Emm Dr. Francis Hamixron’s Commentary 
entale, and that without any mark of doubt, although both Commeline and 
Plukenet had expressed uncertainty. That Linnzus, however, by his Ævi- 
cennia meant the Oepata, and not the Anacardium, we may judge from his 
having placed it in the class T'etrandria. 
Rumphius, under the name Mangium album, no doubt described (Herb. 
Amb. iii. 115. £. 76.) a species of Avicennia. Concerning this he says, * juxta 
regionum varietatem varias exhibens species seu varietates." He then goes on 
to describe the kind most common in Amboyna, which, both from the figure 
and account, would appear to differ from the Oepata, to which, however, the 
kind growing in Macassar seems to have a greater affinity. Neither Rumphius 
nor his commentator Burman quotes the Oepafa, nor hints at any similarity 
between the plants. 
When the younger Burman published his Flora Indica (138.), Linnzus, 
under the name of Bontia germinans, had joined the Oepata and true Anacar- 
dium, not only in the same genus, but in the same species with the Bon£ia of 
Jacquin and Browne (quite different from the Bontia of Plumier), an Ame- 
rican plant with hairy leaves. The Oepata, no doubt, belongs to the same 
genus with the Bontia of Jacquin; but Rheede's words, * folia glabra," might 
have cautioned Linnzus against including them in one species; and a proper 
consideration of Rheede's account of the fruit might have shown that it could 
not be the Anacardium, then well known in the shops. 
The younger Linneus having described the dnacardium under the name of 
Semecarpus Anacardium, it might have been expected that the Oepata might 
have been separated ; but Willdenow, having confined the name Bontia to the 
genus of Plumier, returned to the Avicennia tomentosa (Sp. PI. iii. 395.), includ- 
ing in one species not only the Bon£ia of Jacquin, but the Oepata, and even the 
Anacardium. As, however, he retains in his specific character the term “ folia 
tomentosa," it is probable that his specimen belonged to the West Indian plant. 
Yet, as he quoted the Oepata, Dr. Roxburgh considered this as the Avicennia 
tomentosa (Hort. Beng. 46.) ; for, although he does not quote the Hortus Mala- 
baricus, I know the plant which he received from Mr. Goodlad to have been 
the Oepata. This may possibly be the Sceura marina of Forskahl, quoted also 
for the A. tomentosa by Willdenow ; for it is more likely that the plant of 
Arabia or Egypt should be the same with that of India than with that of. 
