94 ANNALS OF THE ROYAL BOTANIC GARDEN, CALCUTTA. 
But if there be some difficulty in recognizing the three varieties which were 
considered by Munro to be species, it is easy to recognize two very distinct varieties 
in habit, viz. (1) the tall handsome large-culmed variety of the valleys of the 
Cirears and the hills of South India, and so often cultivated elsewhere; and (2) 
the almost dwarf, thick-branched, very thorny small-culmed variety which grows gre- 
gariously on the low hills and laterite downs of Orissa and Ganjam and extends 
into Lower Bengal and across to Burma. This latter is gregarious in densely thorny 
clumps of some 20 feet in height, and is probably the one which Roxburgh meant 
as В. spinosa. But I doubt if it can be described as a variety by any more 
definite characters. 
The thorns on the branches and side shoots; the characteristic culm-sheath 
with felted hairs inside the imperfect blade, and the narrow pointed leaves characterize 
this species, which is probably the best known and the most cultivated of all the 
Indian bamboos. Roxburgh gives as vernacular names: Bans, behor bans (Bengali) 
Mulkas, vedru (Telugu), Mungil (Tamil); Dalzell and Gibson give the Bombay name 
as Mundgay ; Brandis gives Magar bans, nál bans (Punjab), Кайапо (Central India); 
Kurz gives Kyakatwa, (Burmese); Thwaites Kuttoo-oona-gass (Cingalese!; Van Rheede Пу 
(Malabar). It is also known as Wahkanteh (Garo), Wanah (Magh), Кай wadár (Gondi), 
(see the ‘Manual of Indian Timbers.’) G. Mann has sent me specimens from Sylhet 
bearing the names Ketúa, kátáúsi (Bengali), and from Nowgong called Kotoha (Assamese). 
I have also received specimens from the Bombay Presidency bearing names as follows: 
from А. D. Wilkins from Ahmednagar, Kalak; from В. C. Wroughton from Poona, 
Kalki; from С. P. Millett and L. S. Osmaston from Thana, Padhai, khara, manwel, 
дода, kashti. Babu Sree Dhur Chakravarti has sent both the large and the small 
variety from Khurda, Orissa, under the obvious name of Kanta bans (thorny bamboo), 
probably the commonest name for it in India. 
As regards the flowering of this species, Brandis says: “ Isolated flowering clumps 
“are found occasionally, but as a rule all clumps in one flowering district come into 
"flower simultaneously, а few clumps flowering in the previous and some in the 
“succeeding year.” According to Beddome, this species flowered in 1804, 1836, and 1868 
on the Western Coast, and Bourdillon (Indian Forester, xiii. 409) says it flowered again 
in 1882; it flowered gregariously (planted trees only) in Dehra Dún in 1881 (see 
Indian Forester, vol. vi, 336), and previously in 1836 according to Sir W. Sleeman, 
quoted by Munro, I myself saw it in flower in the Nallamalai Hills of Kurnool in 1889. 
In Orissa it flowered in 1812; in Canara in 1864; in the Balaghat district, Central 
Provinces, in 1865, and in Narsingpur in 1885 (С. J. Nicholls in Pioneer, April 
1893); in Malda in 1874; in Oudh in 1880 (Captain Wood in Judian Forester, vii. 59). 
This year, 1894, it is in flower in Cuddapah (В. McIntosh). Roughly, it may be 
said to flower about every 30 years, and then to die down, reproducing itself 
abundantly from seed, and affording a magnificent crop of grain. As the seeds, 
which somewhat resemble wheat seeds, are edible, they have in some years proved 
of great value to supplement the food-supply. As regards uses, this bamboo is very 
largely employed; but it is by no means one of the best kinds, as the culms are rather 
crooked and often knotty, and the densely interlacing thorny branchlets make it 
difficult io extract them from the clump. It makes a close, almost impenetrable hedge, 
and is said to have been largely planted around cities both in North and South India, 
and specially in Mysore, as a protection against attack. Against such a hedge, nothing 
