176 Dr. Francis HAMILTON’s Commentary 
nus verus he may have meant to describe the highly odorous 
Kaida, which is no doubt found in many islands of the eastern 
archipelago, yet he described in fact an inferior species found 
in Amboina, and which may readily be distinguished from the 
Kaida by the size of the fruit, and by the structure of the 
drupa ; for he says (p.139.) **fructus magnitudinem habet mali 
aurantii, sed oblongior est.—In centro cujusvis pyramidis (drupæ) 
foraminulum tanquam porus conspicitur, ubi et brevis adparet 
apex." Now Rheede says, ** Fructus oblongo-rotundi sunt et 
preegrandes—in singulis tuberculis (druparum apicibus) tribus 
aculeatis, lignosis papillis muniti :” and in fact in fig. 5. the 
fruit is represented as large as the pine-apple (7 inches long by 
41 thick), with three large pores on the end of each drupa, each 
pore being placed in a projecting tubercle. We may therefore 
safely infer, that the plant of. Amboina, actually described by 
Rumphius, is not the Kaida, although much of what he says 
concerning the Pandanus verus probably belongs to the highly 
odorous plant of other islands, which is probably not different 
from that of. Malabar. 
The elder Burman considered the plant of Amboina, de- 
scribed by Rumphius with a fruit like an orange, as being the 
same. with the Ananas sylvestris arborescens of Acosta, with a 
fruit like a melon, and as being the Kaida Taddi of Rheede, not 
his Kaida. But the Kaida Taddi, as I shall have occasion to 
show, is rather the Pandanus spurius of Rumphius. The elder 
Burman was probably misled by Plukenet in giving his plant to 
the Kaida Taddi: very little dependence can however be placed 
on his authority, especially as he adds to the synonyma an Ame- 
rican plant, the Nana brava of Marcgrave, probably a real 
Bromelia. lt would be impossible, therefore, on the authority 
of the elder Burman, to say what the Wetkakeiya of the Cey- 
lonese is. 
Linn:eus, 
