on the Hortus Malabaricus, Part II. 271 
least to the same transplanted to America. Burman, however, 
gives no notice of the circumstances that induced Ammannus 
to form this opinion. 
Linnzus, changing the name Ketmia to Hibiscus, called this 
H. foliis peltato-cordatis septemangularibus serratis hispidis (Fl. 
Zeyl. 261), adding without comment synonyma of the Indian, 
Egyptian and American plants; but he does not mention Am- 
mannus; nor was any change worth notice made in the Species 
Plantarum, nor by the younger Burman (FI. Ind. 153.), except 
by introducing the specific name Abelmoschus, well derived from 
the Arabic. 
M. Lamarck (Enc. Meth. iii. 359.) gives the synonyma a 
little fuller than even Linnæus in the Flora Zeylanica ; but does 
not include that of Ammannus; and, although he quotes au- 
thors describing it as an African, Asiatic and American plant ; 
yet, when treating of its native country, he omits the first alto- 
gether. Although he quotes the Alcea Ægyptiaca villosa of 
C. Bauhin, yet he does not refer to Plukenet's works under that 
head, where a reference to the Cattu Gasturi is made; but 
quotes him as describing the plant by two other names: 1. Alcea 
moschata villosissima foliis in lacinias profundiores incisis (Alm. 
15. Phyt. t. 197. f. 1.) from Barbadoes. If this be a good re- 
presentation of the West India plant introduced from Africa, I 
do not wonder at Ammannus having separated the Indian kind 
from it, as, however strongly the plants may resemble each other 
in qualities, they appear to me quite distinct species. 2. Alcea 
Maderaspatana hastatis foliis glabris, pericarpio tantum villosa 
(Alm. 15. Phyt. t. 197. f. 2.), which has still less resemblance 
than the West India plant to the Cattu Gasturi, and is quoted 
by Willdenow for the Hibiscus hastatus (Sp. Pl. iii. 808.). 
Willdenow (/. c. 826.) and the Hortus Kewensis (iv. 220.) 
without at all quoting Plukenet, continue to call the Abelmoschus 
a native 
