249 Dr. Francis Hamilton's Commentary 



would appear, that the plant he meant grew as high as a 

 man, and was covered every where with a white wool, except on 

 the upper side of the leaves : so that he probably described a 

 kind different from that " caule herbaceo foliis glabris," which 

 Linnaeus described in the Flora Zeylamca. From his synonyma 

 it would appear, that Tournefort, in himself an host, considered 

 the Egyptian, Syrian and Malabar kinds as different species. 

 Along with the first Lamarck only quotes as synonyma the Beid 

 el Ossar of P. Alpinus, Miller's Dictionary, and an account by 

 Jacquin. Along with the Malabar plant of Tournefort, he quotes 

 the Ericti of Rheede, Plukenet and Seba. The latter is an Ame- 

 rican plant; and he admits that Plukenet's figure represents 

 badly the plant he meant to describe, and no wonder ; for, as I 

 have said, it was only quoted by mistake for the Ericu, and 

 probably represents the Beid el Ossar of Fgypt. Even therefore 

 in the A. gigantea /3 of Lamarck we have three plants united. 

 Following Linnaeus in his second edition of the Species Planta- 

 rum, and subsequent works, M. Lamarck (281.) describes the 

 Syrian plant as a different species {A. syriaca) ; and to this 

 probably belong (although not quoted by Lamarck) all the syno- 

 nyma quoted by Plukenet for the Syrian kind, except the Ame- 

 rican plant of Parkinson, which is perhaps the J . purpurascens 

 {Enc. Meth. i. 281.), or at least the Apocymim erectum novebora- 

 cense foliis minus incanis, Jlore ex obsoleto dilute purpurascente of 

 Hermann, which was possibly the herbaceous smooth-leaved 

 plant described by Linnaeus, and which no doubt would thrive 

 in the open air of Holland. 



Willdenow (Sp. PI. i. 1263.) totally separates the A. gigantea a 

 of Lamarck, that is, the plant of Jacquin quoted by the French 

 botanist, from the Asclepias gigantea, calling it A. procera. For 

 this he quotes, but with doubt, the plant figured by Plukenet as 

 above mentioned ; and also, with a similar doubt, the Beid el 



Ossar 



