Philosophical transactions, Vol. L. Part I. For the year 1757.: Giving some account of the present undertakings, studies, and labours, of the ingenious, in many considerable parts of the world.Various
History
Philosophical transactions, Vol. L. Part I. For the year 1757.: Giving some account of the present undertakings, studies, and labours, of the ingenious, in many considerable parts of the world.
Various
Science -- Periodicals
In answer to this, I say their lobe-leaves are not equal; for I have
examined both the specimens and drawings of Dr. Kœmpfer’s spurious
varnish-tree, and I don’t find that the number of the _pinnæ_ exceed
seven on a side: whereas I have a small specimen of a leaf by me, that
was taken from the top of one of D’Incarville’s China varnish-trees,
which is above eight feet high, and stands in an open exposure; and
this leaf, tho’ but a foot long, has 12 lobe-leaves, on a side, and
each lobe indented at the base[210]. At the same time I observed, that
the leaves of the young shoots of another tree were a yard long, as
they were this summer at the garden of the British Museum. Another
thing is remarkable in the leaves of this China varnish-tree; and that
is, the lobes of the leaves, as they approach to the end, grow smaller
and smaller; whereas in the spurious Japan varnish-tree they are
rather, if there is any difference, larger towards the end.
I shall make this further remark, that tho’ these indentations on the
lobe-leaves may vary in number in this China varnish-tree; yet, as
I observed before, since they are continued on even in the smaller
leaves at the top of the branches of a tree eight feet high in the open
ground, it appears to me, that this specific character, besides the
form and insertion of the lobe-leaves, will ever distinguish it as a
different species from the _Fasi-no-ki_, or spurious varnish-tree of
Kœmpfer.
Mr. Miller now goes on to tell us, he is confirmed in his belief of
their being the same, by making some observations on the seeds of this
China varnish-tree; and therefore asserts, that they are the same. It
is natural to suppose he compared them with the accurate drawings of
the seeds of Kœmpfer’s _Fasi-no-ki_, p. 794. that being the only place
where the seeds of it are described.
In the very next paragraph Mr. Miller seems to forget, that from
his own observations on the seeds of the China varnish-tree, he has
asserted it to be the _Fasi-no-ki_ of Kœmpfer; but now he finds, in his
memorandums, that those seeds were wedge-shaped, and like the seeds of
the beech-tree; and that all the three seeds he received seemed to be
inclosed in one capsule: so that now he is at a loss what to call it;
and at the same time says I have been too hasty in calling it a Rhus.
Mr. Miller goes on, and allows this China varnish-tree changes to a
purple in the autumn; but not so deep as the true varnish-tree. I
suppose he means, by this true varnish-tree, the Carolina pennated
Toxicodendron; for Kœmpfer has not told us what colour the true
varnish-tree of Japan changes to in autumn.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account