[1139] Darwin, Variation of Plants and Animals, etc., i. p. 338.
[1140] Decaisne, ubi supra, p. 2.
[1141] Ledebour, Fl. Ross., ii. p. 94; Boissier, Fl. Orient., ii. p. 653. He has verified several specimens.
[1142] Sir J. Hooker, Fl. Brit. Ind., ii. p. 374.
[1143] P. sinensis described by Lindley is badly drawn with regard to the indentation of the leaves in the plate in the Botanical Register, and very well in that of Decaisne’s Jardin Fruitier du Muséum. It is the same species as P. ussuriensis, Maximowicz, of Eastern Asia.
[1144] Well drawn in Duhamel, Traité des Arbres, edit. 2, vi. pl. 59; and in Decaisne, Jard. Frui. du Mus., pl. 1, figs. B and C. P. balansæ, pl. 6 of the same work, appears to be identical, as Boissier observes.
[1145] This is the case in the forests of Lorraine, for instance, according to the observations of Godron, De l’Origine Probable des Poiriers Cultivés, 8vo pamphlet, 1873, p. 6.
[1146] Rosenmüller, Bibl. Alterth.; Löw, Aramaeische Pflanzennamen, 1881.
[1147] The spelling Pyrus, adopted by Linnæus, occurs in Pliny, Historia, edit. 1631, p. 301. Some botanists, purists in spelling, write pirus, so that in referring to a modern work it is necessary to look in the index for both forms, or run the risk of believing that the pears are not in the work. In any case the ancient name was a common name; but the true botanical name is that of Linnæus, founder of the received nomenclature, and Linnæus wrote Pyrus.
[1148] Comes, Ill. Piante nei Dipinti Pompeiani, p. 59.