The "Amilbeds" and the Pummelos. 31 



Baber's time ; now, however there are many varieties, 

 and natives in Upper India call one variety mahtabi, 

 and another chakbtra. 



I do not think there would be much advantage in 

 separating the amilbeds from the pummelos. They 

 may no doubt have had a different origin, but at 

 present the difference in the fruit is slight. The 

 amilbeds are sour, and some have a pulp of an orange 

 tinge, while the pummelos are sour-sweet, with a dash 

 of bitter, and some have a pink or red tinge. The 

 leaves do not differ much, the wings of the petioles of 

 the latter being larger than those of the former. At 

 the most, they might be considered as varieties of 

 some older parent. Anyhow, the amilbeds appear to 

 have been overlooked by botanists, as, not even has 

 their name been mentioned. It is impossible to say 

 whether they came into existence in India, or are of 

 foreign origin. 



With regard to the pummelo, Alph. de Candolle, in 

 his " Origin of Plants," says : " Rumphius believed it to 

 be a native of Southern China, neither he nor modern 

 botanists saw it wild in the -Malay archipelago .... 

 according to Loureiro, the tree is common in China, 

 and Cochin China, but this does not imply that it is 

 wild. It is in the islands to the east of the Malay 

 archipelago, that the clearest indications of a wild 

 existence are found. Forster formerly said of this 

 species, ' very common in the Friendly Isles.' Seeman 

 is yet more positive about the Fiji Isles. ' Extremely 

 common,' he says, ' and covering the banks of the 

 river.' It would be strange if a tree, so much 

 cultivated in the south of Asia, should have become 

 naturalized to such a degree in certain islands of the 

 Pacific, while it has scarcely been seen elsewhere. It 

 is probably indigenous in them, and may perhaps 



