204 Dr. Francis Hamitton’s Commentary 
properly the Bintangor of Rumphius, the leaves of which are not of this form. 
He retained, however, among the synonyma all the three plants of Plukenet, 
which have been already mentioned. 
The younger Burman takes from the Species Plantarum the specific name 
Inophyllum, adds to the synonyma the Bintangor of Rumphius, and omits the 
only one of three species of Plukenet which I think belongs to the Ponna, 
that is, the Nux bengalensis Juglandi folio fructu orbiculari (Alm. 265.). 
M. Lamarck (Enc. Méth. i. 553.) considers the Ponna as his Calophyllum 
Inophyllum ; but this is not distinguished * foliis ovalibus," as Linnzeus justly 
defines them, but “foliis obovatis." It is probable, therefore, that M. Lamarck 
actually described the Focraha, or Fooraha, of Madagascar, which he quotes as 
synonymous. The seeds of the Ponna indeed produce a lamp-oil ; but I never 
heard of its producing, like the Fooraha, an odorous resin like the Tacamaque 
of Bourbon, the qualities attributed to which are totally different from those 
attributed by Rheede to the gum of the Punna. M. Lamarck also joins to the 
Punna the American Calaba described by Jacquin. Whether or not this is 
the Red-wood of Barbadoes, considered by Plukenet as the same with the 
Punna, Y cannot say; but I suspect it is on no better authority that the Ca- 
laba and Punna are made one species. Linnzeus, it must be observed, thought 
them different. Whether or not it is the Calaba or the Fooraha that M. La- 
marck represents in his figure (IU. Gen. t. 459.) I cannot say ; but it certainly 
is not the Punna. Its leaves, like those of the Bintangor maritima, which 
M. Lamarck places among the synonyma of his Calophyllum Inophyllum, are 
emarginate ; but the flowers are totally dissimilar to those of both the Punna 
and Bintangor, at least as represented in the figure with leaves (a.), which, if 
not taken from that work, strongly resembles the figure of the Inophyllum flore 
quadrifido of Burman (Thes. Zeyl. t. 60.). This, indeed, is quoted by Linnzeus 
as representing the C. Calaba; but it certainly is totally different from the 
Ponna. Perhaps M. Lamarck intended that his figure should represent both 
his varieties, that marked a, belonging to one variety, and those marked 
b, c, d, e, f, g, h, belonging to the other variety; but no hint of this is given 
in the Supplement. 
Willdenow makes little change on the synonyma (Sp. Pl. ii. 1159.) as they 
stood in the Flora Indica of Burman, only he omits that of the elder Burman 
