumaceœ.

But, although this may appear a considerable number, and one that has, of late, received very extensive additions, it turns out, in fact, to be a proof of the negligence of botanists in respect to these three orders.

It has been already shown, that these three orders form one-tenth part of the Phænogamous vegetation of the earth; so that, in the 30,000 Monocotyledonous and Dicotyledonous species, which have been recorded, we ought to have met with, at least, 3000 Glumaceœ, if they had received from travellers an equal share of attention, with that which has been bestowed upon Compositeœ and Leguminosœ.

All over the world the Glumaceœ are found to increase their number in a wonderful proportion, either as you recede from the line, towards the poles, or as you ascend the mountain from the level of the sea.

But then this augmentation of number takes place in a far smaller ratio, from the line to the temperate zone, than that in which it is found to take place from the latitudes of France and Germany, towards the polar circle.

In Lapland, for instance, there are three times more Glumaceœ than Compositœ; while, in the temperate parts of Europe, the families are nearly equal.

On the other hand, in North America, from the 32d to the 45th degree of latitude, the Compositœ are already found to exceed the Glumaceœ by a fourth: a proportion which becomes still greater in the tropical regions of that continent.

I have purposely taken the Glumaceœ and Compositœ for points of comparison, as being the two families which, in every part of the world, comprise the largest portion of vegetable species, and display the greatest variety of configuration.

Next, in point of numbers, to the Glumaceœ and Compositœ, as far as I am able to judge, are the Caryophylleœ, Amentaceœ, and Ericinœ, in the frozen zone; the Leguminosœ, Cruciferœ, and Labiatœ, in the temperate zone; the Leguminosœ, Rubiaceœ, and Malvaceœ, in the torrid zone.

In considering, separately, the three natural orders which compose the family of the Glumaceœ, we shall find, that the respective relations of the Gramineæ, Cyperaceœ, and Junceœ, under the line, are, to each other, nearly as 25.7.1; in the temperate latitudes of the old world, as 7.5.1; under the polar circle, as 2 [Formel] . 2 [Formel] . 1.

So that it is only in Lapland that the Cyperaceœ are equal, in number of species, to the Gramineæ; but through the temperate zone to the tropics, the quantity of Cyperaceœ and Junceœ diminishes, in a far greater proportion, in the northern hemisphere, than that of the Gramineæ: insomuch that the Junceœ disappear almost entirely in the torrid zone.

The Cyperaceœ, on the other hand, seem better qualified to support every degree of climate; and it is specially among them that we find the plants which are common to both the new and the old continents, such as Kyllingia monocephala, Cyperus monostachyus, Chætospora aurea, and other species, which we have enumerated elsewhere.

So New Holland and South America produce, in common, Scirpus triqueter, Scirpus capitatus, and Fuirena umbellata; Europe and Australasia, Scirpus fluitans, Scirpus supinus, Scirpus setaceus, Scirpus lacustris, Scirpus triqueter, Schœnus mariscus, Carex cœpitosa, Carex Pseudo- Cyperus, Juncus maritimus, and Juncus effusus.

In general the countries which lie within the tropic of Capricorn appear to abound in the Cyperaceæ; for, of the 456 Glumaceæ of New Holland, described by Mr.

Brown, 214 are ranked in the Gramineæ, and 200 in the Cyperaceœ; which proportion, if it be admitted as the true one of the relative distribution of these plants, is widely different from that which is exemplified in the tropic of Cancer.

As to what I have to offer in regard to the secondary groups or tribes, into which the Glumaceœ have been divided according to natural affinity, I shall make use of an extract from the writings of Mr.

Kunth: “Some of the tribes of the Gramineæ are represented by numerous species in the tropical regions, while in Europe they have not a single species, or at least, such only as are very rare: for instance, the Paniceœ, Stipaceœ, Chlorideœ, Saccharinœ, Orizeœ, Olyreœ, and Bambusaceœ.

Europe does not produce a single species of Paspalum, only five species of the Stipaceœ, very few of the Saccharinœ, but one of the Oryzeœ, (Leersia oryzoides,) and not one of the Chlorideœ, Olyreœ, and Bambusaceœ.

On the other hand, the Agrostideœ, Avenaceœ, Arundinaceœ, and Bromeœ, are peculiar to our temperate latitudes.

In a like manner the Hordeaceœ, (an order which comprehends the principal part of our corn-plants,) seem specially adapted to the warmer regions of Europe and to Asia, while the alpine grasses of both the new and old continents belong principally to the Agrostideœ, Avenaceœ, and Bromeœ.

The genus Cyperus, is almost entirely tropical; for of the 150 species, which we know at present, scarcely 20 belong to Europe and the northern part of America.

There is not a Mariscus, nor a Kyllingia in all Europe; nor is there any species of the true Cyperaceœ, (those with two ranked imbricated glumes,) in the whole European continent.

The Scirpeœ seemed to be dispersed indiscriminately over every part of the globe, and of all the monocotyledonous plants, are those among which we meet with the greatest number of instances of species, which are common both to the new and old continents.”

In regard to Bamboos, M.

Bonpland and myself had the good fortune to meet with them in bloom twice, once on the banks of the Cassiquiare, (a branch of the Oronoco,) and again near the plantation of El Muerto, in the province of Popayan, between Bugus and Quilichao. For though these tree-like canes cover the marshy lands of the new world to a great extent, and often attain the height of 50 or 60 feet, yet they very seldom flower there.

Neither Mutis, who had explored so many Guadales, (as the marshes covered with Bamboos are called by the Creoles,) nor our friend Tafalla, who had accompanied Ruiz and Pavon in their well-known botanical expedition through Peru, had either of them ever been able to procure the fruit of the flower of a Bamboo.

On the other hand, in the East-Indies these gigantic grasses are known to flower in such abundance, that according to Dr. Buchanan, the seed mixed with honey, is a common article of food in the Mysore country.

The plant is there believed to bear fruit as soon as it has attained the age of 15 years, and to die immediately afterward.

It is distinguished by the natives of those parts into two sorts, one with a solid cane, called Chittu, and which grows in dry places, and the other with a hollow cane, called Doda, which comes quicker to maturity, and grows in watery places.

Having procured some canes of a Bamboo (Bambusa Guaduœ) at Guaduas, in New Granada, we saw at once how deficiently and incorrectly the genus had been characterized in all our botanical works, and made it our first concern to take the description of the plant on the spot where it grew, and attended in particular to the deeply three-parted style, and the three scales which surround the parts of fructification, and were then denominated by us its triphyllous nectary.

Loureiro is almost the only author who has described the style correctly in the Asiatic species, (for example in Bambusa verticellata.)

The Bamboo is not so general in the wet lands of South America as has been usually thought.

They are rather scarce, both in the Caraccas and New Andalusia, (if we except the valleys that lie between Cumanacoa and the town of San Fernando,) and the marshy woods of Guayana, that line the banks of the Cassiaquiare and Atabasso.

There are hardly any other on the shores of the Apure which runs through the province of Varinas, or on those of the Guainia, or Rio Negro.

In all the parts of America which were visited by Bonpland and myself, we only found them common in those places which lay exposed to the setting sun.

They abound principally in New Granada, where they constitute vast forests, and grow both in the sultry lowlands, between Turbaco, and Mahates, as well as in the highland valleys, where the climate is more temperate; for instance, between the towns of Guaduas and Villeta, in Santa Fè de Bogotà; on the western declivities of the Quindu Andès, near Buenavista and Carthagena; on the bank of the Cauca (between Bugas and Quilichao, in Popayan;) and, lastly, at the back of the volcanic mountain, Rucu- Pichincha, near the city of Quito; where a wide marshy level, covered with a close rank vegetation, extends through the province of Esmeralda, to the shores of the Pacific Ocean.

We found the Bambusa Guaduæ from on a level with the sea, up to the height of 860 fathoms; and what struck us was, that the highland plants of this species always contained more water than those on the plains, although both grew in soils of equal degrees of humidity.

In the highest stations (as from 600 to 900 fathoms) we only found them dispersed about in small bushes; but, in the level country, even as high up as 400 fathoms, they formed extensive forests.

In general the plants which belong to the Bamboo tribe, may be reckoned among the gregarious plants (plantœ sociatœ.)

The Nastus of the Isle of Bourbon, according to Bory St. Vincent, is a true subalpine grass, and never descends into the plains lower than to an elevation of 600 fathoms above the sea.

The genera Bambusa and Nastus, which most botanists of the present day have blended together, are to be distinguished from each other by the following characteristics:—In Bambusa the long subcylindrical ears comprise a great number of bipaleaceous (double-chaffed) flowers, of which the lower only are male ones.

Each of these bipaleaceous flowers is enclosed by a calyx of two glumes, (husks.)

The manner of the inflorescence, and the form of the chaffs are nearly the same as in the Poæ, from which, however, the Bambusæ are sufficiently distinguishable by an arborescent haulm, by having six stamens, a deeply trifid style, and three scales that surround the parts of fructification.

In the genus Nastus, on the other hand, the ear is oblong, compressed, and comprises a fixed number of chaffs, which overlay each other in two rows, nearly as in the Cyperaceœ.

Of these glumes, only the two upper ones enclose a flower like that of Bambusa, viz. one with a trifid style, six stamens, and three nectaries.

Judging from analogy, the two lower glumes may stand for the calyx in Bambusa, the others may be looked upon as neutral flowers with only one valve.

The species which belong to Bambusa are, arundinacea et stricta Roxb. verticillata Willd. latifolia et Guadœ, Bonpl. and an unpublished one of the Isle of Bourbon.

To the genus Nastus belong Calumet des hauts de Bourbon, and a Madagascar, species of which the specimen is preserved in the Herbarium of M.

Du Petit Thouars.

Bory St. Vincent has described the style and nectaries of Nastus correctly, but has blended the genus with Bambusa.

The water which is found secreted in the hollow of the American Bamboos has a somewhat brackish taste, but is not unpalatable.

It is said by the natives to have an injurious effect upon the urinary passages.

I could never detect any secretion from the American Bamboos, that gave me any idea of the sweetness of honey; but I met with the true Tabasheer or Tabaxir in the kingdom of Quito, and it differed but very slightly from that of the East Indies. I brought home a specimen of it, which was analyzed by the celebrated Vauquelin. It is called by the Creoles manteca de Guaduas, (Guaduas butter,) and contains 0,70 of siliceous earth, and 0,30 of potash, lime, and water.

I cannot account for the Tabasheer, which is a white substance, and friable like starch, having been compared to honey by those who have treated on the subject of the sugar of the ancients.

I could perceive no sweet taste in the Quito Tabasheer, not even when it was in the state of a mucilage, and before it was hardened by drying: and strongly suspect that none of the arborescent canes in all America contain any sweet liquid whatever.

As to the Tabasheer, before it coagulates into its wonted stony hardness, it is a viscid, white, and milky substance.

Kept for five months, it exhales a strongly fetid animal smell.

The same property was observed by Dr. Patrick Russell, the oriental traveller, in what he terms the salt of the Asiatic Bamboo, while Garcias del Huerto, who resided for a long time at Goa, in quality of physician to the viceroy, is the only author who speaks of a sweet juice from the Bamboo.

The ancients seem to have been led to confound true sugar with Tabasheer in the first place, from both being the produce of a cane, and in the second from the Sanscrit word sharkara, which at this day (like the Persian shaker, and the Hindustanée schukur) is used for our sugar, not properly meaning something which is sweet, but something that is lapideous and granulated, as we learn from Boppius, on the authority of Amarasinha. It is probable that the word scharkara originally meant only Tabasheer, (saccar mombu,) but was subsequently transferred from similitude of appearance to our sugar from the smaller cane (ikschut, kandekschu, kanda.)

The word Bamboo is derived from mombu; and from kanda we get candy, (sugar-candy.)

In tabasheer we trace the Persian word scher, which means milk, in Sanscrit kschiram.

Pliny, as has been ingeniously demonstrated by Salmasius, in opposition to Scaliger, clearly describes tabasheer of the Bamboo under the name of sugar, when he speaks of it as “a honey formed in canes, white like gum, crumbling between the teeth, found in lumps about the size of a filbert, and only used medicinally.”

Yet it is manifest from the verses of Varro, quoted by Isidorus, from passages of Theophrastus, Lucan, Solinus, and especially Strabo, on the authority of Eratosthenes, that the ancients had derived some notion of our sugar from the East Indies, and affirmed that it was obtained from canes without the assistance of the bee.

But then they believed that a liquid of the sweetness of honey was expressed from the roots of the large kind of canes, confounding the root with the haulm and the humble sugar cane (Saccharum officinale) with the Bamboo, “a joint of which, when split asunder, they described as large enough to form a navigable bark.”

Others among them, as Seneca, Dioscorides, and Alexander Aphrodisæus, believed true sugar to be the morning dews of the canes, collected on the foliage of the plant.

It is certain that the sugar-cane is indigenous in the neighbourhood of Almangar, in the East Indies, on the banks of the Euphrates, and at Siraf; but I suspect that in that part of Asia which was frequented by the Greeks, the plant was only expressed for the purpose of procuring a beverage for immediate use, and that the juice never could have been exported, owing to its tendency to ferment.

So that I conclude, that hard sugar was unknown to the ancients, and that when they speak of a solid sugar, they mean tabasheer or scharkara of Bamboo.

The art of making sugar from the cane was not mentioned by any writers until the fifth century, and as the learned Sprangell has first shown, Moses Chorenensis, in describing the beauties of the province of Chorasan, mentions the valley of Gundi-Saporem “as place where the precious sugar was made.” I have proved in another place, that the manufacture of sugar was of the highest antiquity in China.

It may be hardly thought necessary that we should mention in this place, that before America was discovered by the Spaniards, the inhabitants of that continent and the adjacent islands, were entirely unacquainted either with the sugar canes, or with any of our corn plants, (which last are indigenous of the country between the Kur and the Terek, in Persia and Armenia,) or with rice.

The Spanish writers on the subject of America, give the name of small-rice (Oryza parva,) to the Chenopodium Quinoa, which is common in Santa Fè de Bogotá, and in the kingdom of Quito, in the same way as the Anglo-Americans did that of Canada rice to a species of Zizania.

Turkey corn, (Zea Mays,) like many of the plants which have been in general cultivation from remote periods, is not found growing wild in any part of America.

We have to lament that travellers have not made us correctly acquainted with the characters of the plants mentioned cursorily by Molina in his history of Chili, under the names of Secale Magu and Hordeum Tuca, of which the Araucanos formerly made a bread called coque.

We know from Cortes that the Agave and Turkey corn afforded the Americans a honey independently of the bee, and that he saw it in market at Tenochlitl.