11 liS'TBODUOTIOS.
each sex are f.,und in each receptacle. The choinoter oí the genus given by Blnme in
liis Bijdragen shorn that ho must hare adopted Vahl's definition irithont esamiimtion
(rt the flowers; for, according to Blnme, as to Vahl, the male flowers of the genus are
triandrons. Blame mentions that the males hare a rudimentary pistil, which, as a matter
of fact, is the caso in only a small nmiiber of species. Hoxbm-gh is tho first writer who
attempts to describe the flowers of cach species, and in a note attached to his definition
of the genus in his Flora Indim he says;—" I have examined minutely the florets of
nearly the whole of the species, and found only two instances in which they were not
androgynous, and by far the greater part are monandrons." He therefore puts Ftciis into
Momecia Mmmdria. Gasparrini and Miquel were the next botanists who ajipear to have
made a careful study of the flowers of tho genns. In the year 1844 &asparrini
published a remarkable paper, in which he divided all the species of Ficus known to him
into eight genera, viz. Fhiis proper, Caprifms, Tenorea (a name subsequently changed by
Mmsolf to iimrophthalma), Unsligma, Visknia, Cyilogyns, Gahglt/ehm, and OomllK. His
first genus, Mens proper, contained only one species, namely tho common eatable Fig of
Southern Europe. His second gonus, Bafrijicut, contained only the Capriflg, wliich, as
Linnieus had maintained nearly a liundi-ed years before, and as the most recent observations
have demonstoatod, is only the male of the plant of which the eatable Kg is the
female. Gasparrini's genus Temrm contained only a singlo species, the F. ¡mmilt, of
Linnieus. His fourth genus, Vrostignm, is tho only ono of his groups wdiich has stood the
test of experience. It contuinod all the spocies known to Gasparrini of the section as
defined in the following pages. Into his fifth genus, called Visiam, Gaspanim put only a
single plant, viz. F. elmtieá, a species referred by all subsequent writers to Vrostigvi,,.
The sixth gonus contained a single specios, F. hucosticta, a species which I have
referred to Oovcllm. Oahglnclm, Gaspan-ini's seventh genus, consisted of two specios,
wdiich, being American, lie beyond the scope of the present undertaking. To Gaspamni's
eighth genus, Cmidlia, he refen-ed only a single specios, of which ho says he had neither
seen male flowers nor rÍ2ie seeds.
During the same year (1844) in which Gasparrini's new classification was pubhshed,
Miquel, in Ann. da Sdmus RaluMks, series III, I, p. 31, working chiefly on some of
Roxburgh's descriptions, suggested that the species described in the Flora India, of that
author ought not to be considered as forming a natural homogeneous group, but as divisible
into very distinct sections ; and in the same paper he proceeds to distribute twentyfive
of them into the two sections Carica, and Sycocarjms, while on one of Koxbm'gh's
species (i?, opfodtífoliu.) he founds the new genus SyeomorjoU. The basis of Miqucl's (as
of Gaspan-ini's) classification, was the structure and disposition of the flowers. Tlireo years
later (i.e. in 1847) Miquel began to publish, in Hooker's Journal of Bolamj, a
monograiih of all the species of tlie old genus Ficus, and as the result of Iiis extended
study o£ it he established the following gmQTa.: — Urosti;jma, iiicl-uding 167 species; I^ha;--
INTEODUCTION.
maco^ycea, including 12 species; Pogonotrophe, including 16 species; Si/comorus, including
12 species; Fisus, including 138 specios; Covellia, including 31 species; Syncecia, including
3 species. These seven genera -were formed solely on characters obtained from the structure
and disposition of the flowers, tho number of the stamens and the chai-acter of the
sti"-ma forming prominent features in the diagnoses. Some of the chai-acters were founded
on undoubted errors of observation, as, for example, "whon the female flowers of Covellia
and those of both males and females in Sijnceeia are described as without perigoniuni.
This arrangement was subsequently abandoned by its author, and Miquel himself, twenty
years later (in 1867), published, in the Ann. Miis. Lugd. But., vol. Ill, a rearrangement of
Ficus. In this new arrangement Miquel abandoned the idea of breaking up the genus
Ficus into genera, and substituted for that scheme one in which tho reunited genus is
suUlivided into six sub-genera, as follows: — UrosHgma, with 143 Old World, ].I0 American
species, and 21 of doubtful nativity; Phannacosyce, with 18 species, all American; Erylhrogijne,
with 2 species; Syn(ecia, with 3 species; Emyee, with 209 specios; Covellia, with 48
species. In this rearrangement tlu-ee of lliquel's old genera—Urostigm% Pharmaeosyce, and
Covellia—appear, with enlarged and slightly altered characters, as sub-genera. The name of
a fom-th old genus, Syncecia, is kejDt up for a sub-genus ; but the name only, for a totally
different set of claaracters are given to the sub-genus from those which characterised the
genus. And two entirely new sub-genera, viz. Erythroyyne and Eusyee, are establislied.
The total number of species included in this second enumeration of iliquel's is 405 Old
World species, 128 American species, and 22 species of doubtful nativity. In this second
an-angement of lliquel's the flowers alone are not trusted to entirely for the sub-generic
characters, but account is also taken of the form and situation of the receptacles, of the
form of the leaves, and of general habit.
In the Genera Plantar urn of the late llr. Bentham and Sir J. D. Hooker fom- of
Jliquel's sub-genera, viz. Urosiit/ma, Eu^yca, Syncecia, and Covellia, are admitted, Pharmacosyce
(a diandi'ous group of Urostig7na-\^Q species) is accepted with doubt, and the sixth,
Erythroriyne, is suppressed. But these eminent botanists admit that the sections which
they adopt from Miquel are too loosely defined, and they commend the whole genus to
the attention of the monographer. This advice, together with the kind personal
encouragement of Sir Joseph Hooker, induced me to carry through to completion an
attempt which I bad begun a year or two previously to elucidate the structure and
aiHnities of the species of Ficus found in tho Indo-Malayan region.
The flowers of the genus Ficus are collected in a cymose manner on a fleshy axis,
which, by the cm-ving upwards of its circumferential part (or organic base), is converted
into a kind of flask, on the inner surface of the walls of which a number of flowers are
arranged. As the bottom of the interior of the flask corresponds to the apes of the axis,
the flowers developed there are the oldest, while those developed neai-ost the mouth—
the organic base—ai-e the youngest. These flower-beai-ing axes are called figs, recept