2S2 A COMMENTARY ON THE SECOND BOOK 
87.), while the continental sandal has only four stamina. 
It was therefore certainly the insular sandal that Linnaeus 
called Santalum alburn^ although he seems afterwards 
(Juss. Gen. Plant. 356) to have drawn his generic charac- 
ter from the continental plant, thus confounding together 
the Santalum album with the Siriu7n myrtifolium of the 
Mantissa, which is no doubt the continental sandal, al- 
though Linnaeus erroneously attributed to it a berry con- 
taining three cells, probably from his having found three 
seeds in the germen. The specimens in his herbarium de- 
cidedly prove, that his Santalum album did not belong to 
even the same natural order with the Sirium, or continen- 
tal sandal (Brown, Prodr. Nov. Hoi. i. 855). 
Willdenow.(Sp. PL i. 609), and M. Poiret (Enc. Meth. 
vi. 501), misled by die latter Linnaean generic character, 
confounded the two plants together ; and, w^hile they con- 
tinued to quote Rumphius, and abandoned the name *S'i- 
rium, they no doubt described the continental sandal. 
Even Mr Robert Brown, although aware that the SantOr- 
lum album of Linnaeus, or the insular sandal, was not even 
of the same order with the Sirium myrtifolium, gave the 
name Santalum not only to the latter plant, but to a 
whole order. The sandal of Timor, however, is equally 
entitled to the name, and its wood, I believe, is that most 
commonly so called, both in Europe and China. M. La- 
marck, therefore, acted very properly in adopting the 
name Sirium, and in not quoting Rumphius (111. Gen. 
804, No. 1587, t. 74). His Sirium myrtifolium is, how- 
ever, probably that of Dr Roxburgh (Fl. Ind. i. 464), 
which the latter thinks different from that of Linnaeus, the 
leaves of the latter being a good deal broader, and the 
glandular bodies between its stamina being vuidivided. 
I have never seen the Sirium, or Santalum myrtifolium 
of Dr Roxburgh, but I have found that of Linnaeus, or the 
Santalum album of Roxbui'gh, not only in Carnata, but in 
