S. papyracea, described by Poiret[2628] in 1804, and figured by Martius,[2629] is but very imperfectly known. It has foliage resembling that of S. officinalis, but, judging from Spruce’s specimens (No. 1871) collected on the Rio Negro, a multangular stem. It is probably the source of the Pará Sarsaparilla.
S. cordato-ovata Rich. is a doubtful plant, perhaps identical with S. Schomburgkiana Knth., a Panama species. Pöppig alleges that its root is mixed with that of the plant which he calls S. syphilitica.
S. Purhampuy Ruiz, a Peruvian species, said to afford a valuable sort of sarsaparilla, is practically unknown, and is not admitted by Kunth.[2630]
No new information on the several above mentioned species of Smilax is found in the review of this genus by A. and C. De Candolle,[2631] where 105 American species are enumerated.
History—Monardes[2632] has recorded that sarsaparilla was first introduced to Seville about the year 1536 or 1545, from New Spain; and a better variety soon afterwards from Honduras. He further narrates that a drug of excellent quality was subsequently imported from the province of Quito, that it was collected in the neighbourhood of Guayaquil, and was of a dark hue, and larger and thicker than that of Honduras.
Pedro de Cieza de Leon, in his Chronicle of Peru,[2633] which contains the observations made by him in South America between 1532 and 1550, gives a particular account of the sarsaparilla which grows in the province of Guayaquil and the adjacent island of Puna, and recommends the sudorific treatment of syphilis, exactly as pursued at the present time.
These statements are confirmed by the testimony of other writers. Thus, João Rodriguez de Castello Branco, commonly known as Amatus Lusitanus, a Portuguese physician of Jewish origin, who practised chiefly in Italy, has left a work recording his medical experiences and narrating cases of successful treatment.[2634] One of the latter concerns a patient suffering from acute rheumatism, for whom he finally prescribed Sarsaparilla. This drug, he explains, has of late years been brought from the newly found country of Peru, that it is in long whip-like roots, growing from the stock of a sort of bramble resembling a vine, that the Spaniards call it Zarza parrilla, and that it is an excellent medicine.
About the same period, sarsaparilla was described by Auger Ferrier,[2635] a physician of Toulouse, who states that in the treatment of syphilis, which he calls Lues Hispanica, it is believed to be better than either China root or Lignum sanctum. Girolamo Cardano of Milan, in a little work called De radice Cina et Sarza Parilia judicium,[2636] expresses similar opinions. After so strong recommendations, the drug soon found its way to the pharmaceutical stores; we find it quoted for instance in 1563, in the tariff of the “Apotheke” of the little town of Annaberg in Saxony.[2637] We have also noticed “Sarsaparilla” in the Ricettario Fiorentino of the year 1573.[2638] Gerarde,[2639] who wrote about the close of the century, states that the sarsaparilla of Peru is imported into England in abundance.
Collection of the Root—Mr. Richard Spruce, the enterprising botanical explorer of the Amazon valley, has communicated to us the following particulars on this subject, which we give in his own graphic words:—
“When I was at Santarem on the Amazon in 1849-50, where considerable quantities of sarsaparilla are brought in from the upper regions of the river Tapajóz, and again when on the Upper Rio Negro and Uaupés in 1851-53, I often interrogated the traders about their criteria of the good kinds of sarsaparilla. Some of them had bought their stock of Indians of the forest, and had themselves no certain test of its genuineness or of its excellence, beyond the size of the roots, the thickest fetching the best price at Pará. Those who had gathered sarsaparilla for themselves were guided by the following characters:—1. Many stems from a root. 2. Prickles closely set. 3. Leaves thin.—The first character was (to them) alone essential, for in the species of Smilax that have solitary stems, or not more than two or three, the roots are so few as not to be worth grubbing up; whereas the multicaul species have numerous long roots,—three at least to each stem,—extending horizontally on all sides.