8 THE GENUS ALBIZZIA. 
hd 
prolix introduction, and gives a long, but superficial account of the Juli- 
brissin plant, states how it was s introduced into "Tuscany from Constanti- 
nople in 1749, by the Knights of Santo Stephano, and relates how it be- 
came successfully cultivated, citing also a notice given of the same plant 
e 
proposes to make it the type of a new genus, Ælbizzia, as a member of 
that x eyes — was one of the first who introduced it into Tus- 
1, he gives the following specific diagnosis :—* Julibrissin 
Albizia inermis, foliis bipinnatis, floribus spicatis, centrali ceteris longiore. 
t 
; : perian quin » 
breve. Corolla monopetala, infundibuliformis, quinquefida, citrina ; tubus 
cylindraceus, longus, rectus, —_ — 5 limbus non multum patens, 
quinque-partitus, acutus. Stamina: filam ta plus minus viginti, recep- 
taculo adnata, anllana intra iban naadik, cylindrum efformantia, 
corolla triplo longiora, versus apicem eda colore. Anthere in- 
cumbentes, rotun , colore viridi. Pistillum : germen oblongum, pla- 
num, acutum ; stylus filiformis, staminibus wagon concolor ; stigma acu- 
tissimum. Pericarpium : siliqua longissima, - pla , mar inibus undu- 
cato-pinuata, 15-jugia, paria. Folio ap ana, serail altero margine curvo, 
EC P^ apice acuto ; paria non 
oli sends with this detract from the 2 aor. Mio d tracing of 
the vun which aecompanied Durazzini's description ; and this illustra- 
tion must be considered a good one for the time, more particularly so as 
some analytic details are given, and among them, at D the tubular con- 
finition is such as to entitle thereby Albizia (or as I should prefer with 
modern phytographers more correctly to write it, Albizzia) to be con- 
sidered as fairly established fully a century ago. illdenow, writing in 
1805 (Spec. Plant. iv. 1065), was evidently ‘not aware, when recording 
a Julibrissin, that Durazzini had given a lengthened account of the 
, the quotations being only,—Forskal, Flora ZEgyptiaco- Arabica, 
p. 177 (1775) ;f Scopoli, "Delieite Flore et Faun Insubricæ, i. 18. t. 8 
( (1786) ; yr: Hort. Kew. iii. 440 (1789). Much later De ‘Candolle 
(Prodr. ii. 469), in 1825, only adds as quotation, Lamarck, Dict. i. 13 
(1783), fik Forskal’s name is adopted. In the second edition of 
Aiton's ‘ Hortus Kewensis, iii. 466 (1813), we find Gmelin's * Reise 
* It seems open to grave doubts whether Plukenet's figure really belon 
inis Julibrissin, because the draw: as shows the leaflets abso. ve d b anf, 
without any trace of spicata ; their nerve is remote from the anterior margin 
the leaflets, cg o are not quite sessile nor „o ~ the base, while flowers 
and e nting to support the identity of the p 
t i ziv es the following note:—Mimosa Cual rachibus partialibus 
7-8-jugis, foliis 24-27-jugis, floribus monadel phis. Hane Constantinopoli vidi, 
Turcis Djulibrzim, i.e. flos sericeus, propter stamina filiformia, 
