J í : Á L a .l ^
v i i i INTRODUCTION.
iVoiii Camellia, in several points o f sufficient importance to justify
their being separated. Linnaeus not only considered them as two distinct
genera, b u t as belonging to different classes, under which they
will be found arranged in .the first and second editions of his Species
PJantarum;* the Theas, in Polyandria Monogynia; and the Camellias,
in Monadelphia Polyandria. In th e Prtelectiones in Ordines N a tu rales,
f they arc brought together, and form p a rt of th e natural order
Columniferee; and it has been subsequently remarked by Sir James
Edward Smith, in Rees' Cyclopedia (article, Thea), th a t they ought
to stand next to one another in th e artificial, as well as in the natural
system.
Willdenow followed th e arrangement o f Linnaeus, which was also
adopted in the first and second editions o f the Hortus Kewensis, and
more recently by Professor Sprengel, in his Systema Vegetabilium.
^ Ir. K er and Dr. Sims have recorded their opinion in the Botanical
Alagazine, folio 998, th a t th e two genera ought to be u n ite d ; or, if
they are to be k ep t separate, th a t they should be placed in the same
class. Professor Lindley, who has had th e best opportunities o f examining
the genera, doubts th e existence o f an y decisive limits by
which Camellia is to be distinguished from Thea. In th e Botanical
Register, folio 1078, he has, however, given b rie f characters o f the
species, with large flowers, which he considers strictly referable to the
former genus, namely, Camellia Japónica, C. lleticulata, and the plant
known in th e gardens as th e Double Purple Sasanqua, which he has
named C. Malijtora; while th e other species, with small florvers, he
would refer to Thea. This arrangement, although emanating from
such an authority, appears to us objectionable, and for this reason:
* S pe c ie s P la n ta rum , firs t e d it. p . 515 a n d C
+ P rs e le c tio n e s in O rd . N a t. p . 451, &c.
8 ; second e d it. p. 734 a n d 9
INTRODUCTION. IX
because th e plants, though possessing many o f the characters common
to Thea, will be found, on examination, to want those which are most
essential in th e distinguishing o f th a t genus from Camellia.
Th e same u nce rtainty seems to have a ttended their arrangement
in the natural system, as in th e artificial. We have before stated th a t
they form p a rt o f th e natural order Columniferce o f Linnseus. By Ju s sieu,
th ey are placed in Aurantice;* an d by Ven ten at, in Ebenacea.-]-
They a re th e Theacea\ o f M . Mirbel, and the Camellie(E\ o f M. De-
candolle. In this order they have been arranged by Mr. Don, in his
Prodromus Florae Nepalensis, p. 224, combined with Ternstrdmiace<e,
a tribe o f plants which, in th e structure of their flowers, as well as in
their general hab it an d appearance, very much resemble those lender
consideration. The most essential difference between them, according
to M. Decandolle, is in th e seeds of th e la tte r being without albumen.
We shall here give th e characters assigned to th e order Camellieae, by
th a t distinguished botanist, in his Prodromus, vol. i. p. 529.
C A M E L L IE .E .
C a l y x . Sepals 5 , 7, in e s tiv a tio n im b ric a ted , th e in n e r o ften larg e r
th a n th e o th ers , s om ew h at c o n c av e , c o ria c eo u s, d e c id u o u s . Petals 5 ,6 ,9 ,
{sometimes hut not always) e q u a l in n um b e r to th e sep als, a lte rn a te w ith
th em , a n d o fte n co h e rin g a t th e b a s e . Stamens, sev eral. Filaments,
filiform a t th e v e ry b a se, m o n ad e lp h o u s o r p o ly d e lp h o u s . Anther
e llip so id o r ro u n d v e rsa tile . Ovanj 1, o v a te ro u n d ish . Styles S, 6,
filiform, m o re o r less u n ite d . Capsules {see plate 1.) 3 celled , 3 v a lv ed ,
* J u s s . G e n e r a , 262.
+ V e n te n a t, ii. 447.
J B u ll. P h i l . Décembre, 1813.
§ D e c . T h e o r . E lem . ed. 1 , F é v r ie r , 1813.