SECTION IV: G. BRASILIENSE 301 



fol. 65 also 66) is G. pemvianum, Cav., not G. brasiliense, Macf. By 

 the rule of priority, however, it is probable that Eoxburgh's name for 

 the species G. acuminatum should have been adopted. He was 

 apparently the first author who described it accurately, but his manu- 

 script drawing (here reproduced, Plate No. 50), bears the name 

 G. vitifolium, and from the standpoint of the planter there might be 

 involved some ambiguity through acceptance of a name that of neces- 

 sity is suggestive of a questionable indigenous (Indian) habitat. 

 Another alternative would be to adopt the name G. religiosum, 

 Swartz., (non Linn.}. But the meagre description given by Linnaeus, 

 of his G. religiosum (' Syst. Nat.' [1767] n., 462), when read in con- 

 nection with the specimen in his herbarium to which, in his own 

 handwriting, he gave that name (see Plate No. 32 A with labels) 

 leaves no room for doubt that he did not mean the Brazilian kidney 

 cotton. In confirmation of this view it may be added that there is a 

 sample of what may be kidney cotton in the Linnean herbarium Linnean 

 (Plate No. 49 A) but which simply bears the generic name ' Gossy- specuE 

 pium,' and was apparently neither identified nor named by Linnaeus, 

 though, curiously enough, in his own handwriting, the name ' Surin ' 

 (? Surinam) is written alongside. 



Sloane says of G. brasiliense that it was in his day believed to Brazilian 

 have been obtained by Jamaica from Brazil, and Macfadyen accepted * m ^~ 

 that belief as sufficient justification for the name G. brasiliense. cotton. 

 When grown as a regular crop it very frequently bears the name of 

 Brazilian or Pernambuco cotton, or has some locality name given to 

 it : thus in India it is often called ' Ava cotton ' and in the Antilles 

 1 Siamese cotton ' names suggestive of introduction. It must not 

 however, be forgotten (as already pointed out) that the earliest 

 accurate description and plate of this species is that given by Zanoni First 

 (1675), who calls it Pernambuco cotton (cf. pp. 18, 20). Nor must it be 

 overlooked that the still earlier author, Marcgraf de Liebstad, 

 according to Piso (1648), speaks of a cotton with seven conjoined 

 seeds which was most frequently found growing in cultivated 

 situations a remark that would seem to imply its being spontaneous. 

 In Brazil to-day it is often found as a plant of gardens and waste 

 lands. 



Whether, in the light of present-day knowledge, I am correct or sioane's 

 not in accepting the very imperfect descriptions given by Lerius, view< 

 Marcgraf, and others as denoting G. brasiliense, it seems highly 

 probable that Sloane was influenced by Marcgraf and Zanoni in the 



