Chapter JACK of J by The Hobson Jobson Dictionary

Plant. iv. 4–5).


It is plain that Pliny and Theophrastus were using the same authority, but neither copying the whole of what he found in it.

The second tree, whose leaves were like birds’ wings and were used to fix upon helmets, is hard to identify. The first was, when we combine the additional characters quoted by Pliny but omitted by Theophrastus, certainly the jack; the third was, we suspect, the mango (q.v.). The terms long and crooked would, perhaps, answer better to the plantain, but hardly the unwholesome effect. As regards the uno quaternos satiet, compare Friar Jordanus below, on the jack: “Sufficiet circiter pro quinque personis.” Indeed the whole of the Friar’s account is worth comparing with Pliny’s. Pliny says that it took four men to eat a jack, Jordanus says five. But an Englishman who had a plantation in Central Java told one of the present writers that he once cut a jack on his ground which took three men—not to eat—but to carry!

As regards the names given by Pliny it is hard to say anything to the purpose, because we do not know to which of the three trees jumbled together the names really applied. If pala really applied to the jack, possibly it may be the Skt. phalasa, or panasa. Or it may be merely p’hala, ‘a fruit,’ and the passage would then be a comical illustration of the persistence of Indian habits of mind. For a stranger in India, on asking the question, ‘What on earth is that?’ as he well might on his first sight of a jack-tree with its fruit, would at the present day almost certainly receive for answer: ‘Phal hai khudawand!’—‘It is a fruit, my lord!’ Ariena looks like hiranya, ‘golden,’ which might be an epithet of the jack, but we find no such specific application of the word.

Omitting Theophrastus and Pliny, the oldest foreign description of the jack that we find is that by Hwen T’sang, who met with it in Bengal:

c. A.D. 650.—“Although the fruit of the pan-wa-so (panasa) is gathered in great quantities, it is held in high esteem. These fruits are as big as a pumpkin; when ripe they are of a reddish yellow. Split in two they disclose inside a quantity of little fruits as big as crane’s eggs; and when these are broken there exudes a juice of reddish-yellow colour and delicious flavour. Sometimes the fruit hangs on the branches, as with other trees; but sometimes it grows from the roots, like the of-ling (Radix Chinae), which is found under the ground.”—Julien, iii. 75.

c. 1328.—“There are some trees that bear a very big fruit called chaqui; and the fruit is of such size that one is enough for about five persons. There is another tree that has a fruit like that just named, and it is called Bloqui [a corruption of Malayal. varikka, ‘superior fruit’], quite as big and as sweet, but not of the same species. These fruits never grow upon the twigs, for these are not able to bear their weight, but only from the main branches, and even from the trunk of the tree itself, down to the very roots.”—Friar Jordanus, 13–14.

A unique MS. of the travels of Friar Odoric, in the Palatine Library at Florence, contains the following curious passage:—

c. 1330.—“And there be also trees which produce fruits so big that two will be a load for a strong man. And when they are eaten you must oil your hands and your mouth; they are of a fragrant odour and very savoury; the fruit is called chabassi.” The name is probably corrupt (perhaps chacassi ?). But the passage about oiling the hands and lips is aptly elucidated by the description in Baber’s Memoirs (see below), a description matchless in its way, and which falls off sadly in the new translation by M. Pavet de Courteille, which quite omits the “haggises.”

c. 1335.—“The Shaki and Barki. This name is given to certain trees which live to a great age. Their leaves are like those of the walnut, and the fruit grows direct out of the stem of the tree. The fruits borne nearest to the ground are the barki; they are sweeter and better- flavoured than the Shaki …” etc. (much to the same effect as before).—Ibn Batuta, iii. 127; see also iv. 228.

c. 1350.—“There is again another wonderful tree called Chake-Baruke, as big as an oak. Its fruit is produced from the trunk, and not from the branches, and is something marvellous to see, being as big as a great lamb, or a child of three years old. It has a hard rind like that of our pine-cones, so that you have to cut it open with a hatchet; inside it has a pulp of surpassing flavour, with the sweetness of honey, and of the best Italian melon; and this also contains some 500 chestnuts of like flavour, which are capital eating when roasted.”—John de’ Marignolli, in Cathay, &c., 363.

c. 1440.—“There is a tree commonly found, the trunk of which bears a fruit resembling a pine-cone, but so big that a man can hardly lift it; the rind is green and hard, but still yields to the pressure of the finger. Inside there are some 250 or 300 pippins, as big as figs, very sweet in taste, and contained in separate membranes. These have each a kernel within, of a windy quality, of the consistence and taste of chestnuts, and which are roasted like chestnuts. And when cast among embers (to roast), unless you make a cut in them they will explode and jump out. The outer rind of the fruit is given to cattle. Sometimes the fruit is also found growing from the roots of the tree underground, and these fruits excel the others in flavour, wherefore