botanist. So sure indeed was the latter that it was this species being referred
to (pointed out to him by a local farmer) that he was led to suggest that Lin-
naeus and others may have been right after all in supposing it to be the mys-
terious samolus mentioned by Pliny the Elder—despite the fact that it was
specifically as a veterinary cure that that was described by the Roman author
as much in use by the druids of Gaul.^269 While almost certainly unaware of
the evidence supporting the claims of brookweed to herbal status, some later
authors^270 have asserted that in some country parts of Britain this species is
still considered a certain remedy for a particular disease of pigs (one of the
two kinds of animals specified by Pliny). The source(s) of those assertions
were,however, not disclosed, and even supposing they were correct, the prob-
ability is that brookweed was adopted as a cure for the disease in question
merely because it was the plant bearing Samolus as part of its scientific name.
It is too much to hope that the identity of the herb Pliny intended by that
name will ever be established, and for the reasons rehearsed above unlikely
that that was brookweed.
Notes
St John’s-worts to Primulas 1291.Hardwicke’s Science-gossip (1866), 83- Williams MS
- Purdon
- Moore MS
- IFC S 200: 75
- Grigson; Vickery 1981
- Tongue
- Pratt 1850–7
- Quayle, 69
- Beith
- Moore 1898; Paton MS
- Quelch, 142
- Moore 1898
- Paton; Quayle, 69
- Beith, 40
- Tongue
- Carmichael, iv, 208
- Martin, 230
- Tongue
- Taylor MS
- Duncan & Robson, 63
22.PLNN,no. 18 (1991), 84 - Whitlock 1976, 164
- Tongue
- Simpkins, 133
- Tongue
- Lankester, 319
- Hart 1898, 381
- Moore MS
- Egan
- Sargent
- Tongue
- Hatfield, 39
- Knights et al.; Dickson
- Hatfield, 28
- Wright, 239
- Wright, 239
- Vickery MSS
- Howse, 206
- Rudkin, 203
- Vickery MSS
- Tongue
- Lafont
- Lafont
45.PLNN,no. 43 (1996), 209 - Collyns