on the Hortus Malaharicus, Part II. 281 



same plant with that which in the interior of Africa produces the 

 gum called Euphorbium, and judges from fragments of the plant, 

 flowers and seed-vessels mixed with the gum from Barbary, and 

 compared with the Schadida Calli. If the fragments of the plant 

 were large, such as a whole joint, there would be little room for 

 error ; but such fragments are not likely to have been mixed 

 with a drug ; and I doubt much, if any one from the flowers or 

 capsule alone, of any species of Euphorbium, could positively 

 say that it belonged to no other species, where there are so many 

 nearly alike. 



Plukenet {Aim. 370.) mentions Commeline's opinion, without 

 either supporting or opposing it, and calls it Tithymalus aizoides 

 triangularis nodosus et spinosus lacte turgens acre ; but he consi- 

 ders it as a mere variety of a plant from the Canaries, with four 

 or five sides to its stem, of which he gives a figure {Phyt. t. 320. 

 /. 2.) : but this identity is now abandoned, and the figure belongs 

 to the Euphorbia canariensis {Willd. Sp. PL ii. 882.). 



Commeline's opinion, however, seems to have been adopted 

 by no less botanists than Tournefort and Ray, as appears from 

 the elder Burman {Thes. Zeyl. 96.), who calls the plant Ewp/ior- 

 bium trigonum, spinosum, rotundifolium, and gives the synonyma 

 of preceding authors. He considers as a distinct species the 

 Sandra Calli of the Ceylonese, for which he quotes the Tithyma- 

 lus from Canary, described by Plukenet. 



Linnaeus also adopts the opinion of the Schadida Calli being 

 the plant which produces the gum Euphorbium ; and he considers 

 the Sandra Calli as a mere variety, rejecting, however, the plant 

 from Canary described by Plukenet; nor does he state (F/. 

 Zeyl. 199.) whether the gum is produced by the Schadida or 

 Sandra. 



On account of its being supposed to be the plant which pro- 

 duces the gum called by the ancients Euphorbium, this plant was 



now 



