— 79 — 



does not presume the existence of more than one species, it is also not 

 quite sure that the described rhizome and flower belong to each other. By 

 no means, however, Dryandür lias a right to declare that the figure given 

 by Hermann is èrroneous, though it may not be the species which Hermann 

 indicates in the heading as the terra mérita of the offices. For the species 

 of Linnaeus does not mean the latter but points to the description and 

 figure of Hermann. !t is strange that Trimen (1898, 242) declares the figure 

 of Hermann to be a good figure of C. longa cultivated in Ceylon. Perhaps 

 he has overlooked this detail. 



It seems to me that C. aromatica Salisb (C. Zedoaria Roxb;) (Trimen 

 I.e. 241), the onl\' one laterally flowering plant with a yellow rhizome, 

 which occurs in Ceylon, must be the plant, which is by Linnaeus at first 

 called C. longa L. 



Later, however, Linnaeus has also added Curcuma ciomestica of Rumph, 

 (above described by me under a new name) as a synonym, in Stickman, Herb. 

 Amb. (1754) 843, and in Amoen. Acad. 4 (1759) 129, and still later (spec. pi. ed. 

 2., 1762, 3) he adds a\so Curcuma rotunda {\ .e. Kaemp/eria pandurata Roxh). 



C. longa Linn, is therefore a very mixed species; but what is now 

 the Curcuma longo of most recent authors, reclaimed to be the plant pro- 

 ducing the deep yellow or orange rhizomes known as "Turmeric" and 

 being a widely spread article of commerce? 



Roxburgh in dealing with C. longa takes as such the species described 

 by KoENiG in Retz., Obs. (1738,3,72) and says: 



"Koenig's description is so very exact and complete, that there is 

 nothing left for me to add." This is unfortunately a mistake for, exact Koenig's 

 description may be, it fits two species ,viz C. viridiflora Roxb. and C. longa 

 Roxb.; and when we accept that the first may be excluded as being not 

 malaccan, then Roxburgh himself caused again a grave confusion, followed by 

 the later authors (also Schmuann) in mentioning Jacqujn (1776,3, t. 4) which 

 represents a species with a purple-red coma while KoENiG 's description 

 as well as that of Rumph. means a species with a white coma. 



Perhaps he does so on authority of Dryander (1792,212) who has 

 examined flowers kept in Spiritus, sent to him by Koenig, which he declared 

 to be identical with the figure of Jacquin. Such a comparison, of course, 

 can only state that the examined plants belong to the same genus, but 

 nothing is said about the species. The figure of Jacquin and Koenig's 

 description represent undoubtedly two different species. The figure of 

 Jacquin and the one of Lindley in Bot. reg. t. 886, which seems to resem- 

 ble the former are unfortunately not available to me. 



However, it is clear that two species lay claim on the name of "tur- 

 meric." But very remarkably there is still a third species, which evidently 

 was considered by Hooker to be the "turmeric" and which does 



