575 



PENTAPETES phoenicea. 

 Scarlet-flowered Pentapetes. 



MONADELPHIA DODECANDRIA. 



NaU ord. Malvaceje. Jussieugen. 271. Piv, K Stamina basi in ur- 

 ceolum sessilem connata, steriUa fertilibus intermixta, detinita aut rairi^s 

 iiidefinita, 



PENTAPETES. Ca/, duplex: ericrior 3-phy!lus, unilateralis, cadu- 

 eus: foliolis linearibus, acummatis: interior monophyllus^ 5-partitus, per- 

 sistens ; laciniis lanceolatis, acuminatis, patentibus» corollft longioribus- 

 Pet. 5, subrotunda, patentia^ urceolo staminum aifixa. FiL 15^ iiliformia, 

 erecta, corollfl breviora, infem^ in urceoluoL 5-gonum coalita, supern^ 

 libera: anth. sagittat^e^ erectx: liguhB 5^ lineari-lanceolatse^ petaliformes, 

 erectae, inter teroa stamina singula, ex urceolo prodeuntes* Germ, ovatunt: 

 ttylus &SSoraii^, supeme incrassatus, striatus^ staminibus longior, persistans: 

 stigma obsolete 5-dentatum. Caps, membranacea, subglobosa^ acuminata, 

 5-!oc,, 5-valv. : dis&epimehtu contrariis: sem. octona^ ovata, acuta, utrin- 

 que 4 dissepimento interius aifixa. Lin. gen. pL 2. 459. 



P. phcenicea. Lin* sp, pL ed. 2. 2. 958- J* Miller iUustr. J. G, Miller gp. 



pL Lamarck illustr. t. 576. /. 1. Gcsrtn. sem, 2* 248. *. 131. Jig. 4. 



TrewpL rar, 7- *. 5. Willd. sp. pi 3. 727. Hort. Kew. cd. 2. 4. 193. 

 Pentapetes. Miller ic. 133. tab, 200. 

 Dombeya phoenicea. Cavan. diss. 3. 129. t. 43. j/?<jf. 1. 

 Alcjea fruticosa pentaphylloides ^mula floribus amoenissimis rubellis, calyce 



producto, Pluk, aim. t. 126, ^g, 4. 

 Alceae indicse cognata planta. Pluk. aim. 18. t. 255. ^gf. 3, 

 Blattaria zeylanica, flore amplo coccineo. Comm. kort. 1. 11- 1. 6. 

 Flos impius. Rumph. amb, 5. 288. t. 100. Jig. \. 

 Naga-Pu. Rheede mat 10. 111. (. 56. 



The subjoined account of our plant is by Sir James E. 

 Smith. 



" Pentapetes (TrfyrosTrsTSf, having five leaves), an ancient 

 name for Cinquefoil, adopted for a very different plant by 

 Linnseus. Though he declines any explanation of it, the 

 five leafy expansions, which, in his Pentapetes, accompany 

 the stamens, seem so well' to account for this appellation, 

 that one cannot but think thcMdea of such an adaptation of 

 the word had occurred to him, though he might have for- 

 gotten it when he wrote the Philosophia Botanica, p. 175. 

 There seems otherwise no possibility of accounting for his 

 choice of the name, for the particular genus in question; 



R 2 



