Page:TheTreesOfGreatBritainAndIreland vol01.djvu/39

Rh in the neighbourhood of Nancy. Fruits of this form have been sown in the garden of the Forest School of Nancy, and have reproduced the twisted form in about the proportion of three-fifths; the other two-fifths of the fruit produced form like the common beech and intermediate varieties.

Many other varieties have been described; and other forms possibly occur wild which have not been noticed. Major M'Nair sent to Kew in 1872 from Brookwood, Knaphill, Surrey, a specimen from a tree growing there, and reported to be in vigorous health, in which the leaves are remarkably small and have only four pairs of lateral nerves.

The beech is indigenous to England. Remains of it have been found in neolithic deposits at Southampton docks, Crossness in Essex, in Fenland, in preglacial deposits in the Cromer forest bed, and at Happisburgh, Norfolk. Names of places of Saxon origin, in which the word beech occurs are very common, as Buckingham, Buxton, Boxstead, Boxford, Bickleigh, Boking, etc. The existence of the beech in Britain in ancient times has been questioned on account of the statement by Julius Cæsar that Fagus did not occur in England. H.J. Long has discussed what tree the Romans meant by Fagus, and the evidence is conflicting. Pliny described as Fagus a tree which is plainly the common beech. However, Virgil's statement that Castanea by grafting would produce fagos indicates rather that Fagus was a name used for the sweet chestnut; and this view is confirmed by the fact that out of the wood of Fagus the Romans made vine-props and wine-casks. The Latin word Fagus is derived immediately from the Greek Φηγός; and the Φηγός of Theophrastus is certainly the chestnut, probably the wild tree which is indigenous to the mountains of Greece. Caesar's statement probably implies that in his day the sweet chestnut did not occur in Britain.

The beech is not believed to be indigenous in Scotland and Ireland, and no evidence is forthcoming of its occurrence in prehistoric deposits in those countries. An able writer in Woods and Forests (1884, June 11, p. 404) contests this view, and speaks of the existence of two beech woods in the north of Scotland, not 10 miles from the most easterly point of Britain, where the trees were larger than any other timber tree, not excepting the Scotch fir, and where it produced fertile seed, while that of the oak was abortive. These woods were high and exposed, but the soil was good. In view of the way in which the beech ascends in the Vosges and the Jura to cold, bleak situations, finally becoming at 4000 feet a dwarf shrub, which