BURMAX S FLORA INDICA 211 



but easy methoLl seems to have been pursued of leaving the unknown 

 ones under * species incognitio,' ' species valde dubi;e,' ' species exclu- 

 dendie,' or other ecpialiy unsatisfactory categories." This criticism 

 applies with especial force to the attitude adopted for many years by 

 Kew tow^ards the British Museum. Altliough so easv'* of access, the 

 National Herbarium was only consulted by Bentiiam and Hooker 

 in special cases ; the former, as has more than once been pointed 

 out, when engaged on his Flora Australiensis, to a large extent 

 ignored the collections and MSS. of iknks and iSolander, and in the 

 ju'eparation of the Genera Flaiitaruin the old material was insuffi- 

 ciently examined. 



In his introduction Mr. Merrill calls attention to the fact that 

 "no botanist with a wide knowledge of t>he Indo-Mala3^an flora seems 

 to have made a critical examination of the Flora hidica or of 

 Burman's herbarium [now at Geneva], with a view of correlating his 

 work with that of other authors." The actual types, however, "in 

 many eases have been examined by subsequent authors who were 

 engaged in monographic work," and their conclusions have been 

 included in the present paper, which, however, is based on the jnib- 

 lished Flora, examination of the specimens being impracticable. 

 In the book, about 13U5 species are included, of which about 21^1 are 

 l)roposed as new. " Of the species included more than 500 are defi- 

 nitely indicated as from India ; that is, mostly from what is now 

 known as India proj^er: from Java about 115 species are enumerated; 

 from Ceylon about 90 ; from China about 50 ; from Japan about 15 ; 

 from Persia about 20." 



As a necessary consequence of Mr. Merrill's careful examination 

 of the work, many new combinations have been created. This has in 

 several instances led to the supersession of generally accepted names 

 — e. g., Foli/podium Scolopendrium Burm. f. (176S) replaces 

 P.phymatodes L. (1771) ; Dendrohium caninum (Burm. f.), F>. cru- 

 menatum Sw. (1799); Indif/ofera Cohitea (Burm, f.), 1. viscosa 

 Lam. (1789). Such alterations, although inevitable if the Laws be 

 followed, may be regretted, especially when a name so familiar as 

 Saiidoricum indicum Cav. (1787) has to give away to >S'. hoetjape on 

 account of its identity with Melia hoetjape Bui-m. f. — the fact that 

 " Koetjape is the common Javanese name " hardly reconciles one to 

 the change. It is, however, satisfactory that the changes have not 

 been wantonly made, and for this Mr. Merrill's name is sufficient 

 guarantee. His note on the transference of Alpinia malaccensis 

 Koscoe (^Maranta malaccensis Burm. f.) to Lanyuas Koenig may be 

 cited as an example of his method : — 



" Burman's binomial typifies Alpinia malaccensis Kosc, a species 

 that has apparently been misinterpi-eted by modei-n authors; see 

 Valeton in Merr. Interpret. Herb. Amb. (1917) 155. The type of 

 the genus Alpinia, as described hj Linufeus, is Alpinia racemosa, 

 of Tropical America, which currently appears in botanical literature 

 as Henealmia racemosa (L.) A. Eich. This is the onl^-- species of 

 Alpiniq that was known to Linn.Tus ; hence it must be the generic 

 iy])Q. The proper application of the generic name Alpinia is to the 



