30 ^ RUMPHIUS'S HERBARIUM AMBOINENSE 



either Rumphius's description or figure. Even in Linnaeus's 

 works descriptions based on actual specimens rather than on 

 cited synonyms are usually thus determinable. I have already 

 noted that none of Loureiro's species, even when the specific 

 name is taken from Rumphius, are to be interpreted by the 

 Rumphian synonym cited. The same is true of most of 

 Burman's species published in his Flora Indica, many of those 

 proposed by Lamarck, and those of many other authors. 

 Where a species was based on an actual specimen supplemented 

 by a reference to Rumphius, the specimen is manifestly 

 the type, but it then becomes necessary to determine ( whether 

 or not the specimen represents the same species as the Rumphian 

 synonym cited. In a very high percentage of such cases the 

 actual specimen described has been found to represent a species 

 different from the one figured by Rumphius, due to the fact 

 that the early authors, having little conception of the geographic 

 distribution of plants, failed to distinguish between the in- 

 digenous and endemic elements in the Amboina flora and those 

 species of wide distribution. Among all of the earlier workers 

 there was a strong tendency to refer the Rumphian illustrations 

 to species described from actual specimens, even if there was 

 only a superficial resemblance between the specimen and the 

 figure. None of them realized the necessity of interpreting 

 Moluccan species from Moluccan specimens ; and, even if the value 

 of such procedure were realized, no botanical material from 

 Ambonia was available to European botanists until the close of 

 the eighteenth century and, even then, only a limited amount. 



In the present consideration of the Herbarium Amboinense 

 those species and their synonyms that were based solely on plants 

 described and figured, or merely described, by Rumphius have 

 been indicated by the term "type!" in parentheses following the 

 citation. The list of such species could doubtless have been 

 extended if in the course of the preparation of the manuscript, 

 I had had access to all the literature. As it is, nearly 350 such 

 4 'types" have been indicated. From the standpoint of taxonomy 

 then, the Herbarium Amboinense is of relatively very great im- 

 portance, for its descriptions and figures typify a very large 

 number of binomials of later authors. Only two other pre- 

 Linnean works on the Indo-Malayan flora can be compared with 

 the Herbarium Amboinense in this respect, these being Rheede's 

 Hortus Malabaricus and Linnaeus's Flora Zeylanica, and most of 

 the actual specimens on which the later work was based are 

 extant. 



