THK TEA PLANT 



CAMELLIA 



THEA 



CAMELLIA, I. in,,. : Fl. Br. Ind.,\., 292-3; Frt,-jr The, Jacobus 

 thw, //"/. Nat. 17- f. //if/. Or., 1631 in Piso, Lid. Utri. re Nat. et 

 .s. j,|. ss ; Tin- SwwnwMm, Jacob Breyn. /iV.,/. P/., 1677, 111-5, 

 I to have been made after a sketch ly William ten Rhyne ) ; 

 K nipi'T. .!///'. Exot., 1712, 605-31, pi. 1-2; Thea japonensi*, 

 il.-iit., ///>/. N/i///*.. 172:.'. 132-43 and 2 pi. ; Bohea Tea and Green Tea, 

 i. Hot.. 175!), pi. 21-2 ; Thea bohea and '/'. >iridis, Lettsom, Nat. 

 177L' (nw ed. 1799) with 2 coloured pi. ; T. viridis, Smith in 

 /-I., 1819, xxxv. ; T. stricta, bohea and viridis, Hayne, Oewachse, 

 vii.. pi. 27-9; C. Thea and (7. viridis, Link, Enum. PI. Hort. 

 l>22, ii., 73; T. virufo and T. b>Aea, Booth, 2Van. ffort. 

 . is.io, vii., .">19; T. viridis, Bot. Mag., 1832, No. 3148; C. bohea 

 theifern, Griffith, .\otulce, 1854, iv., 553, 558; Ic., iv., t. 601, 

 -3 : T. ririrft* and bohea, Choisy, Mem. Soc. Phys. Geneve, 1855, xiv., 

 ; T. chinenais, Seemann, Trans. Linn. Soc., 1859, xxii., 337-52, t. 61 ; 

 -v. Prize Essay in Journ. Agri.-Hort. Soc. Ind., 1871, iii., 143-441 ; 

 selton-Dyer, Journ. Linn. Soc., 1873, xiii., 329 ; Heuze, Les PI. Indust., 

 , iv.. 2<M>-7 ; Watt, Peste and 5ZigrAte o/ ^e Tea Plant, 1898 : Watt 

 Mann. I.e. 1903 ; Watt, Tea and Tea Plant, Journ. Roy. Hort. Soc., 

 7, xxxii.. 64-96 ; TERNSTRGEMIACE^:. 



Species and Varieties of Tea. Linnaeus (Gen. PL, 1737) indicated two genera, 

 and ntntriiiti. The differences he established turned on whether or not 

 stami-ns were free from each other or united, and on the number of cells and 

 in the fruit. Accordingly he placed Thrn in Polyandria Monogynia and 

 inn in Monadelphia Polyandria. Subsequently (Sp. PI., 1753, 515, 698) 

 iseus assigned the tea plant as the type of Then and the Japanese Camellia 

 type of fameiiia. But it has since been abundantly established that 

 iseus was incorrect in regarding the stamens as being free in the tea plant, and 

 a matter of everyday knowledge that on the same tea plant fruits may be 

 id with one, two, three or more seeds. Modern botanists are accordingly 

 that the two genera cannot be separately upheld. Hence it may be regarded 

 priority of accurate generic recognition of the structural peculiarity of the 

 sens (were there no other considerations) necessitates the retention of the 

 < < nineiiia. and the reduction of Thfa. Turning now to the specific name, 

 the first edition of the Species Plantarum, Linnaeus (without giving any 

 cription) called the tea plant Thm niiivn*l8 and remarked that he had seen 

 specimens with six petals and others with nine, but he left it to those who 

 the opportunity of studying the living plants to say whether that peculiarity 

 loted two or only one species. In the second edition of his work (published 

 ) Linnaeus discarded the name T. sinensis (without giving any reason) 

 accepted Hill's conclusion that there were two plants, which he named 

 fa the plant with six petals and T. rii-iaiM the plant with nine petals, 

 eus then adds (still following Hill) that the leaves are longer in i-triiii* 

 in hnhen. but he says nothing of Hill's contention that the former yields 

 en " and the latter " black tea." In the third edition of his work Linnffius 

 no alterations, but in the fourth (prepared by Willdenow, 1797) a few 

 Mitional particulars are given (of the two forms above indicated) and T. baitm 

 referred to two varieties : (a) laia a plant with rough elliptic oblong leaves 



d (6) Mtricta a plant with plane lanceolate leaves. 



Seemann pointed out that on his own copy of the sixth edition of the Genera 

 intarum, Linnseus had written certain corrections which show that the material 

 r-n to hand had induced him once more to amend and amplify his description, 

 ice then many botanists have striven to uphold the two Linnaean genera, 

 9ir recognition being regarded as justified by certain trivial peculiarities of 

 calyx or, as Seemann affirms, of the stamens, but the final conclusion of 

 majority of writers, as already indicated, seems to be that they constitute 

 ne genus and one species of tea. Engler and Prantl (Pflanzenfam., 1895, 

 6, 1823), the most recent authors, reduce Camellia to Thfa. and restore 

 the rejected name Thvu Kim-nut*. But it would seem that that specific name 

 cannot be given as a collective appellation for the many races of the cultivated 



209 14 



D.E.P., 

 ii., 66 83 ; 

 vi., pt. iii., 

 417 79. 

 Tea. 



Botanical 



Name. 



Only one 

 (Jenus. 



Supposed to be 

 Two Species. 



Ono" Genus and 

 One Species. 



