of the Abelicea cretica of Pona. 129 



with C. Bauhin's synonym. This Linnaeus never ventured to de- 

 scribe. He had received from some other quarter an equally 

 imperfect specimen of the tree named in the Ilortus Kewensis, 

 Ulmas nemoralis, which bears at least a generic resemblance in 

 habit to the Abelicea, but the leaves are twice as large, and not 

 downy (except near the nerves) beneath. These two specimens 

 Linnaeus pinned together, and wrote on the last-mentioned 

 ABCdaria, laying them both into the genus Qucrcus. Whether 

 this arose from the slight resemblance between the names Abeli- 

 cea and ABCdaria I will not venture to guess, but the latter 

 denomination, used by Rumphius only, belongs to a Verbesina, 

 and has no proper connection with the plants of which I am 

 speaking. 



The union of these two specimens in the Linnean herbarium 

 first led me to suspect the Abelicea might be an Ulmus, or at 

 least next akin to that genus. Specimens of the Ulmus nemoralis, 

 in flower and fruit, were given to the younger Linnaeus at Paris, 

 by the name of Ulmus polygama, and I think there can be no 

 doubt of its being what Pallas has described and figured under 

 the denomination of Rhamnus carpinifolius, FL Ross. v. i. t. 60, 

 though he justly doubted whether he were right as to the genus. 

 The fruit, indeed, in the imperfect state in which Pallas as well 

 as Linnaeus had it, is not much like an Ulmus, but it bears less 

 resemblance to a Rhamnus. 



In Dr. Sibthorp's herbarium I find specimens of the Abelicea, 

 gathered by him probably in Crete, though no mark is annexed 

 to them, nor do I discover any mention of the Abelicea among 

 his papers. These specimens, however, are valuable for being 

 in fruit, and they agree in that part with the supposed Ulmus 

 above mentioned. On these grounds I have ventured to admit 

 the tree in question into my Prodro?nus Flora Greece by the name 



vol. ix. s °f 



