270 Dr. Francis Hamilton's Commentary 



first sight, being a large bushy shrub, is easily distinguished ; 

 but, on a closer examination, the structure of all tlie parts is so 

 nearly alike, that I am not sure of their being different species. 

 Specimens of both have been deposited in the Collection of the 

 East India Company. 



Cattu Gasturi, p. 71. Jig- 38. 

 Commeline considers this as the same with a plant brought 

 first to Europe from Egypt, where it is called Ab el Mosch; and 

 in this he is probably right ; but more doubt might have been 

 entertained concerning the Herba Moschata of the West Indies, 

 unless it had appeared that the plant was not a native of that 

 country, but had been introduced from Africa {Herb. Amb. iv. 



39.). 



Plukenet, {Aim. 14.) however, without hesitation joins both 



the Egyptian and American plant to the Cattu Gasturi, under 

 the name of Alccea JEgyptiaca villosa, borrowed from C. Bauhin, 

 adding to the list given by Commeline some more recent au- 

 thorities. 



Rumphius {Herb. Amb. iv. 38. t. 15.) as usual gives an ex- 

 cellent account of this plant under the name of Granum mos- 

 chutum, and accounts for its appearance in America as above 

 stated. 



Bauhin's generic name Alcea had been changed by Tourne- 

 fort into Ketmia ; and the elder Burman, following his example, 

 calls it Ketmia Mgyptiaca, semine moschato {Thes. Zeyl. 134.), men- 

 tioning that Ammannus considered the Egyptian kind as dif- 

 ferent from the Indian. If this supposition is well founded, no 

 other person than Rheede and Rumphius has described the plant 

 in question, all the synonyma quoted by Commeline, Plukenet, 

 Rumphius, and Burman, belonging to the plant of Africa, or at 



least 



