on the Hortus Malabaricus, Part II. 221 
bacca nigra in calyce stelliformiter expanso of Ray. To this he 
joins a plant of Sloane, which in all probability is quite different ; 
and also the Periclymeni similis, Myrtifolia arbor Maderaspatana 
of Plukenet (Phyt. t. 211. f. 4. Alm. 287.), which is no doubt 
of the same genus, but is a variety of the Volkameria inermis of 
Willdenow (Sp. Pl. iii. 383.). 
Linnæus in the Flora Zeylanica (231.) separated this plant of 
Plukenet, and united (232.) the Pinnakola sive infelix et infortu- 
nata of Hermann and the Peragu of Rheede with its name in 
Ray, to the Clerodendron folio lato et acuminato of Burman, which, 
according to Burman, is the P/anta fortunata Pinna Zeylonensi- 
bus of Hermann; so that Burman and Linnæus are here in direct 
opposition. 
In the Species Plantarum, as copied by the younger Burman 
( Fl. Ind. 197.), Linnæus gives the Peragu the name of Clero- 
dendrum infortunatum, omitting to quote Hermann, but quoting 
the elder Burman, as was done in the Flora Zeylanica. Here 
the difference between the elder Burman on the one side, and the 
younger Burman and Linnæus on the other, is in fact continued, 
and one side is thus clearly in error. Ifthe Pinna of Hermann 
has lanceolate leaves, it cannot be the plant for which it is 
quoted by the elder Burman ; if it has cordate leaves, it cannot 
be the Clerodendrum fortunatum. This, however, can only be 
determined by an inspection of the Herbal collected by Her- 
mann : nor might this even be decisive, as Linnæus complains in 
the dedication of the Flora Zeylanica, that Hermann's collection, 
after having been in the hands of the elder Burman * per 50 
annos fuerat suppressus, indignorum manibus versatus, et in 
barbarorum hominum scriniis sepultus," before he had access to 
describe it; and during this period several transpositions of 
names and specimens are likely to have taken place. That 
serious injury was done, the language of Linnzus implies. In 
262 the 
