# The Trees of Great Britain & Ireland/Volume 1/Araucaria

The Trees of Great Britain & Ireland was a multi-volume work, privately published between 1906 and 1913. The first volume was published 1906. The plates of this volume were published separately
ARAUCARIA
    Araucaria, Jussieu, Gen. Pl. 413 (1789); Bentham et Hooker, Gen. Pl. iii. 437 (1880); Masters, Journ. Linn. Soc. (Bot.) xxx. 26 (1893).
    Dombeya, Lamarck, Dict. ii. 301 (non Cavanilles) (1786).
Tall evergreen trees, with naked buds and coriaceous leaves, which are widest at their bases and spirally arranged on the shoots. Usually diœcious. Male flowers in catkin-like masses, solitary or in fascicles at the ends of the branchlets; anthers numerous, with a prolonged connective, from which hang six to fifteen pollen sacs. Female flowers terminal, composed of many scales spirally arranged in a continuous series with the leaves, there being no obvious distinction between the seed-scale and the bract; each scale bears one ovule attached to the scale along its whole length. Cones globular, composed of imbricated wedge-shaped scales thickened at the apex. Seeds, one on each scale and adnate to it, flattened and without wings.
The genera Araucaria and Agathis constitute the tribe Araucarineæ, which are distinguished from the other Coniferæ by having a single ovule on a simple scale. In Agathis the ovule is free from the scale, while in Araucaria it is united with it. Cunninghamia, which was considered by Bentham and Hooker and by Masters to belong to this tribe, is now generally classed with the Taxodineæ; in it each scale bears three ovules.
There are about ten species of Araucaria, inhabitants of South America, Australia, New Guinea, New Hebrides, New Caledonia, and Norfolk Island. Araucaria Cunninghami has been reported several times as growing in the open air in England; but in some cases it is evident that Cunninghamia sinensis was the tree in question, while in other cases small plants were referred to which were speedily killed by the cold of our winters. Araucaria imbricata is the only species which is hardy in this country. There are fine specimens of some of the other species in the Temperate House at Kew, viz. Araucaria Bidwilli, 48 feet high; Araucaria excelsa, 48 feet; Araucaria Cunninghami, 47 feet; and Araucaria Cookii, 30 feet.
ARAUCARIA IMBRICATA, Chilean Araucaria
    Araucaria imbricata, Pavon; in Mem. Acad. Med. Madrid, i. 199 (1797); Lambert, Genus Pinus, 106, t. 56, 57 (1832); Loudon, Arb. et. Frut. Brit. iv. 2432 (1844); Kent in Veitch's Man. Coniferæ, ed. 2, 297 (1900).
    Araucaria Dombeyi, A. Rich. Conif. 86, t. 20 (1826).
    Araucaria chilensis, Mirb., Mem. Mus. Par. xiii. 49 (1825).
    Araucaria araucana, C. Koch, Dendr. ii. 206 (1873).
    Pinus araucana, Molina, Sagg. Storia Nat. Chile, 182 (1782).
    Dombeya chilensis, Lamarck, Encycl. ii. 301 (1786).
Araucaria imbricata is the oldest name under the correct genus Araucaria, and is, moreover, the one most generally used. Piñon is the Spanish name in Chile, Pehuen the Indian name.
Araucaria imbricata is a tree usually 50 to 100 feet high, with a cylindrical stem, only slightly tapering in adult trees, and attaining 3 to 5 feet in diameter. The bark is very rough and divided into large thick irregularly pentagonal or hexagonal scales. The branches, in whorls of 6 or 7, are at first very spreading, and in young or isolated individuals persist for a long time, but in the forest generally fall off until a broad umbrella-shaped crown of very crowded branches remains. In certain cases, secondary shoots appear on the trunk among the older branches as they die off.
Leaves: all of one kind, spirally crowded on the branches, sessile, coriaceous, rigid, ovate-lanceolate, with a sharp point at the apex, slightly concave on the upper surface, glabrous, bright shining green, marked with longitudinal lines, bearing stomata on both surfaces, margins cartilaginous; persistent for 10 or 15 years, withering during the later period of their life; their remains may be seen for a long time on the trunk and branches as narrow transverse ridges.
Male flowers: catkins almost cylindrical in shape, solitary or 2 to 6 in a cluster, terminal, sessile, erect, 3 to 5 inches long, yellow in colour, composed of densely packed anther scales, the tips of which are sharply pointed and recurved; pollen sacs 6 to 9. The male flowers frequently remain intact on the tree for several years; they generally in Europe appear early in spring, the pollen escaping in June or July.
Female flowers: ovoid, solitary, terminal, erect, about 3 inches long, composed of numerous wedge-shaped scales, terminating in long, narrow, brittle points.
Cones: globular, brown in colour, 4 to 6 inches in diameter, falling to pieces when the seeds are ripe (in England in late summer, in Chile in January or February). The cones take two years to ripen, fertilisation occurring in the second year in June or July, when the scales open and expose the ovule to the pollen blown from neighbouring staminate trees. Three months after fertilisation the seeds are fully matured.
Seeds: adnate to the scale and falling with it, 1 to 1½ inch long, wingless, covered by a thick brown coat. There are about 300 seeds in a cone.
Sexes.—The Araucaria is usually diœcious, the trees being either male or female. It was long supposed that there was a difference in the habit of the two sexes, due, doubtless, to Pavon's account of the matter. Araucarias differ, however, remarkably in habit, and no inference can be drawn as to sex from the habit or character of the growth of an individual. Monœcious trees (as is the case in nearly every diœcious species) are of exceptional and very rare occurrence. The most noted of these occurred at Bicton. Other cases have been recorded from South Lytchett, near Poole, and Pencarrow in Cornwall. (A.H.)
Distribution
This remarkable tree was discovered in or about 1780 by a Spaniard, Don Francisco Dendariarena, who was employed by the Spanish Government to examine the trees in the country of the Araucanos, with the object of finding out those whose timber was best suited for shipbuilding. His account of its discovery, as quoted by Lambert, pp. 106–108, is as follows:—
"In September 1782 I left my companion, Don Hippolito Ruiz, and visited the mountains named Caramavida and Nahuelbuta belonging to the Llanista, Peguen, and Araucano Indians. Amongst many plants which were the result of my two months' excursion, I found in flower and fruit the tree I am about to describe.
"The chain or cordillera of the Andes offers to the view in general a rocky soil, in parts wet and boggy, on account of the abundance of rain and snow which fall in these regions, similar to many provinces in Spain. There are to be seen large forests of this tree which rises to the amazing height of 150 feet, its trunk quite straight and without knots, ending in a pyramid formed of horizontal branches which decrease in length gradually towards the top, and is covered with a double bark, the ​inner 5 or 6 inches thick, fungous, tenacious, porous, and light, from which as from almost all other parts flows resin in abundance; the outer is of nearly equal thickness, resembling cork cleft in various directions, and equally resinous with the inner."
I may say that the district spoken of is not really part of the Andes at all, but a coast range separated from the Andes by a wide tract of low country, mostly covered with forest. And as regards the bark, though I did not see any old trees felled in Chile, the bark of trees of 40–50 years old felled in England does not show bark at all approaching the thickness described. Neither have I seen in the districts I visited myself any trees as tall as he describes, or more than about 120 feet. He states that it is also found "juxta oppidum Conceptionis." There are no mountains near Concepcion high enough for the Araucaria, and I think this must be based on false information.
Don Dendariarena goes on to say that "the wood of this tree is of a yellowish white, fibrous, and full of very beautiful veins, capable of being polished and worked with facility. It is probably the best adapted for shipbuilding, as has been shown by the experiments made in the year 1780, in consequence of which orders were given to supply the squadron commanded by Don Antonio Bacaro, then at anchor in the port of Talcahuano."
"The resin abounding in all parts of the tree is white, its smell like that of frankincense, its taste not unpleasant. It is applied in plaster as a powerful remedy for contusions and putrid ulcers, it cicatrises recent wounds, mitigates headaches, and is used as a diuretic, in pills, to facilitate and cleanse venereal ulcers. The Indians make use of the fruit of this tree as a very nourishing food; they eat it raw as well as boiled and roasted, with it they form pastry, and distil from it a spirituous liquor."
Lambert says: "In a letter which I have lately received M. Pavon mentions an important particular, not noticed in the above description, namely, that the male tree is not above half the size of the female, and seldom exceeding 40 feet in height." I am not able to confirm this from personal observation either in Chile or England, and Dr. Masters says that there is no reliable distinction between the male and female tree, whilst it is said in an account of the Araucarias in the Piltdown Nurseries that the habit of the tree is no guide to the sex.
It was first described by the Abbé Molina, who called it Pinus araucana. Ruiz and Pavon who explored parts of Chile soon afterwards sent specimens to Europe to a Frenchman named Dombey, which were described by Lamarck under the name of Dombeya chilensis, but the generic name he gave cannot stand because it was previously used for a genus of Sterculiaceæ.
In 1795 Captain Vancouver visited the coast of Chile, accompanied by Archibald Menzies, who procured some seeds which he sowed on board ship, and succeeded in bringing home living plants, which he gave to Sir Joseph Banks, who planted one of them in his own garden at Spring Grove, and sent the remaining five plants to Kew. One of these, after being kept in the greenhouse till about 1806 or 1808, ​was planted out on what is now called Lawn L, and was at first protected during winter by a frame covered with mats. Here it grew for many years and attained the height of 12 feet in 1836 (fide Loudon), but eventually died in the autumn of 1892 at the age of nearly 100 years. This is probably the tree figured by Lambert.
The first person who gives any account of the tree in its native forests, so far as I know, is Dr. Poeppig, whose account of the tree is printed in Companion to Bot. Mag. i. 351–355. It did not, however, become common in cultivation till the celebrated botanical traveller William Lobb, who was sent to South America by the firm of Veitch, sent home in 1844 a good supply of seeds which produced most of the finest trees now in England.
No account of his travels were, however, published, and on applying to Messrs Veitch before I went to Chile in 1901 I was informed that his journals, which I wished to consult, could not be found. The late Miss Marianne North was the first English traveller who published any account of the tree in its native forests, which she visited on her last journey in November 1884, mainly, as she says, for the purpose of painting this tree. But, owing to the difficulty and danger at that time of reaching the Andes, she went to the coast range of Araucania, called Nahuelbuta, which lies between the sea and the town of Angol, in the same district where the tree was probably first discovered. After describing her ride up from Angol to the mountains, which are here covered with a beautiful vegetation, among which Gunnera, Lapageria, Embothrium, Fuchsia, Buddleia, Alstroemeria, and many other favourite plants in English gardens are conspicuous, she says:—
"The first Araucarias we reached were in a boggy valley, but they also grew to the very tops of the rocky hills, and seemed to drive all other trees away, covering many miles of hill and valley; but few specimens were to be found outside that forest. The ground underneath was gay with purple and pink everlasting peas, and some blue and white ones I had never seen in gardens, gorgeous orange orchids, and many tiny flowers whose names I did not know, which died as soon as they were picked, and could not be kept to paint. I saw none of the trees over 100 feet in height or 20 in circumference, and, strange to say, they seemed all to be very old or very young. I saw none of the noble specimens of middle age we have in English parks, with their lower branches resting on the ground. They did not become quite flat at the top, like those of Brazil, but were slightly domed like those in Queensland, and their shiny leaves glittered in the sunshine, while their trunks and branches were hung with white lichen, and the latter weighed down with cones as big as one's head. The smaller cones of the male trees were shaking off clouds of golden pollen, and were full of small grubs; these attracted flights of bronzy green parrakeets, which were busy over them. Those birds are said to be so clever that they can find a soft place in the great shell of the cone when ripe, into which they get the point of their sharp beak, and fidget with it until the whole cone cracks and the nuts fall to the ground. Men eat the nuts too, when properly cooked, like chestnuts. The most remarkable thing about the tree is its bark, ​which is a perfect child's puzzle of slabs of different sizes, with 5 or 6 distinct sides to each, all fitted together with the neatness of a honeycomb. I tried in vain to find some system on which it was arranged. We had the good fortune to see a group of guanacos feeding quietly under the old trees. They looked strange enough to be in character with them, having the body of a sheep and the head of a camel; and they let us come quite near. On the other side of the mountains they are used as a beast of burden, though so weak that ten of them could not carry the load of an average donkey. After wandering about the lower lands, we climbed through the bogs and granite boulders to the top of one of the hills, and came suddenly to a most wonderful view, with seven snowy cones of the Cordillera piercing their way through the long line of mist which hid the nearer connecting mountains from sight, and glittering against the greenish blue sky. Each one looked perfectly separate and gigantic, though the highest was only 10,000 feet above the sea. Under the mist were hills of beech forest, and nearer still the Araucaria domes, while the foreground consisted of noble old specimens of the same trees grouped round a huge grey boulder covered with moss and enriched with sprays of embothrium of the brightest scarlet. No subject could have been finer, if I could only have painted it, but that 'if' has been plaguing me for years, and every year seems to take me farther from a satisfactory result."
Inspired by this charming description, and by a desire to see the magnificent forests of Southern Chile, whence I hoped to introduce new trees and plants to our gardens, I visited Chile in the winter of 1901–1902, and after various difficulties caused by the dispute about the frontier, which nearly led to a war between Chile and Argentina, I started from the hospitable home of my friends, Mr. George and Senora Bussey at San Ignacio, to see the Araucarias in the Sierra de Pemehue, a region where they attain their greatest perfection, and which, having only been recently conquered from the Indians, had been described by no scientific traveller; though Senor Moreno has written an excellent account of the Argentine side of the frontier, which I visited later.
The Sierra de Pemehue is a range of mountains lying on the west side of the upper course of the great Bíobio river, and is not, strictly speaking, a part of the Cordillera of the Andes, from which it is separated by that river. The greater part of it is covered with splendid forests, principally composed of beeches, Fagus obliqua and Fagus Dombeyi, and it was near the head-waters of the Renaico river that I first saw what is to me the most striking of all trees hardy in England, and the only Chilean tree which as yet seems to have acclimatised itself thoroughly in this country.
They were growing in scattered groups on the cliffs far above us at an elevation of 3000–4000 feet, and we did not enter the Araucaria forest till we got near the top of the pass, which crossed over a mountain called Chilpa, between the Renaico and the Villacura valleys. Here the trees were growing scattered among Coigue trees (Fagus Dombeyi), and higher up in a forest mainly composed of Niere (Fagus antarctica), many of which were killed by forest fires, which had not, however, destroyed the thick-barked Araucarias, though I saw here but few young trees and no seedlings. ​Their average height was 80–90 feet, and the diameter 2–3 feet, and the branches were mostly confined to the top of the tree, where they form a dense, flat-topped crown. On 27th January I saw much finer specimens in the valley above Lolco, on the road to Longuimay, and my companion, Mr. Bartlett Calvert, was successful in getting some excellent photographs which are here reproduced. Plate 17 shows the appearance of mature and young trees growing in an open grassy valley at about 4500 feet, with the high volcanoes of Longuimay and Tolhuaca in the background. The old tree on the right of the picture is about 90 feet, and the young one about 20 feet high, showing sixteen years of growth from a point 2–3 feet from the ground where the annual growths could no longer be distinguished. I therefore suppose this young tree to be twenty to twenty-five years old from seed.
Farther on in the same valley we came to much larger trees, which showed the curiously irregular slabs of bark of which Miss North speaks. The largest trees I saw had a girth of 24 feet at breast height, and were 90–100 feet high. The longest fallen stems I measured were little over 100 feet, and I should say 80–90 was the average height of full-grown ones. Plate 18 shows the habit which the trees assume when grown thickly at about 3500 feet elevation in the upper Villacura valley.
On the wind-swept ridges which we crossed higher up the pass, at an approximate elevation of 6500 feet, the Araucarias were much more stunted and had a very different habit of growth, but the high wind which prevailed, as it usually does at this season, made it impossible to photograph them. Two days later at Los Arcos, the frontier post of Argentina, I found scattered groves of Araucaria for about fifty miles south, as far as the valley of Quillen, but when we reached the country about the head-waters of the Pichelifeu river, about lat. 39° 30' S., I saw no more except a few isolated trees which appeared to have sprung up from seeds dropped by the Indians on their old camping grounds.
I had previously been told by Mr. Barton of Buenos Ayres, who is engaged in cutting timber on the north shore of the great lake Nahuelhuapi, about 100 miles to the south, that the Araucaria was found near this lake, and I had great hopes of discovering and introducing a new southern variety or species, which might prove hardier than A. imbricata.
But notwithstanding what Poeppig says as to the probability of its extension as far south as lat. 46°, I saw not a single tree on my journey from San Martin via Nahuelhuapi to Puerto Montt in lat. 41° 50', and none of the explorers who have been recently employed in surveying the frontier have, so far as I know, found it south of about lat. 41°. Sir T. Holdich is my authority for this statement.
Some of the trees here had much smoother bark covered with long tufts of grey lichen, and in this part of the forest there were plenty of young seedlings coming up, some of which I took up and unsuccessfully attempted to transplant to my friend's garden at San Ignacio.
The geographical range of the tree is therefore a very limited one, extending only from Antuco in about lat. 38° 40' to lat. 40° in the Cordillera, and on the coast range from about lat. 38° 30' to an unknown point probably not south of about lat. 41°. For, though Poeppig says it occurs on the Corcovado, he was speaking only from ​hearsay, and the sudden change of the climate, which here becomes an extremely wet one, is probably the reason why the tree does not exist on the west coast in a much higher latitude, as do the majority of the trees and plants which are associated with it.
Another point in which I must differ from Poeppig is the bareness of the Araucaria forests of other vegetation. Though, of course, where the trees are closely crowded not many plants grow in their shade, yet the number of beautiful terrestrial orchids and other plants which I found in the more open parts of the Araucaria forest was very striking, and Miss North's observations in the Nahuelbuta range quite confirm my opinion that the moderate shade of the Araucaria is not prejudicial to herbaceous plants.
The soil on which it grows is mostly of volcanic origin, sometimes covered with deep vegetable mould, but more usually dry and rocky; and the climate, though warm and dry in the months of December, January, and February, is cold and wet in winter.
The only exact particulars I can give of the climatic variations were taken during the winter of 1901 at Rahue in the upper Biobio Valley, near Longuimay, at an elevation of 700 metres, which is lower and thus probably warmer than that of the Araucaria region. These observations I have condensed as follows:—
| | | Maximum | Minimum Centigrade | Minimum Centigrade |
| Between April 21 | and 30 | + 26 (on 25th) | - 3 (on 30th) |
| Between„ May 1 | and„ 31 | + 19 (1st, 25th) | -7 (on 13th) | snow on 7 days. |
| Between„ June 1 | and„ 30 | + 22 (on 27th) | -6 (on 24th) | snow on 8 days. |
| Between„ July 1 | and„ 31 | + 12 (on 27th) | 5 (on 10th) | snow on 6 days. |
| Between„ Aug. 1 | and„ 30 | + 12 (on 19th) | 6 (on 17th) | snow on 5 days. |
| Between„ Aug. 1 | and„ 30 | + 12 (on 19th) | 6 (on 17th) | rain on 7 days. |
| Between„ Sept. 1 | and„ 30 | + 24 (on 27th) | ? 10 (on 2nd) | snow on 1 day. |
| Between„ Sept. 1 | and„ 30 | + 24 (on 27th) | ? 10 (on 2nd) | rain on 12 days. |
| Between„ Oct. 1 | and„ 31 | + 30 (on 17th) | ? 6 (on 8th) | snow on 2 days. |
| Between„ Oct. 1 | and„ 31 | + 30 (on 17th) | ? 6 (on 8th) | rain on 5 days. |
| Between„ Nov. 1 | and„ 23 | + 25 (on 21st) | ?? | snow on 2 days. |
| Between„ Nov. 1 | and„ 23 | + 25 (on 21st) | ?? | rain on 7 days. |
Reduced to Fahrenheit this register shows a very similar climate to that of some parts of England, very variable all the year round, but probably hotter and more sunny in winter.
As regards the summer climate I may say that in the months of January and February, which are the height of summer, it was never cold by day, and the sun and wind often unpleasantly warm, but at night the thermometer often fell to near freezing-point, and on one occasion, on 1st February, my sponge was frozen in camp just south of Lake Aluminé at about 5000 feet. We know that the Araucaria has borne in Great Britain temperatures below zero Fahr. without injury on dry and suitable soil, but it evidently will not endure the continuous wet of the southern coast region of Chile.
In the Forstliche Naturwissenschaftliche Zeitschrift, 1897, iv. 416–426, Dr. Neger, who was naturalist on the Chilean Boundary Survey in 1896–97, gives an ​account of Araucaria imbricata, which does not add anything of great importance for English arboriculturists to what I have already stated. He says that there are two types of Araucaria forest, one of which is characteristic of the rainy coast mountain range of Nahuelbuta and the west side of the Andes on the Cordillera of Pemehue; and the other, which is peculiar to the drier plateaux of the Argentine territory, on the east side of the watershed. He refers to Reiche's account of the Nahuelbuta forest in Engler's Bot. Jahrbuch, xxii. 110, which gives a good account of the flora. He does not confirm the statement that the male trees are smaller in size than the female, and speaks of trees occurring in deep valleys 40–50 metres high, and 2–2½ metres in diameter at about 3 feet, but does not give any exact measurements, so that this height is probably an estimate by the eye. He says that the seeds do not ripen until May in the year after flowering, but I found them ripe in February and fit to eat in January. He gives some excellent illustrations of Araucaria forests on Nahuelbuta, one of which shows a wider and more unbroken extent than any that I saw; another shows the ability of the tree to take root and grow in the crevices of bare rock. Another shows a forest at the foot of the great volcanic peak of Lanin, where some of the trees have been almost buried by sand and still retain their upright position. Lastly, he gives a small map of the distribution which, however, is not sufficiently detailed to be very accurate; this makes Antuco the most northerly point, and a point somewhere north of lat. 40°, the southerly range of the tree. He says that in the museum of Santiago there are geological evidences of the existence at a former period of Araucaria as far north as the Puna of Atacama.
Remarkable Trees
The finest tree which until recently existed in England was at Dropmore, which, however, began to die about four years ago, and was dead when the photograph (Plate 19) was taken in June 1903. It is said to have been purchased at a sale in the Royal Horticultural Gardens at Chiswick in 1829, and in 1893 to have been 69 feet high. When felled in 1905 Mr. Page found it to be 78 feet 6 inches high, and the butt was 27½ inches in diameter at the base under the bark, which was about 2 inches thick, the measurable timber in it being about 65 cubic feet.
There are many fine specimens at Beauport, Sussex, the seat of Sir Archibald Lamb, Bart., where a plantation was made about forty years ago, which gives a better idea of the Araucaria at home than any I have seen in England. It contains 27 trees on an area 102 paces round, and the inside trees are clearing themselves from branches naturally. Twenty of them Sir A. Lamb says are over 50 feet high, and in 1905 I estimated them to contain an average of 25 cubic feet (Plate 20). The largest tree at Beauport, as measured by Henry in 1904, was 74 feet high and 7 feet 9 inches in girth. The trees produce seeds freely, and a seedling growing in a chink of the garden steps was 4 feet high in 1903, and in 1905 had grown at least 2 feet more.
At Strathfieldsaye, Berks, the seat of the Duke of Wellington, the Araucaria has produced self-sown seedlings, a group of which is shown in Plate 15 e.
​At the Piltdown Nurseries in Sussex there are many fine specimens, one of which is said to have been 50 feet by 9½ feet in girth in 1854. Messrs. Dennett and Sons, the present tenants of this nursery, inform me that they believe this is one of the oldest trees in the country, and that in April 1903 it was about 70 feet high (perhaps more), with a girth of 7 feet at 5 feet, and 11 feet close to the ground. But a correspondent of the Gardeners' Chronicle says that in 1891 it was 65 feet by 10½ feet at 4 feet, and that 3½ bushels of seed were collected in this nursery in 1889, which produced hardier plants than imported seed. He also states that one of the trees which was cut down in 1880 threw up in 1884 a sucker from the roots, which grew 15 feet high in five years, and showed in 1891 no signs of branching out in any way. He also states that it does not matter when Araucarias are pruned, as they grow steadily all the year. The soil at Piltdown is a deep loam with gravel subsoil, and though, as it is here stated, it is generally thought that a dry, well-drained subsoil is essential to the success of this tree, yet I have seen in the garden of Foss bridge Inn in the Cotswold Hills, in a low damp situation close to the banks of the Coin, two Araucarias, male and female, about 40 feet high, which produced ripe seed in 1903, from which Mr. Holyoake, gardener to the Earl of Eldon of Stowell Park, has raised plants.
At Bicton, Devonshire, the seat of the Honourable Mark Rolle, there is a fine avenue of Araucarias, which has been often mentioned in print; but the trees in it do not appear to be increasing in height so fast as the good soil and climate would lead one to expect. When I saw them in September 1902 the best which I measured was about 50 feet high by 8 feet 9 inches in girth. Ripe seeds were falling at the time, from which seedlings were raised.
There are also fine trees at Castlehill, North Devon, the seat of the Earl Fortescue, which have produced seed for many years past.
At Tortworth Court, Gloucestershire, the seat of the Earl of Ducie, who has one of the best collections of trees in England, and to whom I am indebted for very much assistance and advice in this work, there are many large Araucarias, the best of which I found to be 53 feet by 7 feet 6 inches in 1904. It is producing many young shoots among the dying branches of the trunk.
In Scotland the Araucaria grows well not only in the south-west where, at Castle Kennedy, the seat of the Earl of Stair, there is a fine avenue, 200 yards long, in which the largest tree is 50 feet by 6 feet 2 inches in girth, and from which self-sown seedlings have sprung, but also in Perthshire, where there are fair-sized trees, one of which on the banks of the Tay in the grounds of the Duke of Athole at Dunkeld, I found in 1904 to be 50 feet high, but only 3 feet 11 in girth. It grows well at Gordon Castle exposed to the full force of the north-east wind, and has ripened seeds as far north as Inverness. But some of the trees recorded in Perthshire and other places in Scotland have been killed during severe frosts, and as a rule the growth is not so rapid as in the south of England. Two ​trees at Redcastle, Ross-shire, planted in 1843, measured by Col. A. Thynne, are 47 feet by 7 feet 4 inches, and 40 feet by 6 feet; the latter, though exposed to the east wind, is branched to the ground.
At Ardkinglas there is a very healthy tree 50 feet by 6 feet, and at Inverary, Minard Castle, Poltalloch, and other places in Argyleshire, there are several thriving trees of good size. At Loch Corrie, near Glenquoich, there are two trees at 450 feet above sea-level, one of which in 1905 was 43 feet by 6 feet 2 inches.
In Ireland it seems at home almost everywhere. At Fota, in the extreme south, Henry measured one 62 feet by 5 feet; at Ballenetray, Co. Waterford, a tree was recorded in 1884 as being 65 feet 6 inches by 6 feet; at Woodstock, Co. Kilkenny, there is a tree which in 1904 Henry found to be 65 feet by 9 feet 9 inches; and at Castlewellan, Co. Down, the seat of the Earl Annesley, and many other places, good trees occur.
In the milder parts of Western France the Araucaria thrives, but does not appear to have grown as large as in England. The best is reported by M. de Vilmorin as growing at Penandreff, near St. Renan, Finisterre, which in 1890 was 50 feet high by 7 feet 4 inches in girth. In the Revue Horticole, 1899, p. 460, this is confirmed. In Germany I have not heard of any fine examples.
Cultivation and Soil
The Araucaria should always be raised from seed, home-grown seed being preferable; for though plants have been raised from cuttings, which have grown to a considerable size, this mode of propagation is the cause of much disappointment, and of many ill-shaped and unsightly trees, not only in the Araucaria, but in many other conifers. The seed should be sown singly in pots, laying the seed on its side with the thick end in the centre, and will germinate best in a frame or cold greenhouse, where they can be protected from mice and frost. The young plants should not remain in pots more than one or at most two seasons, for though the tap-root does not become so long as in the case of pines, it wants room; and if the climate and soil are not very favourable, the young tree should not be permanently planted out till it is 1 or 2 feet high. The seedlings vary much in vigour, and on cold or calcareous soil many die young; but under better conditions the tree grows at least 1 foot a year when established.
It should be planted only in a well-drained situation, as severe frosts will often kill the trees when small; and though not so particular about the constituents of the soil as most Chilean trees, seems to thrive better on a sandy soil free from lime, especially on the red sandstone and greensand formations.
In the Gardeners' Chronicle, August 15, 1885, is an excellent note by Mr. Fowler, whose experience of this tree at Castle Kennedy was extensive, on the cultivation of the Araucaria; and another valuable note on the same subject will be found in the same journal, November 13, 1886, by Mr. C.E. Curtis. Both these authorities consider that the exudation of gum which often occurs in unhealthy trees ​is due to the roots of the tree having reached a cold wet subsoil, or from exposure to excessive cold. There seems to be no remedy for this disease, which usually kills the tree.
Araucarias do not thrive in the smoky atmosphere of a large town, and for this reason are not seen at their best in the immediate neighbourhood of London, nor do I know of any very fine ones in Wales or in the midland and northern counties of England.
Uses
The gum which exudes from the bark is used in Chile as a salve for wounds and ulcers. It has a pleasant smell like that of turpentine, and sets hard when dry, but I am not aware that it contains any special intrinsic virtue.
The seeds are largely consumed by the Araucanos and other tribes of Indians, and are occasionally sent for sale to the markets of Valdivia and Concepcion. I have eaten them both roasted and boiled, and found them very palatable, with a nutty flavour somewhat like that of almonds.
The timber is said to have been formerly used in the dockyards of Chile, but is now considered inferior to that of the Alerce (Fitzroya patagonica), and perhaps owing to the remote positions in which the trees grow, is not now used except locally. Through the kindness of the Duke of Bedford I received two planks cut from a tree grown at Endsleigh, near Tavistock, of which the wood does not show any specially attractive quality. The Earl of Ducie describes it as "not unlike good deal, but from the absence of turpentine and for some other reason it is smoother to the touch than the ordinary deals of commerce. In this respect its texture is not unlike that of redwood (Sequoia sempervirens). On testing a thin batten by breakage, it proved to be tough and strong for its size; but the fracture was abrupt, and showed little longitudinal fibre. The wood is somewhat heavier than ordinary deal." The timber is not mentioned in Stone's Timbers of Commerce. (H.J.E.)
* ↑ Araucaria Bidwilli has the leaves also spirally arranged, but by twisting on their bases they assume a pseudo-distichous appearance.
* ↑ In a letter in the Gardeners' Chronicle, May 1, 1869, Mr James Barnes, then gardener at Bicton, states, in reply to a suggestion that the tree there might be Cunninghamia, that it was really Araucaria Cunninghami, and that it had attained a height of 36 feet, with a diameter of branches of 28 feet, in a sheltered plantation in that favourable locality. But this tree was no longer living when I visited Bicton in 1902.—(H.J.E.)
* ↑ I have seen in Chile trees exceeding even 100 feet in height.—(H.J.E.)
* ↑ Such a case exists in a large tree at Tortworth Court.—(H.J.E.)
* ↑ Gard. Chron. 1890, viii. 588, 593, Fig. 118.
* ↑ L.c. 753.
* ↑ Specimens in the museum at Kew.
* ↑ Gard. Chron. 1890, ii. 667.
* ↑ Ibid. 1891, i. 342.
* ↑ Sir Joseph Hooker, who knew Menzies personally, tells me that he took these seeds from the dessert table of the Governor.
* ↑ Cf. Kew Bull. 1893, p. 24.
* ↑ Marianne North, Recollections of a Happy Life, 2nd ed. ii. 323, 324 (1892).
* ↑ Gard. Chron. 1893, i. 232; also l.c. 1872, p. 1324.
* ↑ Gard. Chron. 1885, xxiii. 342.
* ↑ Ibid. 1891, i. 342.
* ↑ Sir Herbert Maxwell informs me that he saw at Cairnsmore an old trunk of Araucaria which had died twenty years ago, still standing, with a young growth 3 feet high from the stool.
* ↑ Cf. Gard. Chron. 1890, ii. 633.
* ↑ Ibid. 1868, p. 464; 1872, p. 1323; 1894, xvi. 603.
* ↑ Woods and Forests, Feb. 6, 1884.
* ↑ Gard. Chron. 1900, ii. 633.