Chapter I: Part 1

Transcriber’s Notes:

Underscores “_” before and after a word or phrase indicate _italics_
in the original text.
Equal signs “=” before and after a word or phrase indicate =bold=
in the original text.
Small capitals have been converted to SOLID capitals.
Illustrations have been moved so they do not break up paragraphs.
Old or antiquated spellings have been preserved.
Typographical and punctuation errors have been silently corrected.

PHARMACOGRAPHIA.

A HISTORY OF
THE PRINCIPAL DRUGS
OF VEGETABLE ORIGIN, MET WITH IN
GREAT BRITAIN AND BRITISH INDIA.

BY
FRIEDRICH A. FLÜCKIGER, PHIL. DR.,
PROFESSOR IN THE UNIVERSITY OF STRASSBURG,
AND
DANIEL HANBURY, F.R.S.,
FELLOW OF THE LINNEAN AND CHEMICAL SOCIETIES
OF LONDON.

_SECOND EDITION._

_London_:
MACMILLAN AND CO.
1879.

[_The Right of Translation and Reproduction is reserved._]

PREFACE.

PHARMACOGRAPHIA, the word which gives the title to this book, indicates the nature of the work to which it has been prefixed. The term means simply a _writing about drugs_; and it has been selected not without due consideration, as in itself distinctive, easily quoted, and intelligible in many languages.

Pharmacographia, in its widest sense, embodies and expresses the joint intention of the authors. It was their desire, not only to write upon the general subject, and to utilize the thoughts of others; but that the book which they decided to produce together should contain observations that no one else had written down. It is in fact a record of personal researches on the principal drugs derived from the vegetable kingdom, together with such results of an important character as have been obtained by the numerous workers on Materia Medica in Europe, India, and America.

Unlike most of their predecessors in Great Britain during this century, the authors have not included in their programme either Pharmacy or Therapeutics; nor have they attempted to give their work that diversity of scope which would render it independent of collateral publications on Botany and Chemistry.

While thus restricting the field of their inquiry, the authors have endeavoured to discuss with fuller detail many points of interest which are embraced in the special studies of the pharmacist; and at the same time have occasionally indicated the direction in which further investigations are desirable. A few remarks on the heads under which each particular article is treated, will explain more precisely their design.

The drugs included in the present work are chiefly those which are commonly kept in store by pharmacists, or are known in the drug and spice market of London. The work likewise contains a small number which belong to the _Pharmacopœia of India_: the appearance of this volume seemed to present a favourable opportunity for giving some more copious notice of the latter than has hitherto been attempted.

Supplementary to these two groups must be placed a few substances which possess little more than historical interest, and have been introduced rather in obedience to custom, and for the sake of completeness, than on account of their intrinsic value.

Each drug is headed by the Latin name, followed by such few synonyms as may suffice for perfect identification, together in most cases with the English, French, and German designation.

In the next section, the _Botanical Origin_ of the substance is discussed, and the area of its growth, or locality of its production is stated. Except in a few instances, no attempt has been made to furnish botanical descriptions of the plants to which reference is made. Such information may readily be obtained from original and special sources, of which we have quoted some of the most important.

Under the head of _History_, the authors have endeavoured to trace the introduction of each substance into medicine, and to bring forward other points in connection therewith, which have not hitherto been much noticed in any recent work. This has involved researches which have been carried on for several years, and has necessitated the consultation of many works of general literature. The exact titles of these works have been scrupulously preserved, in order to enable the reader to verify the statements made, and to prosecute further historical inquiries. In this portion of their task, the authors have to acknowledge the assistance kindly given them by Professors Heyd[1] of Stuttgart, Winkelmann of Heidelberg, Monier Williams of Oxford, Dümichen of Strassburg; and on subjects connected with China, by Mr. A. Wylie and Dr. Bretschneider. The co-operation in various directions of many other friends has been acknowledged in the text itself.

[1] The admirable work of this author—_Geschichte des Levantehandels im Mittelalter_, 2 vols., Stuttgart, 1879—appeared when the second edition of our Pharmacographia was already in the press.

In some instances the _Formation_, _Secretion_, or _Method of Collection_ of a drug, has been next detailed: in others, the section _History_ has been immediately followed by the _Description_, succeeded by one in which the more salient features of _Microscopic Structure_ have been set forth. The authors have not thought it desirable to amplify the last named section, as the subject deserves to be treated in a special work, and to be illustrated by engravings. Written descriptions of microscopic structure are tedious and uninteresting, and however carefully drawn up, must often fail to convey the true meaning which would be easily made evident by the pencil. The reader who wishes for illustrations of the minute structure of drugs may consult the works named in the footnote.[2]

The next division includes the important subject of _Chemical Composition_, in which the authors have striven to point out to the reader familiar with chemistry what are the constituents of greatest interest in each particular drug—what the characters of the less common of those constituents—and by whom and at what date the chief investigations have been made. A knowledge of the name and date provides a clue to the original memoir, which may usually be found, either _in extenso_ or in abstract, in more than one periodical. It has been no part of the authors’ plan to supersede reference to standard works on chemistry, or to describe the chemical character of substances[3] which may be easily ascertained from those sources of information which should be within the reach of every pharmaceutical inquirer.

In the section devoted to _Production and Commerce_, the authors have given such statistics and other trade information as they could obtain from reliable sources; but they regret that this section is of very unequal value. Duties have been abolished, and a general and continuous simplification of tariffs and trade regulations has ensued. The details, therefore, that used to be observed regarding the commerce in drugs, exists no longer in anything like their former state of completeness: hence the fragmentary nature of much of the information recorded under this head.

The medicinal uses of each particular drug are only slightly mentioned, it being felt that the science of therapeutics lies within the province of the physician, and may be wisely relinquished to his care. At the same time it may be remarked that the authors would have rejoiced had they been able to give more definite information as to the technical or economic uses of some of the substances they have described.

[2] Berg, _Anatomischer Atlas zur pharmazeutischen Waarenkunde_, Berlin, 1865. 4to., with 50 plates.

Flückiger, _Grundlagen der pharmaceutischen Waarenkunde, Einleitung in das Studium der Pharmacognosie_, Berlin, 1873.

Planchon, _Traité pratique de la détermination des drogues simples d’origine végétale_, Paris, 1874.

Luerssen, _Medicinisch-Pharmaceutische Botanik_, Leipzig (in progress).

[3] For further information, see Flückiger, _Pharmaceutische Chemie_, Berlin, 1879.

What has been written under the head of _Adulteration_ is chiefly the result of actual observation, or might otherwise have been much extended. The authors would rather rely on the characters laid down in preceding sections than upon empirical methods for the determination of purity. The heading of _Substitutes_ has been adopted for certain drugs, more or less related to those described in special articles, yet not actually used by way of adulteration.

A work professing to bring together the latest researches in any subject will naturally be thought to contain needless innovations. Whilst deprecating the inconvenience of changes of nomenclature, the authors have had no alternative but to adopt the views sanctioned by the leaders of chemical and botanical science, and which the progress of knowledge has required. The common designations of drugs may indeed remain unchanged:—hellebore, aconite, colchicum, anise, and caraway, need no modernizing touch. But when we attempt to combine with these simple names, words to indicate the organ of the plant of which they are constituted, questions arise as to the strict application of such terms as root, rhizome, tuber, corm, about which a diversity of opinion may be entertained.

It has been the authors’ aim to investigate anew the field of Vegetable Materia Medica, in order as far as possible to clear up doubtful points, and to remove some at least of the uncertainties by which the subject is surrounded. In furtherance of this plan they have availed themselves of the resources offered by Ancient and Modern History; nor have they hesitated to lay under contribution either the teaching of men eminent in science, or the labours of those who follow the paths of general literature. How far they have accomplished their desire remains for the public to decide.

CORRIGENDA.

Page 57, footnote 4; _for_ qui produit,
_read_ qui a produit.
” 86, 13th line from bottom; _for_ Bauchin,
_read_ Bauhin.
” 128, footnote 3; _read_ Adversariorum,
_for_ Adersariorum.
” 161, line from top; _read_ southern and south-western
part, _for_ northern part.
” 265, footnote 2; _for_ 4794 grammes,
_read_ 4·794 grammes.
” 271, line 5 from bottom; _read_ στνραξ νγρὸϛ
_for_ πνρα ζνγρὸϛ.
” 368, line 12 from bottom; _read_ Flora, _for_ Floræ.
” ” ” 20 ” ” mossing, _for_ motsing.
” 369, ” 17 from top; _read_ José, _for_ Jose.
” 404, ” 2 from bottom; _read_ Xarnauz,
_for_ Xarnaux.
” ” footnote 7; _read_ por, _for_ par.
” ” line 12 from bottom; _read_ Barbarigo,
_for_ Barberigo.
” 407, ” 5 ” ” benzoic, _for_ benzoin.
” 469, lines 21 and 24 from top; with reference to _Nicotiana
rustica_ and _N. repanda_,
see _Pharm. Journ._ ix. (1878) 710.
” 558, footnote 3; _read_ 562, _for_ 652.
” 559, line 24 from top; _read_ 1849, _for_ 1749.

PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION.

The premature death—March 24, 1875—of my lamented friend Daniel Hanbury, having deprived me of his invaluable assistance, I have attempted to prepare the new edition of our work with adherence to the same principles by which we were guided from the beginning.

I desire to acknowledge my obligations for great and valuable assistance to my friend Thomas Hanbury, Esq., F.L.S., who has also honoured the memory of his late brother by causing the scientific researches of the latter to be collected and republished in the handsome volume entitled, “Science Papers, chiefly Pharmacological and Botanical, by Daniel Hanbury, edited, with memoir, by Joseph Ince,” London. 1876. To Dr. Charles Rice of New York, editor of “New Remedies,” I am indebted for much kindly extended and valuable information, and to whose intimate acquaintance with oriental literature, both ancient and modern, many of the following pages bear ample testimony. I am likewise indebted for similar assistance to my friends Professors Goldschmidt and Nöldeke, Strassburg. Information of various kinds, as well as valuable specimens of drugs, have also been courteously supplied to me by the following gentlemen, viz.:—Cesar Chantre, Esq., F.L.S., London; Prof. Dymock, Bombay; H. Fritzsche, Esq. (Schimmel &, Leipzig); E. M. Holmes, Esq., F.L.S., &c., London; J. E. Howard, Esq., F.R.S., &c., London; David Howard, Esq., F.C.S., &c.; Wm. Dillworth Howard, F.I.C., London; Capt. F. M. Hunter, F.G.S., &c., Assistant Resident, Aden; A. Oberdörffer, Esq., Hamburg; Prof. Edward Schär, Zürich; Dr. J. E. de Vry, the Hague, &c.

On mature consideration, it was deemed expedient to omit in the new edition a large number of references relating more especially to chemical facts. Yet, in most instances, not only the author but also the year has been stated in which the respective observation or discovery was made, or at least the year in which it was published or recorded. Every such fact of any importance may thus, by means of those short references, be readily traced and consulted, if wished for, either in the original sources, in abstracts therefrom, or in the periodical reports. Opportunities of the latter kind are abundantly afforded by the German _Jahresbericht der Pharmacie_, &c., published at Göttingen since 1844, successively by Martius, Wiggers, Husemann, and at the present time by Dragendorff. The same may be said, since 1857, of the _Report on the Progress of Pharmacy_, as contained annually in the Proceedings of the American Pharmaceutical Association, and likewise, since 1870, of the _Yearbook of Pharmacy_, for which the profession is indebted to the British Pharmaceutical Conference.

PROF. FLÜCKIGER.
STRASSBURG, GERMANY, _October, 1879_.

EXPLANATIONS.

=Polarization.=—Most essential oils, and the solutions of several substances described in this book are capable of effecting the deviation of a ray of polarized light. The amount of this rotatory power cannot be regarded as constant in essential oils, and is greatly influenced by various causes. As to alkaloids and other organic compounds, the deviation frequently depends upon the nature and quantity of the solvent. The authors have thought it needful to record in numerous cases the results of such optical investigations, as determined by means of the _Polaristrobometer_ invented by Wild, and described in Poggendorff’s _Annalen der Physik und Chemie_, vol. 122 (1864) p. 626; or more completely in the _Bulletin de l’Académie impériale des Sciences de St. Pétersbourg_, tome viii. (1869) p. 33.

=Measurements and Weights.=—The authors regret to have been unable to adopt one standard system of stating measurements. They have mostly employed the English inch: the accompanying woodcut will facilitate its comparison with the French decimal scale. The word _millimetre_ is indicated in the text by the contraction _mm._; _micromillimetre_, signifying the thousandth part of a millimetre, and only used in reference to the microscope, is abbreviated thus, _mkm._

1 inch = 25·399 millimetres.
1 gallon = 4·543 litres.
1 ounce (oz.) avdp. = 28·34 grammes.
1 lb. avoirdupois = 453·59 ”
1 cwt. = 112 lb. = 50·8 kilogrammes.
1 ton = 2240 ” = 1016 ”
1 kilogramme = 2·204 lb. avoirdupois.
1 pecul = 133·33 lb. = 60·479 kilogrammes.

=Thermometer.=—The _Centigrade Thermometer_ has been alone adopted. The following table is given _for comparing the degrees of the Centigrade or Celsius Thermometer with those of Fahrenheit’s Scale_.

THERMOMETRIC TABLE.

--------------+----------------+-----------------+---------------
CENT. FAHR. | CENT. FAHR. | CENT. FAHR. | CENT. FAHR.
--------------+----------------+-----------------+---------------
-29° -20·2° | + 41° + 105·8° | +111 +231·8 | +181 +357·8
28 18·4 | 42 107·6 | 112 233·6 | 182 359·6
27 16·6 | 43 109·4 | 113 235·4 | 183 361·4
26 14·8 | 44 111·2 | 114 237·2 | 184 363·2
25 13·0 | 45 113·0 | 115 239·0 | 185 365·0
24 11·2 | 46 114·8 | 116 240·8 | 186 366·8
23 9·4 | 47 116·6 | 117 242·6 | 187 368·6
22 7·6 | 48 118·4 | 118 244·4 | 188 370·4
21 5·8 | 49 120·2 | 119 246·2 | 189 372·2
20 4·0 | 50 122·0 | 120 248·0 | 190 374·0
| | |
19 2·2 | 51 123·8 | 121 249·8 | 191 375·8
18 -0·4 | 52 125·6 | 122 251·6 | 192 377·6
17 +1·4 | 53 127·4 | 123 253·4 | 193 379·4
16 3·2 | 54 129·2 | 124 255·2 | 194 381·2
15 5·0 | 55 131·0 | 125 257·0 | 195 383·0
14 6·8 | 56 132·8 | 126 258·8 | 196 384·8
13 8·6 | 57 134·6 | 127 260·6 | 197 386·6
12 10·4 | 58 136·4 | 128 262·4 | 198 388·4
11 12·2 | 59 138·2 | 129 264·2 | 199 390·2
10 14·0 | 60 140·0 | 130 266·0 | 200 392·0
| | |
9 15·8 | 61 141·8 | 131 267·8 | 201 393·8
8 17·6 | 62 143·6 | 132 269·6 | 202 395·6
7 19·4 | 63 145·4 | 133 271·4 | 203 397·4
6 21·2 | 64 147·2 | 134 273·2 | 204 399·2
5 23·0 | 65 149·0 | 135 275·0 | 205 401·0
4 24·8 | 66 150·8 | 136 276·8 | 206 402·8
3 26·6 | 67 152·6 | 137 278·6 | 207 404·6
2 28·4 | 68 154·4 | 138 280·4 | 208 406·4
-1 30·2 | 69 156·2 | 139 282·2 | 209 408·2
0 32·0 | 70 158·0 | 140 284·0 | 210 410·0
| | |
+1 33·8 | 71 159·8 | 141 285·8 | 211 411·8
2 35·6 | 72 161·6 | 142 287·6 | 212 413·6
3 37·4 | 73 163·4 | 143 289·4 | 213 415·4
4 39·2 | 74 165·2 | 144 291·2 | 214 417·2
5 41·0 | 75 167·0 | 145 293·0 | 215 419·0
6 42·8 | 76 168·8 | 146 294·8 | 216 420·8
7 44·6 | 77 170·6 | 147 296·6 | 217 422·6
8 46·4 | 78 172·4 | 148 298·4 | 218 424·4
9 48·2 | 79 174·2 | 149 300·2 | 219 426·2
10 50·0 | 80 176·0 | 150 302·0 | 220 428·0
| | |
11 51·8 | 81 177·8 | 151 303·8 | 221 429·8
12 53·6 | 82 179·6 | 152 305·6 | 222 431·6
13 55·4 | 83 181·4 | 153 307·4 | 223 433·4
14 57·2 | 84 183·2 | 154 309·2 | 224 435·2
15 59·0 | 85 185·0 | 155 311·0 | 225 437·0
16 60·8 | 86 186·8 | 156 312·8 | 226 438·8
17 62·6 | 87 188·6 | 157 314·6 | 227 440·6
18 64·4 | 88 190·4 | 158 316·4 | 228 442·4
19 66·2 | 89 192·2 | 159 318·2 | 229 444·2
20 68·0 | 90 194·0 | 160 320·0 | 230 446·0
|
21 69·8 | 91 195·8 | 161 321·8 | 231 447·8
22 71·6 | 92 197·6 | 162 323·6 | 232 449·6
23 73·4 | 93 199·4 | 163 325·4 | 233 451·4
24 75·2 | 94 201·2 | 164 327·2 | 234 453·2
25 77·0 | 95 203·0 | 165 329·0 | 235 455·0
26 78·8 | 96 204·8 | 166 330·8 | 236 456·8
27 80·6 | 97 206·6 | 167 332·6 | 237 458·6
28 82·4 | 98 208·4 | 168 334·4 | 238 460·4
29 84·2 | 99 210·2 | 169 336·3 | 239 462·2
30 86·0 | 100 212·0 | 170 338·0 | 240 464·0
| | |
31 87·8 | 101 213·8 | 171 339·8 | 241 465·8
32 89·6 | 102 215·6 | 172 341·6 | 242 467·6
33 91·4 | 103 217·4 | 173 343·4 | 243 469·4
34 93·2 | 104 219·2 | 174 345·2 | 244 471·2
35 95·0 | 105 221·0 | 175 347·0 | 245 473·0
36 96·8 | 106 222·8 | 176 348·8 | 246 474·8
37 98·6 | 107 224·6 | 177 350·6 | 247 476·6
38 100·4 | 108 226·4 | 178 352·4 | 248 478·4
39 102·2 | 109 228·2 | 179 354·2 | 249 480·2
40 104·0 | 110 230·0 | 180 356·0 | 250 482·0
--------------+----------------+-----------------+-----------------

CONTENTS.

PAGE
PREFACE v
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION ix
EXPLANATIONS xi
THERMOMETRIC TABLE xii

I.—PHÆNOGAMOUS OR FLOWERING PLANTS.

=_Dicotyledons and Gymnosperms._=

RANUNCULACEÆ 1
Radix Hellebori nigri 1
Rhizoma Coptidis 3
Semen Staphisagriæ 5
Radix Aconiti 8
Folia Aconiti 11
Radix Aconiti indica 12
——— heterophylli 14
——— Cimicifugæ 15

MAGNOLIACEÆ 17
Cortex Winteranus 17
Fructus Anisi stellati 20

MENISPERMACEÆ 23
Radix Calumbæ 23
Pareira Brava 25
Cocculus indicus 31
Gulancha 33

BERBERIDEÆ 34
Cortex Berberidis indicus 34
Rhizoma Podophylli 36

PAPAVERACEÆ 39
Petala Rhœados 39
Capsulæ Papaveris 40
Opium 42

CRUCIFERÆ 64
Semen Sinapis nigræ 64
———— albæ 68
Radix Armoraciæ 71

CANELLACEÆ 73
Cortex Canellæ albæ 73

BIXACEÆ 75
Semen Gynocardiæ 75

POLYGALEÆ 77
Radix Senegæ 77
——— Krameriæ 79

GUTTIFERÆ 83
Cambogia 83
Oleum Garciniæ 86

DIPTEROCARPEÆ 88
Balsamum Dipterocarpi 88

MALVACEÆ 92
Radix Althææ 92
Fructus Hibisci esculenti 94

STERCULIACEÆ 95
Oleum Cacao 95

LINEÆ 97
Semen Lini 97

ZYGOPHYLLEÆ 100
Lignum Guaiaci 100
Resina Guaiaci 103

RUTACEÆ 106
Cortex Angosturæ 106
Folia Buchu 108
Radix Toddaliæ 111
Folia Pilocarpi 113

AURANTIACEÆ 114
Fructus Limonis 114
Oleum Limonis 118
——— Bergamottæ 121
Cortex Aurantii 124
Oleum Neroli 126
Fructus Belæ 129

SIMARUBEÆ 131
Lignum Quassiæ 131

BURSERACEÆ 133
Olibanum 133
Myrrha 140
Elemi 147

MELIACEÆ 154
Cortex Margosæ 154
——— Soymidæ 156

RHAMNACEÆ 157
Fructus Rhamni 157

AMPELIDEÆ 159
Uvæ passæ 159

ANACARDIACEÆ 161
Mastiche 161
Terebinthina chia 165
Gallæ chinenses seu japonicæ 167

LEGUMINOSÆ 170
Herba Scoparii 170
Semen Fœni græci 172
Tragacantha 174
Radix Glycyrrhizæ 179
Succus Glycyrrhizæ 183
Oleum Arachis 186
Radix Abri 188
Setæ Mucunæ 189
Semen Physostigmatis 191
Kino 194
Lignum Pterocarpi 199
Balsamum tolutanum 202
——— peruvianum 205
Semen Bonducellæ 211
Lignum Hæmatoxyli 213
Folia Sennæ 216
Fructus Cassiæ Fistulæ 221
Tamarindi Pulpa 224
Balsamum Copaiba 227
Gummi Acaciæ 233
Catechu 240

ROSACEÆ 244
Amygdalæ dulces 244
——— amaræ 247
Fructus Pruni 251
Cortex Pruni serotinæ 253
Folia Lauro-cerasi 254
Flores Koso 256
Petala Rosæ gallicæ 259
——— centifoliæ 261
Oleum Rosæ 262
Fructus Rosæ caninæ 268
Semen Cydoniæ 269

HAMAMELIDEÆ 271
Styrax liquidus 271

MYRTACEÆ 277
Oleum Cajaputi 277
Caryophylli 280
Fructus Pimentæ 287

GRANATEÆ 289
Cortex Granati fructus 289
———— radicis 290

CUCURBITACEÆ 292
Fructus Ecballii 292
——— Colocynthidis 295

UMBELLIFERÆ 297
Herba Hydrocotyles 297
Fructus Conii 299
Folia Conii 301
Fructus Ajowan 302
——— Carui 304
——— Fœniculi 308
——— Anisi 310
Radix Sumbul 312
Asafœtida 314
Galbanum 320
Ammoniacum 324
Fructus Anethi 327
——— Coriandri 329
——— Cumini 331

CAPRIFOLIACEÆ 333
Flores Sambuci 333

RUBIACEÆ 335
Gambier 335
Cortex Cinchonæ 338
Radix Ipecacuanhæ 370

VALERIANACEÆ 377
Radix Valerianæ 377

COMPOSITÆ 380
Radix Inulae 380
——— Pyrethri 383
Flores Anthemidis 384
Santonica 387
Radix Arnicæ 390
Flores Arnicæ 392
Radix Taraxaci 392
Herba Lactucæ virosæ 395
Lactucarium 396

LOBELIACEÆ 399
Herba Lobeliæ 399

ERICACEÆ 401
Folia Uvæ Ursi 401

EBENACEÆ 403
Fructus Diospyri 403

STYRACEÆ 403
Resina Benzoë 403

OLEACEÆ 409
Manna 409
Oleum Olivæ 417

APOCYNEÆ 421
Cortex Alstoniæ 421

ASCLEPIADEÆ 423
Radix Hemidesmi 423
Cortex Mudar 424
Folia Tylophoræ 427

LOGANIACEÆ 428
Nux Vomica 428
Semen Ignatii 431
Radix Spigeliæ 433

GENTIANEÆ 434
Radix Gentianæ 434
Herba Chiratæ 436

CONVOLVULACEÆ 438
Scammonium 438
Radix Jalapæ 443
Semen Kaladanæ 448

SOLANACEÆ 450
Stipes Dulcamaræ 450
Fructus Capsici 452
Radix Belladonnæ 455
Folia Belladonnæ 458
Herba Stramonii 459
Semen Stramonii 461
——— et Folia Daturæ albæ 462
Folia Hyoscyami 463
——— Tabaci 466

SCROPHULARIACEÆ 469
Folia Digitalis 469

ACANTHACEÆ 472
Herba Andrographidis 472

SESAMEÆ 473
Oleum Sesami 473

LABIATÆ 476
Flores Lavandulæ 476
Herba Menthæ viridis 479
——— piperitæ 481
——— Pulegii 486
——— Thymi 487
——— Rosmarini 488

PLANTAGINEÆ 490
Semen Ispaghulæ 490

POLYGONACEÆ 491
Radix Rhei 491

MYRISTICEÆ 502
Myristica 502
Macis 508

LAURACEÆ 510
Camphora 510
Cortex Cinnamomi 519
——— Cassiæ ligneæ 527
——— Bibiru 535
Radix Sassafras 537

THYMELEÆ 540
Cortex Mezerei 540

ARTOCARPACEÆ 542
Caricæ 542

MORACEÆ 544
Fructus Mori 544

CANNABINEÆ 546
Herba Cannabis 546
Strobili Humuli 551
Glandulæ Humuli 554

ULMACEÆ 556
Cortex Ulmi 556
——— fulvæ 557

EUPHORBIACEÆ 558
Euphorbium 558
Cortex Cascarillæ 561
Semen Tiglii 565
——— Ricini 567
Kamala 572

PIPERACEÆ 576
Fructus Piperis nigri 576
——— longi 582
Cubebæ 584
Herba Matico 589

ARISTOLOCHIACEÆ 591
Radix Serpentariæ 591

CUPULIFERÆ 593
Cortex Quercus 593
Gallæ halepenses 595

SANTALACEÆ 599
Lignum Santali 599

=_Gymnosperms._=

CONIFERÆ 604
Terebinthina vulgaris 604
——— veneta 609
Cortex Laricis 611
Terebinthina canadensis 612
——— argentoratensis 615
Pix burgundica 616
——— liquida 619
——— nigra 623
Fructus Juniperi 624
Herba Sabinæ 626

=_Monocotyledons._=

CANNACEÆ 629
Amylum Marantæ 629

ZINGIBERACEÆ 635
Rhizoma Zingiberis 635
——— Carcumæ 638
——— Galangæ 641
Fructus Cardamomi 643
Grana Paradisi 651

ORCHIDACEÆ 654
Salep 654
Vanilla 657

IRIDACEÆ 660
Rhizoma Iridis 660
Crocus 663

PALMÆ 669
Semen Arecæ 669
Sanguis Draconis 672

AROIDEÆ 676
Rhizoma Calami aromatici 676

LILIACEÆ 679
Aloë 679
Bulbus Scillæ 690

MELANTHACEÆ 693
Rhizoma Veratri albi 693
——— viridis 695
Semen Sabadillæ 697
Cormus Colchici 699
Semen Colchici 702

SMILACEÆ 703
Radix Sarsaparillæ 703
Tuber Chinæ 712

GRAMINEÆ 714
Saccharum 714
Hordeum decorticatum 722
Oleum Andropogonis 725
Rhizoma Graminis 729

II.—CRYPTOGAMOUS OR FLOWERLESS PLANTS.

=_Vascular Cryptogams._=
LYCOPODIACEÆ 731
Sporæ Lycopodii 731

FILICES 733
Rhizoma Filicis 733

=_Thallogens._=

LICHENES 737
Lichen islandicus 737

FUNGI 740
Secale cornutum 740

ALGÆ (FLORIDEÆ) 747
Chondrus crispus 747
Fucus amylaceus 749

APPENDIX.
Short Biographic and Bibliographic Notes
relating to authors and books quoted in
the Pharmacographia 751

INDEX 769

PHARMACOGRAPHIA.

I.—PHÆNOGAMOUS OR FLOWERING PLANTS.

_Dicotyledons and Gymnosperms._

RANUNCULACEÆ.

RADIX HELLEBORI NIGRI.

_Radix Ellebori nigri_, _Radix Melampodii_; _Black
Hellebore Root_; F. _Racine d’Ellebore noir_;
G. _Schwarze Nieswurzel_.

=Botanical Origin=—_Helleborus niger_ L., a low perennial herb, native of sub-alpine woods in Southern and Eastern Europe. It is found in Provence, Northern Italy, Salzburg, Bavaria, Austria, Bohemia, and Silesia, as well as, according to Boissier,[4] in Continental Greece.

Under the name of _Christmas Rose_, it is often grown in English gardens on account of its handsome white flowers, which are put forth in midwinter.

=History=—The story of the daughters of Prœtus, king of Argos, being cured of madness by the soothsayer and physician Melampus, who administered to them hellebore, has imparted great celebrity to the plant under notice.[5]

But admitting that the medicine of Melampus was really the root of a species of _Helleborus_, its identity with that of the present plant is extremely improbable. Several other species grow in Greece and Asia Minor, and Schroff[6] has endeavoured to show that of these, _H. orientalis_ Lam. possesses medicinal powers agreeing better with the ancient accounts than those of _H. niger_ L. He has also pointed out that the ancients employed not the entire root but only the bark separated from the woody column; and that in _H. niger_ and _H. viridis_ the peeling of the rhizome is impossible, but that in _H. orientalis_ it may be easily effected.

[4] _Flora Orientalis_, i. (1867) 61.

[5] See the list of theses and memoirs on Hellebore given by Mérat and De Lens, _Dict._ iii. (1831) 472, 473.

[6] _Zeitschr. d. Gesellsch. d. Aerzte zu Wien._ 1860, No. 25; Canstatt’s _Jahresbericht_ for 1859. i. 47. 1860. i. 55.

According to the same authority the hellebores differ extremely in their medicinal activity. The most potent is _H. orientalis_ Lam.; then follow _H. viridis_ L. and _H. fœtidus_ L. (natives of Britain), and _H. purpurascens_ Waldst. et Kit., a Hungarian species, while _H. niger_ is the weakest of all.[7]

=Description=—Black Hellebore produces a knotty, fleshy, brittle rhizome which creeps and branches slowly, forming in the course of years an intangled, interlacing mass, throwing out an abundance of stout, straight roots. Both rhizome and roots are of a blackish brown, but the younger roots are of lighter tint and are covered with a short woolly tomentum.

In commerce the rhizome is found with the roots more or less broken off and detached. It is in very knotty irregular pieces, 1 to 2 or 3 inches long and about ²/₁₀ to ³/₁₀ of an inch in diameter, internally whitish and of a horny texture. If cut transversely (especially after maceration), it shows a circle of white woody wedges, 8 to 12 in number, surrounded by a thick bark. The roots are unbranched, scarcely ⅒ of an inch in diameter. The younger, when broken across, exhibit a thick bark encircling a simple woody cord; in the older this cord tends to divide into converging wedges which present a stellate appearance, though not so distinctly as in _Actæa_. The drug when cut or broken has a slight odour like that of senega. Its taste is bitterish and slightly acrid.

=Microscopic Structure=—The cortical part both of the rhizome and the rootlets exhibits no distinct medullary rays. In the rootlets the woody centre is comparatively small and enclosed by a narrow zone somewhat as in sarsaparilla. A distinct pith occurs in the rhizome but not always in the rootlets, their woody column forming one solid bundle or being divided into several. The tissue contains small starch granules and drops of fatty oil.

=Chemical Composition=—The earlier investigations of Black Hellebore by Gmelin, and Feneuille and Capron, and of Riegel indicated only the presence of the more usual constituents of plants.

Bastick, on the other hand, in 1852 obtained from the root a peculiar, non-volatile, crystalline, chemically-indifferent substance which he named _Helleborin_. It is stated to have a bitter taste and to produce in addition a tingling sensation on the tongue; to be slightly soluble in water, more so in ether, and to dissolve freely in alcohol.

Marmé and A. Husemann extracted helleborin (1864) by treating with hot water the green fatty matter which is dissolved out of the root by boiling alcohol. After recrystallization from alcohol, it is obtainable in shining, colourless needles, having the composition C₃₆H₄₂O₆. It is stated to be highly narcotic. Helleborin appears to be more abundant in _H. viridis_ (especially in the older roots) than in _H. niger_, and yet to be obtainable only to the extent of 0·4 per mille. When it is boiled with dilute sulphuric acid, or still better with solution of zinc chloride, it is converted into sugar and _Helleboresin_, C₃₀H₃₈O₄.

[7] Between _purpurascens_ and _niger_, Schroff places _L. ponticus_ A. Br., a plant which Boissier holds to be simply _H. orientalis_ Lam.

Marmé and Husemann succeeded in isolating other crystallized principles from the leaves and roots of _H. niger_ and _H. viridis_, by precipitation with phospho-molybdic acid. They obtained firstly a slightly acid glucoside which they named _Helleboreïn_. It occurs only in very small proportion, but is rather more abundant in _H. niger_ than in _H. viridis_. When boiled with a dilute acid, helleboreïn, C₂₆H₄₄O₁₅, is resolved into _Helleboretin_, C₁₄H₂₀O₃, of a fine violet colour, and sugar, C₁₂H₂₄O₁₂. It is remarkable that helleboretin has no physiological action, though helleboreïn is stated to be poisonous.

An organic acid accompanying helleborin was regarded by Bastick as probably aconitic (equisetic) acid. There is no tannin in hellebore.

=Uses=—Black Hellebore is reputed to be a drastic purgative. In British medicine its employment is nearly obsolete, but the drug is still imported from Germany and sold for the use of domestic animals.

=Adulteration=—Black Hellebore root as found in the market is not always to be relied on, and without good engravings it is not easy to point out characters by which its genuineness can be made certain. In fact to ensure its recognition, some pharmacopœias required that it should be supplied with leaves attached.

The roots with which it is chiefly liable to be confounded are the following:—

1. _Helleborus viridis_ L.—Although a careful comparison of authenticated specimens reveals certain small differences between the roots and rhizomes of this species and of _H. niger_, there are no striking characters by which they can be discriminated. The root of _H. viridis_ is far more bitter and acrid than that of _H. niger_, and it exhibits more numerous drops of fatty oil. In German trade the two drugs are supplied separately, both being in use; but as _H. viridis_ is apparently the rarer plant and its root is valued at 3 to 5 times the price of that of _H. niger_, it is not likely to be used for sophisticating the latter.

2. _Actœa spicata_ L.—In this plant the rhizome is much thicker; the rootlets broken transversely display a cross or star, as figured in Flückiger’s “Grundlagen” (see p. vii.), fig. 64, p. 76. The drug has but little odour; as it contains tannin its infusion is blackened by a persalt of iron, which is not the case with an infusion of Black Hellebore.

RHIZOMA COPTIDIS.

_Radix Coptidis_; _Coptis Root_, _Mishmi Bitter_, _Mishmi Tita_.

=Botanical Origin=—_Coptis Teeta_ Wallich, a small herbaceous plant, still but imperfectly known, indigenous to the Mishmi mountains, eastward of Assam. It was first described in 1836 by Wallich.[8]

=History=—This drug under the name of _Mahmira_ is used in Sind for inflammation of the eyes, a circumstance which enabled Pereira[9] to identify it with a substance bearing a nearly similar designation, mentioned by the early writers on medicine, and previously regarded as the root of _Chelidonium majus_ L.

[8] _Trans. of Med. and Phys. Soc. of Calcutta_, viii. (1836) 85. Reprinted in _Pereira’s_ Materia Medica, vol ii. part 2 (1857), 699.

[9] _Pharm. Journ._ xi. (1852) 204; also _Mat. Med. l.c._

Thus we find that Paulus Ægineta in the 7th century was acquainted with a knotty root named Μαηιρά.[10] Rhazes, who according to Choulant died in A.D. 923 or 932, mentions _Mamiran_, and it is also noticed by Avicenna a little later as a drug useful in diseases of the eye. Μαμιρὰϛ likewise occurs in exactly the same way in the writings of _Leo_, “Philosophus et Medicus.”[11] Ibn Baytar called the drug _Mamiran_ and _Uruk_, and described it as a small yellow root like turmeric, coming from China. Other writers of the middle ages allude to it under the name of _Memeren_.

Hajji Mahomed, in the account of Cathay which he gave to Ramusio (_circa_ A.D. 1550) says that the _Mambroni chini_, by which we understand the root in question, is found in the mountains of Succuir (Suh-cheu) where rhubarb grows, and that it is a wonderful remedy for diseases of the eye.[12] In an official report published at Lahore in 1862,[13] _Mamiran-i-chini_ is said to be brought from China to Yarkand.

The rhizome of _Coptis_ is used by the Chinese under the names _Hwang-lien_ and _Chuen-lien_.[14] It is enumerated by Cleyer[15] (1682) as “_radix pretiosa amara_,” and was described in 1778 by Bergius[16] who received it from Canton.

More recently it was the subject of an interesting notice by Guibourt[17] who thought it to be derived from _Ophioxylon serpentinum_ L., an apocyneous plant widely removed from _Coptis_. Its root was recommended in India by MacIsaac[18] in 1827 and has been subsequently employed with success by many practitioners.

There is a rude figure of the plant in the Chinese herbal _Pun-tsao_.

=Description=—_Tita_, as the drug is called in the Mishmi country, whence it is sent by way of Sudiya on the Bramaputra to Bengal, is a rhizome about the thickness of a quill occurring in pieces an inch or two in length. It often branches at the crown into two or three heads, and bears the remains of leafstalks and thin wiry rootlets, the stumps of which latter give it a rough and spiny appearance. It is nearly cylindrical, often contorted, and of a yellowish-brown colour. The fracture is short, exhibiting a loose structure, with large bright yellow radiating woody bundles. The rhizome is intensely bitter,[19] but not aromatic even when fresh.

It is found in the Indian bazaars in neat little open-work bags formed of narrow strips of rattan, each containing about half an ounce. We have once seen it in bulk in the London market.[20]

[10] See also Meyer, _Geschichte der Botanik_, ii. (1855) 419.

[11] _F. Z. Ermerins_, Anecdota medica Græca, e codicibus MSS. expromsit. Lugd. Bat. 1840. Leonis Philosophi et Medici conspectus medicinæ, lib. iii. cap. I. (Κεϕ. ά. Περὶὑϕθαλμῶν.....σαρκοκόλλς, γλαμκίῳ, μαμηρᾀ καἰ καμϕορᾷ).

[12] Yule, _Cathay and the way thither_, (Hakluyt Society) i. (1866) p. ccxvi.

[13] Davies, _Report on the trade of the countries on the N. W. boundary of India_, Lahore, 1862.

[14] Otherwise written _Honglane_, _Chonlin_, _Chynlen_, _Chouline_, _Souline_, &c.

[15] _Specimen Medicinæ Sinicæ_, Med. Simp. No. 27.

[16] _Mat. Med._ ii. (1778) 908.

[17] _Hist. des Drog._ ii. (1849) 526.

[18] _Trans. of Med. and Phys. Soc. of Calcutta_, iii. (1827) 432.

[19] Teeta is the Hindustani tāītā, from the Sanskrit tikta, “bitter.” (Dr. Rice.)

[20] Two cases were offered for sale as _Olen_ or _Mishmee_ by Messrs. Gray and Clark, drug-brokers, 22nd Nov. 1858.

=Microscopic Structure=—Cut transversely the rhizome exhibits an inner cortical tissue, through which sclerenchymatous groups of cells are scattered. The latter are most obvious on account of their bright yellow colour. In the woody central column a somewhat concentric arrangement is found, corresponding to two or three periods of annual growth. The pith, not the medullary rays, begins to be obliterated at an early period. The structure of the drug is, on the whole, very irregular, on account of the branches and numerous rootlets arising from it.

The medullary rays contain small starch granules, while the bark, as well as the pith, are richer in albuminous or mucilaginous matters.

=Chemical Composition=—The colouring matter in which the rhizome of _Coptis_ abounds, is quickly dissolved by water. If the yellow solution obtained by macerating it in water is duly concentrated, nitric acid will produce an abundant heavy precipitate of minute yellow crystals, which if redissolved in a little boiling water will separate again in stellate groups. Solution of iodine also precipitates a cold infusion of the root.

These reactions as well as the bitterness of the drug are due to a large proportion of _Berberine_, as proved by J. D. Perrins.[21] The rhizome yielded not less than 8½ per cent., which is more than has been met with in any other of the numerous plants containing that alkaloid.

As pure berberine is scarcely dissolved by water, it must be combined in _Coptis_ with an acid forming a soluble salt. Further researches are requisite to determine the nature of this acid. In some plants berberine is accompanied by a second basic principle: whether in the present instance such is the case, has not been ascertained.

=Uses=—The drug has been introduced into the _Pharmacopœia of India_ as a pure, bitter tonic.

=Substitutes=—_Thalictrum foliolosum_ DC., a tall plant common at Mussooree and throughout the temperate Himalaya at 5000-8000 feet, as well as on the Khasia Hills, affords a yellow root which is exported from Kumaon under the name _Momiri_. From the description in the _Pharmacopœia of India_, it would appear to much resemble the _Mishmi Tita_, and it is not impossible that some of the observations made under the head _History_ (p. 3) may apply to _Thalictrum_ as well as to _Coptis_.

In the United States the rhizome of _Coptis trifolia_ Salisb., a small herb indigenous to the United States and Arctic America, and also found in European and Asiatic Russia, is employed for the same purposes as the Indian drug. It contains berberine and another crystalline principle.[22]

[21] _Journ. of Chem. Soc._ xv. (1862) 339.

[22] Gross in _Am. Journ. of Pharm._ May 1873. 193.

SEMEN STAPHISAGRIÆ.

_Stavesacre_; F. _Staphisaigre_; G. _Stephanskörner_, _Läusesamen_.

=Botanical Origin=—_Delphinium Staphisagria_ L., a stout, erect, biennial herb growing 3 to 4 feet high, with palmate, 5-to 9-lobed leaves, which as well as the rest of the plant are softly pubescent.

It is a native of Italy, Greece, the Greek Islands and Asia Minor, growing in waste and shady places; it is now also found throughout the greater part of the Mediterranean regions and in the Canary Islands, but whether in all instances truly indigenous is questionable. It is cultivated to some extent in Puglia, very little now near Montpellier.

=History=—Stavesacre was well known to the ancients. It is the ἀγροτἔρη σταϕὶς of Nicander,[23] the σταϕὶς ἀγρία of Dioscorides,[24] and Alexander Trallianus,[25] the _Staphisagria_ or _Herba pedicularia_ of Scribonius Largus,[26] the _Astaphis agria_ or _Staphis_ of Pliny.[27] The last named author mentions the use of the powdered seeds for destroying vermin on the head and other parts of the body.

The drug continued in use during the middle ages. Pietro Crescenzio,[28] who lived in the 13th century, mentions the collection of the seeds in Italy; and Simon Januensis,[29] physician to Pope Nicolas IV. (A.D. 1288-1292), describes them—“_propter excellentem operationem in caputpurgio_.”

[23] O. Schneider, _Nicandrea_, Lips. 1856. 271.

[24] _De Mat. Med._ lib. iv. c. 153.

[25] Puschmann’s edition (quoted in the Appendix) i. 450.

[26] _De Compositione Medicamentorum_, c. 165.

[27] Lib. xxiii. c. 13.

[28] _Libro della Agricultura_, Venet. (1511) lib. vi. c. 108.

[29] _Clavis Sanationis_, Venet. 1510.

=Description=—The fruit consists of three downy follicles, in each of which about 12 seeds are closely packed in two rows. The seeds (which alone are found in commerce) are about 3 lines in length and rather less in width; they have the form of a very irregular 4-sided pyramid, of which one side, much broader than the others, is distinctly vaulted. They are sharp-angled, a little flattened, and very rough, the testa being both wrinkled and deeply pitted. The latter is blackish-brown, dull and earthy-looking, rather brittle, yet not hard. It encloses a soft, whitish, oily albumen with a minute embryo at its sharper end.

The seeds have a bitter taste and occasion a tingling sensation when chewed. Ten of them weigh about 6 grains.

=Microscopic Structure=—The epidermis of the seed consists of one layer of large cells, either nearly cubical or longitudinally extended: hence the wrinkles of the surface. The brown walls of these cells are moderately thickened by secondary deposits, which may be made very obvious by macerating thin sections in a solution of chromic acid, 1 p. in 100 p. of water. By this treatment numerous crystals after a short time make their appearance,—without doubt the chromate of one of the alkaloids of staphisagria.

The outer layer of the testa is made up of thin-walled narrow cells, which become larger near the edges of the seed and in the superficial wrinkles. They contain a small number of minute starch granules and are not altered on addition of a salt of iron. The interior layer exhibits a single row of small, densely packed cells. The albumen is composed of the usual tissue loaded with granules of albuminoid matter and drops of fatty oil.

=Chemical Composition=—Brandes (1819) and Lassaigne and Feneulle (1819) have shown this drug to contain a basic principle. Erdmann in 1864 assigned it the formula C₂₄H₃₅NO₂; he obtained it to the extent of 1 per mille in crystals, soluble in ether, alcohol, chloroform, or benzol. The alkaloid has an extremely burning and acrid taste, and is highly poisonous.

Couerbe[30] in 1833 pointed out the presence in stavesacre of a second alkaloid separable from delphinine by ether in which it is insoluble.

The treatment of the shell of the seed with chromic acid, detailed above, shows that this part of the drug is the principal seat of the alkaloids; and the albumen indeed furnishes no crystals of any chromate. In confirmation of this view we exhausted about 400 grammes of the _entire seeds_ with warm spirit of wine acidulated with a little acetic acid. The liquid was allowed to evaporate and the residue mixed with warm water. The solution thus obtained, separated from the resin, yielded on addition of chromic acid an abundant precipitate of chromate. The same solution likewise furnished copious precipitates when bichloride of platinum,[31] iodohydrargyrate of potassium, or bichromate of potassium were added. By repeating the above treatment on a larger scale we obtained crystals of delphinine of considerable size, and also a second alkaloid not soluble in ether.

[30] _Ann. de Chimie et de Phys._ lii. (1833) 352.

[31] The platinic compound is in fine microscopic crystals.

In the laboratory of Dragendorff, Marquis in 1877 succeeded in isolating the following alkaloids:—1. _Delphinine_, C₂₂H₃₅NO₆, yielding crystals one inch in length, belonging to the rhombic System. They are soluble in 11 parts of ether, 15 parts of chloroform, and 20 of absolute alcohol. 2. _Staphisagrine_, C₂₂H₃₃NO₅, is amorphous, soluble in less than 1 part of ether, also in 200 parts of water at 150°. This alkaloid, although it would appear to be the anhydride of the former, is in every respect widely different from delphinine. 3. _Delphinoidine_ (formula not quite settled), amorphous, soluble in three parts of ether, more abundantly occurring in the seed than the two former alkaloids. In its physiological action delphinoidine agrees with delphinine, not with staphisagrine. 4. _Delphisine_ (formula doubtful) forms crystalline tufts, occurs in but small amount, is sparingly soluble in alcohol, chloroform, or ether.—The total amount of alkaloids afforded by stavesacre is about 1 per cent.

By exhausting the seeds with boiling ether, we get 27 per cent. of a greenish, fatty oil, which continued fluid even at -5° C. It concreted by means of hyponitric acid, and is therefore to be reckoned among the non-drying oils; it contained a large part of the alkaloids.

The drug air-dry contains 8 per cent. of hygroscopic water. Dried at 100° C. and incinerated it left 8·7 per cent. of ash.

Nothing exact is known of the _Delphinic acid_ of Hofschläger (about 1820) said to be crystalline and volatile.

=Commerce=—The seeds are imported from Trieste and from the south of France, especially from Nismes, near which city as well as in Italy (Puglia) the plant is cultivated.

=Uses=—Stavesacre seeds are still employed as in old times for the destruction of _pediculi_ in the human subject, for which purpose they are reduced to powder which is dusted among the hair. Dr. Balmanno Squire[32] having ascertained that _prurigo senilis_ is dependent on the presence of _pediculus_, has recommended an ointment of which theessential ingredients is the fatty oil of stavesacre seeds extracted by ether. It is plain that such a preparation would contain delphinine. Delphinine itself has been used externally in neuralgic affections. Stavesacre seeds are largely consumed for destroying the pediculi that infest cattle.

[32] _Pharm. Journ._ vi. (1865) 405, and vii. (1877) 1043.

RADIX ACONITI.

_Tuber Aconiti_; _Aconite Root_[33]; F. _Racine d’Aconit_; G. _Eisenhutknollen_, _Sturmhutknollen_.

=Botanical Origin=—_Aconitum Napellus_ L.—This widely diffused and most variable species grows chiefly in the mountainous districts of the temperate parts of the northern hemisphere.

It is of frequent occurrence throughout the chain of the Alps up to more than 6500 feet, the Pyrenees, the mountains of Germany and Austria, and is also found in Denmark and Sweden. It has become naturalized in a few spots in the west of England and in South Wales. Eastward it grows throughout the whole of Siberia, extending to the mountain ranges of the Pacific coast of North America. It occurs in company with other species on the Himalaya at 10,000 to 16,000 feet above the sea-level.

The plant is cultivated for medicinal use, and also for ornament. The Abbé Armand David[34] saw in northern Sz-chuen (Setchuan) fields planted with Aconite (A. Napellus?).

=History=—The Ἀκόνιτον of the Greeks and the _Aconitum_ of the Romans are held to refer to the genus under notice, if not precisely to _A. Napellus_. The ancients were well aware of the poisonous properties of the aconites, though the plants were not more exactly distinguished until the close of the middle ages. The Greek name is supposed to refer to the same source as that of Conium. (See article on Fructus Conii.)

Aconite has been widely employed as an arrow-poison. It was used by the ancient Chinese,[35] and is still in requisition among the less civilized of the hill tribes of India. Something of the same kind was in vogue among the aborigines of ancient Gaul.[36] Aconite was pointed out in the thirteenth century, in “_The Physicians of Myddvai_,”[37] as one of the plants which every physician is to grow.

Störck of Vienna introduced aconite into regular practice about the year 1762[38]; the root and the herb occur in the German pharmaceutical tariff of the seventeenth century.

[33] We use the word _root_ as most in accordance with the teaching of English botanists.

[34] _Journal de mon troisième voyage en Chine_, i. (Paris 1875) 367.

[35] F. Porter Smith, _Mat. Med. and Nat. Hist. of China_, Shanghai, 1871. 2, 3.

[36] Pliny, lib. xxvii. c. 76, also xxv. 25.

[37] _The Physicians of Myddvai_; _Meddygon Myddfai_. Published for the Welsh MSS. Society. Llandovery, 1861. 282, 457.

[38] _De Stramonio, Hyoscyamo et Aconito_, Vindob. 1762.

=Description=—The herbaceous annual stem of aconite starts from an elongated conical tuberous root 2 to 4 inches long and sometimes as much as an inch in thickness. This root tapers off in a long tail, while numerous branching rootlets spring from its sides. If dug up in the summer it will be found that a second and younger root (occasionally a third) is attached to it near its summit by a very short branch and is growing out of it on one side. This second root has a bud at the top which is destined to produce the stem of the next season. It attains its maximum development at the latter part of the year, the parent root meanwhile becoming shrivelled and decayed. This form of growth is therefore analogous to that of an orchis.

The dried root is more or less conical or tapering, enlarged and knotty at the summit which is crowned with the base of the stem. It is from 2 to 3 or 4 inches long and at the top from ½ to 1 inch thick. The tuber-like portion of the root is more slender, much shrivelled longitudinally, and beset with the prominent bases of rootlets. The drug is of a dark brown; when dry it breaks with a short fracture exhibiting a white and farinaceous, or brownish, or grey inner substance sometimes hollow in the centre. A transverse section of a sound root shows a pure white central portion (pith) which is many-sided and has at each of its projecting angles a thin fibro-vascular bundle.

In the fresh state the root of aconite has a sharp odour of radish which disappears on drying. Its taste which is at first sweetish soon becomes alarmingly acrid, accompanied with sensations of tingling and numbness.

=Microscopic Structure=—The tuberous root as seen in a transverse section, consists of a central part enclosed by a delicate cambial zone. The outer part of this central portion exhibits a thin brownish layer made up of a single row of cells (_Kernscheide_ of the Germans). This is more distinctly obvious in the rootlets, which also show numerous, scattered, thick-walled cells of a yellow colour.

The fibro-vascular bundles of aconite root are devoid of true ligneous cells; its tissue is for the largest part built up of uniform parenchymatous cells loaded with starch granules.

=Chemical Composition=—Aconite contains chemical principles which are of great interest on account of their virulent effects on the animal economy.

The first to be mentioned is _Aconitine_, a highly active crystallizable alkaloid, furnishing readily crystallizable salts. It is accompanied by another active alkaloid, _Pseudaconitine_, which is crystallizable, but yields mostly amorphous salts. According to the admirable researches of Wright and Luff,[39] aconitine may be decomposed according to the following equation:—

C₃₃H₄₃NO₁₂. OH₂ = C₇H₆O₂. C₂₆H₃₉NO₁₁,
Aconitine. Benzoic acid. Aconine.

and pseudaconitine breaks up in accordance with the equation:

C₃₆H₄₉NO₁₁. OH₂ = C₉H₁₀O₄. C₂₇H₄₁NO₈
Pseudaconitine. Dimethyl- Pseudaconine.
protocatechnic acid.

[39] _Pharm. Journ._ 1875 to 1878, also _Yearbook of Pharmacy_, the results being summarized in the _Yearbook_ for 1877, 466.—Comparative qualitative reactions of Aconitine, Aconine, Pseudaconitine, and Pseudaconine, see _Yearbook_ (1877) 459.

The decomposition of aconitine, as well as of pseudaconitine, may be performed by means of mineral acids, alkaline solutions, or also by heating the bases with water in sealed tubes. The two alkaloids, _Aconine_ and _Pseudaconine_, appear to be present already in the roots of Aconitum; they, moreover, contain two other alkaloids of less physiological potency. One of them, _Picraconitine_, C₃₁H₄₅NO₁₀, is merely bitter, producing no lip-tingling; it gives well crystallized salts, although it is itself amorphous. Commercial aconitine is a mixture of the above alkaloids. The total yield of basic substances afforded by aconite root is not more than about 0·07 per cent.

The other constituents of aconite root are but imperfectly known. In the preparation of the alkaloids, a dark green mixture of resin and fat is obtained; it is much more abundant in European than in Nepal aconite (Groves). The root contains _Mannite_, as proved by T. and H. Smith (1850), together with cane-sugar, and another sugar which reduces cupric oxide even in the cold. Tannin is absent, or is limited to the corky coat. The absence of a volatile alkaloid in the root was proved by Groves in 1866.

=Uses=—Prescribed in the form of tincture as an anodyne liniment; occasionally given internally in rheumatism.

=Adulteration and Substitution=—Aconite root, though offered in abundance in the market, is by no means always obtained of good quality. Collected in the mountainous parts of Europe by peasants occupied in the pasturing of sheep and cattle, it is often dug up without due regard to the proper season or even to the proper species,—a carelessness not surprising when regard is had to the miserable price which the drug realizes in the market.[40]

One of the species not unfrequent in the Alps, of which the roots are doubtless sometimes collected, is _A. Störckeanum_ Reichenb. In this plant the tuberous roots are developed to the number of three or four, and have an anatomical structure slightly different from that of _A. Napellus_.[41] _A. variegatum_ L., _A. Cammarum Jacq._, and _A. paniculatum_ Lam. are blue-flowered species having tuberous roots resembling those of _A. Napellus_, but according to Schroff somewhat less active.

The yellow-flowered _A. Anthora_ L. and _A. Lycoctonum_ L. produce roots which cannot be confounded with those of _A. Napellus_ L.

The root of _A. japonicum_ Thunb. has been noticed in Europe by Christison as early as 1859[42]; it is now imported occasionally from the East. It forms grey or almost blackish tubers from ⁶/₁₀ of an inch to upwards of 1 inch in length, and from ²/₁₀ to ⁴/₁₀ of an inch in diameter, oblong or ovoid, either tapering or rounded at their extremities. They are of plump, scarcely shrivelled appearance.[43]

_Japanese aconite_ afforded to Wright and Luff a crystallized active alkaloid different from both aconitine and pseudaconitine.

Holmes[44] states that the _aromatic_ roots of _Imperatoria Ostruthium_ L. have been found mixed with aconite.