_Prunus cerasifera_, the Cherry plum, first came to notice in pomological
literature as the Myrobalan plum, a name used as early as the last half
of the Sixteenth Century by Tabernæ-Montanus and given prominence in the
_Rariorum Plantarum Historum_, published by Clusius in 1601. Why applied
to this plum is not known. Myrobalan had long before been used, and is
still, as the name of several plum-like fruits of the East Indies, not
of the genus Prunus, which are used in tanning, dyeing, ink-making and
embalming. Until Ehrhart gave it the name _Prunus cerasifera_ in 1789 it
was known as the Myrobalan plum by botanists, some of whom, and nearly
all horticulturists, have continued the use of the name until the present
time.
Not a few of the botanists who have used Myrobalan for this plum have
called it a botanical variety of _Prunus domestica_. Among these were
Linnaeus and Seringe. Others, as Loisleur and Poiteau, have preferred the
name for the species as distinguished by Ehrhart.
Many of the early botanists, as Tournefort in 1700, Ehrhart in 1701,
Loudon in 1806 and Loisleur in 1812, gave the origin of the Cerasifera
plums as North America, but upon what authority does not appear. On the
other hand many European botanists, including Linnaeus, gave the habitat
as Europe or Asia. The supposition that this plum came from North America
hardly needs discussion. The plum flora of this continent has been well
enough studied so that it can be said that no plant that could by any
possibility be the Cerasifera plum grows on this side of the Atlantic.
Neither does it seem logical to consider this an off-shoot of _Prunus
domestica_, for fruit and tree-characters are distinctly different, and
for a member of the genus Prunus are remarkably constant. Moreover, there
is abundant evidence to show that this is a distinct species and that its
nativity is in the Turkish and nearby countries in Europe and Asia and
that there it has been in cultivation for a long time.
It is very significant that in the old herbals and botanies a frequent
name of this fruit is “the Turkish plum.” But more specific and almost
conclusive proof is that two forms of plums belonging to this species are
known to come from the Caucasus region. _Prunus divaricata_[86] is now
considered by some botanists to be a synonym of _Prunus cerasifera_ and
by others to be a botanical variety of the last named species. Ledebour,
who named it, found it in the Trans-Caucasian region. It differs from the
type only in having much divided, wide-spreading and nearly prostrate
branches. The Pissardi plum, a purple-leaved form of this species,
originated in Persia. A plum now growing in the Arnold Arboretum raised
from seed from Turkestan, presumably from wild stock, is identical with
plants of Cerasifera of European origin. And, according to Schneider,[87]
this plum is known in the wild state in Caucasus, Trans-Caucasus,
northern Persia and Turkestan.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account