180 Dr. Francis Hamilton's Commentary 



Kaida Tsierrea, p. 7. Jig. 8. 

 This continued unquoted by modern authors, until Dr. Rox- 

 burgh received plants from his son in Chatigang ; and it is men- 

 tioned in the Hortus Bengalensis (71.) under the name of Pan- 

 danus furcatus. Rumphius indeed {Herb. Amb. iv. 149.) sup- 

 posed it to be his Pandanus ceramicus montanus ; but I cannot 

 see any resemblance between the figure in Rheede and the de- 

 scription in Rumphius, for he gives no figure ; and I rather 

 suspect that his plant is the Millore of the Nicobar islands {As. 

 Res. iii. l6l.), a magnificent plant, which I have seen in the 

 garden of the late worthy Dr, James Anderson of Madras ; and 

 doubtless different from the Pandanus odoratissimus, with which 

 Dr. Roxburgh seems inclined to class it. 



Panel, p. 9- fig- 9. 

 Plukenet {Mant. 139.) only mentions this plant to say, that it 

 has no affinity with the Nimbo of Acosta (now called Melia 

 Azadirachta), as Commeline asserted : but Commeline says 

 nothing of the kind. He indeed compares the Narum Panel, 

 next to be mentioned, with the Nimbo; but he says that the 

 Panel is quite different. I cannot find that the Panel has been 

 since mentioned by any author. Notwithstanding its simple 

 leaves, it has very much the general appearance of the Limojiia 

 pentaphylla of Willdenow {Sp. PL ii. 572.), and probably belongs 

 to the same genus with that plant, which scarcely can be con- 

 sidered as being of the same family with the Limonia acidissima 

 of Linnaeus, the prototype of the genus. By the Limonia aci- 

 dissima of Linnaeus, I mean the L. crenulata of Dr. Roxburgh, 

 who, misled by Koenig, took the anisifolia of Rumphius for 

 the Limonia acidissima, and therefore described the Tsjeru Catu 

 Naregam as a new species : but when Linnaeus {Fl. Zeyl. 175.) 



first 



