220 Dr. Francis Hamilton's Commentary 



entale, and that without any mark of doubt, although both Commeline and 

 Plukenet had expressed uncertainty. That Linnseus, however, by his Avi- 

 cennia meant the Oepata, and not the Anacardium, we may judge from his 

 having placed it in the class Tetrandria. 



Rumphius, under the name Mangium album, no doubt described {Herb. 

 Amb. iii. 115. t. 76.) a species of Avicennia. Concerning this he says, "juxta 

 regionum varietatem varias exhibens species seu varietates." He then goes on 

 to describe the kind most common in Amboyna, which, both from the figure 

 and account, would appear to differ from the Oepata, to which, however, the 

 kind growing in Macassar seems to have a greater affinity. Neither Rumphius 

 nor his commentator Burman quotes the Oepata, nor hints at any similarity 

 between the plants. 



When the younger Burman published his Flora Indica (138.), Linnaeus, 

 under the name of Bontia germinans, had joined the Oepata and true Anacar- 

 dium, not only in the same genus, but in the same species with the Bontia of 

 Jacquin and Browne (quite different from the Bontia of Plumier), an Ame- 

 rican plant with hairy leaves. The Oepata, no doubt, belongs to the same 

 genus with the Bontia oi ia.c(\mn; but Rheede's words, "folia glabra," might 

 have cautioned Linnaeus against including them in one species ; and a proper 

 consideration of Rheede's account of the fruit might have shown that it could 

 not be the Anacardium, then well known in the shops. 



The younger Linnaeus having described the Anacardium under the name of 

 Semecarpus Anacardium, it might have been expected that the Oepata might 

 have been separated ; but Willdenow, having confined the name Bontia to the 

 genus of Plumier, returned to the Avicennia tomentosa (Sp. PI. iii. 395.), includ- 

 ing in one species not only the Bontia of Jacquin, but the Oepata, and even the 

 Anacardium. As, however, he retains in his specific character the term " folia 

 tomentosa," it is probable that his specimen belonged to the West Indian plant. 

 Yet, as he quoted the Oepata, Dr. Roxburgh considered this as the Avicennia 

 tomentosa (Hort. Beng. 46.) ; for, although he does not quote the Hortus Mala- 

 baricus, I know the plant which he received from Mr. Goodlad to have been 

 the Oepata. This may possibly be the Sceura marina of Forskahl, quoted also 

 for the A. tomentosa by Willdenow ; for it is more likely that the plant of 

 Arabia or Egypt should be the same with that of India than with that of 



