Dr. R. Wight on the Laurus Cassia of Linnceus, 183 



same Cingalese name. Linneeus's specimen not being in flower, 

 and the resemblance between the specimen and figure being 

 in other respects considerable, he had not the means of detect- 

 ing the discrepancy, and unsuspectingly adopted Burman's 

 figure and name as a synonym to his plant. In Rheede's 

 ^Hortus Malabaricus,^ (1 tab. 57) he found the figure of an- 

 other cinnamon, even more closely resembling his plant in its 

 general aspect than Burman's figure : this he also associated 

 as a synonym ; and Rheede's plant being lauded on account of 

 the aromatic properties of its bark and leaves, which resem- 

 ble the true cinnamon, though it is not the genuine cinnamon 

 tree, he seems to have considered himself quite safe in asso- 

 ciating this also, and called the three species, this tria juncto 

 in uno plant, Laurus Cassia, and assigned it as the source of 

 the officinal ^^ Cassia Lignea cortex,'^ 



After this exposition of the origin of the species Laurus 

 Cassia, it can scarcely be a matter of surprise that no two bo- 

 tanists have ever agreed as to the plant which ought to bear 

 the name ; nor, that not one of them should ever have sur- 

 mised what plant Linnaeus had constituted the type of his 

 species. It is not my intention on the present occasion to 

 extend these remarks, by tracing the various conjectures that 

 have been promulgated on the subject ; suffice it to say that 

 no one, so far as I am aware, has taken a similar view as that 

 now explained. It only further remains for me to give some 

 account of the three species thus erroneously associated. 



The first mentioned, Dawalkurundu, Linnaeus's own plant 

 and the type of the species, is, I believe, the Laurus involu- 

 crata of Vahl, and of Lamarck in the ^ Encyclopedic Methodi- 

 que,' and has in Professor Nees's Monograph of the Indian 

 Laurince (Wall. Plant. As. rariores), received the name of Te- 

 tradeuia Zeylanica, but is the Litsea Zeylanica of a former 

 work of his, a name which I presume must be restored, owing 

 to the other being preoccupied. The slight difference of struc- 

 ture does not seem to render a new genus necessary. 



The second and third have both been referred, by the same 

 eminent botanist, to his variety of the true cinnamon, the Cin- 

 namomum Zeylanicum, a decision to which I cannot subscribe, 

 as I cannot perceive that either of these figures are referable 



