THY M ELM AGE M. 115 



Stellera of Ghelin, Arthrosolen and Funifera of C. A. Meyer, 

 Kelleria of Endlicher, Peddiea of Harvey, Daphnopsis and Schœno- 

 biblus of Martids and Zuccarini, Dicranolepis of Planchon, Cbfco- 

 phora of Miers and Goodallia and Lasiadenia of Bentham. In fact, he 

 admitted among the Thtjmeleœ thirty-three genera which we have 

 reduced to twenty-seven and to which Oliver l has just added Synap- 

 tolepis. We have also proposed, in this series, a new genus Stepha- 

 nodaphne ; 2 bringing the total up to twenty-nine. The Aquilarieœ, 

 which formerly comprised only the genera Aquilaria of Lamarck 3 and 

 Gyrinops of Gartner, 4 have been long separated from the Thymelacece, 

 chiefly on account of their pluricarpellar gynœcium ; but E. Brown, 

 who ranged them beside the Dichapetalecv ( Chailletieœ), declares, how- 

 ever, 5 " that their affinity with the Tlujmelccv would be less difficult 

 to establish than with any other group." This opinion, the ' para- 

 doxical appearance ' of which he did not dissimulate, is indeed now 

 adopted by everyone. We have seen Endlicher placing Pha- 

 laria in the series of the Thymelacece ; which entails the annexation 

 to this family of Aquilaria and Gyrinops, inseparable from Phaleria. 

 Unfortunately, Decaisne, engaged with these plants in 1843 6 and 

 1864, 7 placed before the latter generic name that of Drymispermum* 

 which is posterior to it, and, inconsiderately multiplying generic 

 and specific divisions, introduced the utmost confusion, making 

 with the true Phaleria at the same time Drymispermum, Pseudais 

 and Leucosmia, persisting in and even aggravating his errors 

 in his work of 1864, in which he appears to take no notice 

 of the progress of science or the labours of his predecessors. 

 Meissner, 10 also, having passively admitted the valueless genera 

 established by Decaisne, was led to divide the Aquilarieœ, under 

 the same title as the Thymelecc, into two tribes, Gyrinopece and 

 Drymispermeœ, distinguished from each other by the presence or 

 absence of scales in the throat of the perianth, and to place the 

 same genus, under different names, in both tribes. Happily in 



i Book. Icon. t. 1074 (1870). 1 Voy. Vénus, Bot. 13, tab. 



2 Adansonia, xi. fasc. 10 (1875). 8 Reinw. Syllog. PI. Xatisb. 15 (1828). 



3 Diet, ii (1806). 3 For the most complete demonstration of 



4 Fruct.u (1791), these facts, now scarcely credible, see Adan- 



5 Congo (1818), 443; Misc. Works (edit. sonia, xi. fasc. 10. 

 Benn.), i. 126. ln Prodr. xiv. 601 (1867). 



6 Ann. Sc. Nat. sér. 2, xix. 35. t. 1. 



8—2 



