231 



but yesterday in looking over Dr. Horsfields immense collections 

 of the plants of Java, I find something which perhaps may 

 approach to it; at any rate the buds of the flower he has re- 

 presented grow from the root precisely in the same manner: 

 his drawing , however, has a branch of leaves and I do not observe 

 any satisfactory dissections. He considers it as a new genus: 

 but the difference of the two plants appears from this, that 

 his full blown flower is about three inches across, where as 

 mine is three feet." TJnd weiter sagt R. Brown selbst, p. 224. 

 ^The plant in question, which has been found in Java by Dr. 

 Horsfield several years before the discovery of Raf9.esia Arnold! , 

 only however in the unexpanded state, is represented in the 

 figure to as springing from a horizontal root in the same manner 

 as the great flower , like which also it is enveloped in numerous 

 imbricate bracteae , as having a perianthium of the same general 

 appearance , with indications of a similar entire annular process 

 or corona at the mouth of the tube, a pustular inner surface 

 and a central column terminated by numerous acute processes. 

 It is therefore unquestionably a second species of the same 

 genus etc." Und in einer Anmerkung heisst es: „This second 

 species may be named Rafil. Horsfieldii from the very merito- 

 rious naturalist by whom it was discovered. At present howe- 

 ver the two species are to be distinguished only by the great 

 diff'erence in size of their flowers, those of the one being nearly 

 three feet, of the other hardly three inches in diameter." Es 

 ist also nicht zu bezweifeln, dass die Gattung Rafi&esia zuerst 

 von Horsfield entdeckt worden ist. Wenn Hooker DC. Prod, in 

 dieser R. Horsfieldii ein Synonym der Rochusseuii findet, so 

 kann ihm dafiir nur die angegebene geringe BliithengrOsse 

 maassgebend gewesen sein. Aber diese ist , da nur Knospen nicht 

 sicher bestimmten Alters vorlagen, bloss nach deren Durch- 

 messer erschlossen worden. Ich bin mit Miquel *) vollkommen 

 "uberzeugt , dass es sich einfach um jugendliche R. Patma handelt. 

 Das beweisen schon die „ numerous acute processes", die bei 

 Rochusseuii nicht vorhanden sind. Hatte Horsfield den Fundort 

 genauer angegeben, so wilrde eine noch viel sicherere Identifi- 



