THE GREWIAS OF ROXBURGH 331 



(Symbola, i. 35), an identification which inspection of the type of 

 Vahl's excelsa shows to have been perfectly erroneous. The true 

 excelsa was a tree discovered by Porskal in South-west Arabia, 

 and described in the Flora Mgyptiaca, p. 105 (1775), as Gliadara 

 arborea, but subsequently lost sight of until 1887, when it was 

 found again in the same country by M. Deflers, and described by 

 him, in the belief that it was new to science, in Bull. Bot. Soc. de 

 France, xlii. p. 301, as "Grewia cluhia." This tree, however, 

 must be called G. arborea Lamarck, as it was duly described under 

 this name in the Encyclopedie Metlioclique, iii. 45 (1789), two years 

 before the appearance of the Symbola. Eoxburgh's ''excelsa" 

 was a plant from Eastern Bengal, of which something will be said 

 later, the present point being that the " excelsa " of Masters in the 

 Flora of British India, i. 385, is not G. excelsa Vahl at all, but is 

 certainly in part the plant published as " G. salvifolia E." in the 

 Flora Indica, ii. 587 (Carey's 1832 edition), which again =: Grewia 

 Bothii DC. (Prodronms, i. 509, sp. 13), i. e. Grewia bicolor of Roth, 

 Nov. sp. p. 420, but not of Jussieu. 



G. salvifolia Heyne (ex Roth, Nov. Sp. 239) is a distinct species, 

 as Roth duly indicated ; Heyne seems in the first instance to have 

 referred it to the Grewia salvifolia of the younger Linne (Suppl. 

 p. 409, 1781), which is an Alangium, but it was ultimately sent to 

 Europe as " G. Icsvigata" (of Rottler, MSS. non Vahl). Roxburgh 

 (MS. note in Hb. Kew) referred to this salvifolia of the younger 

 Linne the other species (which is G. Bothii DC), observing at 

 the same time that the leaves did not square with the description. 

 His specimen at Kew has a further label " G. glabra," manifestly 

 referring to the G. glabra of G. Forster ; of this there is an 

 authentic specimen in the Kew Herbarium, which is unmistakably 

 G. Bothii of De CandoUe. The 'psendo- Greivia — really an Alaii- 

 gium — of the younger Linnaeus was sent to Europe by the 

 missionaries (see a specimen at Kew) as " Grewia montana" ; the 

 mistake was pointed out by Roxburgh (Fl. Ind. ed. Carey, ii. 503), 

 but so succinctly that the clue was missed by Wight and Arnott 

 {v. footnote to p. 78 of Prodr. Fl. Renins. Ind. Or.). At the same 

 time they have clearly and correctly indicated that the salvifolia 

 of Roxburgh in the Flora Indica, as his unpublished tab. 225 

 demonstrates, is G. Bothii DC, and further that Roth's {i. e. 

 Heyne's) salvifolia (1821) is the G. Damine of Gaertner [De 

 Fructibus, ii. 112, 1. 1067, ann. 1788). The names and synonymy, 

 as well as the descriptions of " G. excelsa " and " G. salvifolia " in 

 Fl. Brit. Ind. (i. 385, 386) must accordingly be set aside ; it is 

 unnecessary to give fresh descriptions in this paper, because 

 Roth's are full and accurate, and all that needs to be repeated 

 here is that Roth's nomenclature has to be amended as follows : — - 



(1) G. BICOLOR Roth, non Juss., = G. salvifolia Roxb. Fl. Ind. 

 ii. 587, non Linn. fil., = C/. glabra G. Forster MS., = G. Bothii DC. 

 Prodr. i. 509 (1824). 



(2) G. SALVIFOLIA Heyne ex Roth, non Roxb., — G. Damine 

 Gaei'tn. 



Gaertner's description and figure were founded on fruits sent 



2 c 2 



