PALMAE 



109 



PALMAE 



The Amboina collections made by Doctor Robinson have thrown 

 comparatively little light on the identity of the numerous species 

 of palms described by Rumphius, for the reason that very few 

 palms were secured by him. Probably in no other group of 

 plants is there more confusion among those species based by 

 later authors on Rumphius or more species of uncertain status 

 than in this family. In the genus Calamus numerous species 

 that were based wholly on the Rumphian descriptions and figures 

 are quite unrecognizable; their positions within the genus and 

 their relationships with other forms are quite undeterminable. 

 In the genus Metroxylon it is impossible to determine, from 

 material at present available, whether one somewhat polymor- 

 phous species or several closely allied ones are represented. In 

 order definitely to settle many cases of uncertain nomenclature 

 and to determine the true characters of many species that have 

 been based wholly on Rumphius, a much more extensive 

 botanical exploration of the Moluccas, especially of Amboina, is 

 necessary, and in no group of plants is this more important 

 than in the Palmae. 



Beccari has recently given us critical and beautifully illus- 

 trated monographs of the genera Calamus and Daemonorops* 

 yet of the fifteen species belonging in these two genera, described 

 and for the most part figured by Rumphius, he was able de- 

 finitely to recognize and to connect with botanical material but 

 four species. Four, incidentally mentioned in the text, he justly 

 states can in all probability never be recognized, but the others 

 he considers to represent characteristic species, which will 

 eventually be recognized when the Moluccas shall have been 

 more thoroughly explored botanically. 



Numerous questions of nomenclature cannot be determined 

 from data at present available, and accordingly the following 

 treatment of the palms described by Rumphius is distinctly un- 

 satisfactory in many respects. Many of the more characteristic 

 forms figured by him are readily recognizable, and their status 

 is certain. Others must await the collection of additional ma- 

 terial. Under the circumstances it has been considered best 

 to give a critical enumeration of all the species, according to 

 their definitely determined or their problematical positions. In 

 certain cases new names are indicated, but few new combina- 



* Ann. Bot. Gard. Calcutta 11 (1908) 1-518, t. 1-238; 12 1 (1911) 1-237, 

 t. 1-109. 



