The botanical legacy of Thomas Hardwicke’s journey to Srinagar in 1796

. In 1796, Thomas Hardwicke travelled through northern India between what is now Fatehgarh in Uttar Pradesh and Srinagar in Uttarakhand. Hardwicke collected and described plants encountered and had many of the plants illustrated from life. He published an account of the journey in 1799 including a list of plant species. I review the names validated in the original paper, and also those published subsequently by Sir James Edward Smith and William Roxburgh based partly or wholly on the material or drawings acquired by Hardwicke on the journey to Srinagar. The large collection of Hardwicke plant drawings now held in the British Library, and a smaller set in the Botany Library of the Natural History Museum, are considered in relation to the application and typi ﬁ cation of plant names related to Hardwicke’s botanical exploration in India. The names of seven plant species were validly published in the 1799 paper ( Androsace rotundifolia Hardw., Ficus laminosa Hardw., Justicia thyrsiformis Roxb. ex Hardw., Linum trigynum Roxb. ex Hardw., Lonicera quinquelocularis Hardw., Salvia integrifolia Roxb. ex Hardw. and Volkameria bicolor Hardw.), plus one new combination ( Echites antidysentericus (L.) Roxb. ex Hardw.). As concluded by Britten more than a century ago, Ficus laminosa is the correct name for the ﬁ g variously referred to F. saemocarpa Miq. or F. squamosa Roxb. Smith based Rhododendron arboreum Sm. and Bignonia undulata Sm. on Hardwicke plants. At least a dozen Roxburgh names, including Crataegus integrifolia Roxb., Gardenia tetrasperma Roxb. and Morus serrata Roxb., are based, at least partly, on Hardwicke’s collections. In total, 23 names are lectotypi ﬁ ed here and one neotype is designated.


Introduction
Thomas Hardwicke (1756Hardwicke ( -1835) ) was an Englishman (from the fens of Cambridgeshire) who rose through the ranks in the military service of the East India Company, eventually being promoted to Major-General (Dawson 1946).Hardwicke was very interested in natural history, apparently in nearly all its branches.He collected widely in India and elsewhere and employed (unnamed) Indian artists to prepare illustrations of animals and plants.When he returned to England on his retirement, Hardwicke possessed a large collection, particularly of illustrations, which was enlarged with drawings obtained from other naturalists such as John Reeves, who had worked in China.At his death, the collection was bequeathed and soon transferred to the British Museum (details given in Anonymous 1839), though a strict execution of Hardwicke's will would probably have resulted in the sale of the material to fulfil the financial bequests (Dawson 1946).The subsequent separation of various departments of the British Museum means that The Hardwicke Bequest is now divided across at least two institutions -the animal specimens and the bulk of the zoological drawings are in the Natural History Museum collections, the remaining drawings and manuscripts are in the British Library.Hardwicke's is a name much better known in zoological than botanical circles.Hardwicke published more extensively on animals than plants, and his superb drawings were the basis of Illustrations of Indian Zoology (Gray 1830(Gray , 1833(Gray -1834)).However, I do not think that this should be taken to imply a lesser interest in botany than zoology on the part of Hardwicke.He maintained extensive correspondence with important figures in Indian botanical circles such as William Roxburgh and Nathaniel Wallich, and with Sir James Edward Smith and Aylmer Lambert in England.
Hardwicke's only foray into botanical publication is in what amounts to an appendix to a report of his travels through north-western India in 1796, describing the plants encountered.This was published in the Asiatick Researches (Hardwicke 1799).Daniel (1991) claimed that the paper by J.P. Rottler (1803) was the earliest account of a botanical collection and excursion in India, but Hardwicke's trip and publication are certainly earlier.Hardwicke's journey was to Sirinagur (Srinagar in contemporary spelling).This is Srinagar in what is now the Indian state of Uttarakhand, not the better-known place with the same name in Kashmir.Departing from Futtehghur (Fatehgarh, a long-established military base near Farrukhabad in what is now Uttar Pradesh), Hardwicke travelled to Srinagar via Hardwar (Haridwar) and Coadwara (Kotdwara), and returned to Fatehgarh.The visit to Haridwar coincided with the Kumbh Mela, an enormous gathering of pilgrims celebrating the most auspicious period for immersion in the holy river Ganges.Hardwicke reports some 2.5 million attendees, surely one of the largest aggregations of human beings up to that date.On the first part of the journey he was accompanied by Company surgeon, orientalist and naturalist Dr William Hunter.
Fortunately, the expedition was accompanied by at least one of Hardwicke's Indian artists and many drawings relating to the expedition are preserved in the collections.There is also correspondence showing that Roxburgh was consulted extensively about the plants found on the journey to Srinagar.Firstly using William Hunter as an intermediary, and then in letters exchanged directly, Roxburgh provided names for some of the species sent to him by Hardwicke as descriptions, specimens and drawings.Hardwicke was not particularly fastidious in acknowledging the help he received from Roxburgh in the Asiatick Researches paper, but the habit of sending plant descriptions to Roxburgh had been begun and would continue for many years, notably when Hardwicke was in Mauritius in 1811-1812.Roxburgh commemorated Hardwicke in the legume genus Hardwickia Roxb.
Hardwicke wanted to draw attention to his botanical research on the Srinagar expedition.He drew up a set of descriptions with accompanying illustrations for 22 species.This was submitted by Dr William Hunter to the Government of India in 1798 for forwarding to the Court of Directors of the East India Company (EIC) in London for the attention of the twin luminaries, Sir Joseph Banks and Sir James Edward Smith. Britten (1906) reported on this material in the Natural History Museum, which presumably came from Banks's collection, not as part of the Hardwicke Bequest, but originally from the EIC.Britten indicated that there were no herbarium specimens from the Srinagar expedition in the herbarium of the Natural History Museum (BM).This appears to have been an error.There are a few specimens, but most of the species seem not to be represented as herbarium material.Britten effectively lectotypified a few of Hardwicke's names to drawings in the set of 22 now held in the Botany Library of the Natural History Museum.Britten made no mention of other relevant drawings in the Hardwicke material then kept in the manuscripts collection at the British Museum.These include a 16-volume set of Plants of India, now in the Western Manuscripts collection of the British Library, which contains duplicates of many of the drawings studied by Britten and other plants from the expedition, as well as drawings made both before and after.The drawings within each volume are numbered in a consecutive sequence with pencilled Arabic numerals in the top right corner.These are used to refer to individual drawings below.When Hardwicke returned to England on leave in 1804, he lent some of these plant illustrations to J.E. Smith.Smith used several of them as the basis for illustrations of species in his Exotic Botany (Smith 1804(Smith -1805)), with some taxa entirely based on Hardwicke drawings.The drawings were not returned until 1812 when Hardwicke was again in England.In 1827, the plant drawings (in ten volumes with 60 loose items) were lent to William Hooker.There are also duplicates or copies of some of Hardwicke's illustrations among the natural history drawings in the Wellesley Collection (Archer 1962), now held in the Asia, Pacific and Africa collection of the British Library.Britten (1906) was not the first to present an analysis of plant list in Hardwicke's narrative.Madden (1849) had included an accurate review of the identities of Hardwicke's plants, based, apparently, on his own knowledge of the flora of the region rather than study of the specimens or illustrations.
The nomenclatural relevance of Hardwicke's expedition comes in several interconnected strands.Firstly, there are the taxa validly published by Hardwicke in Asiatick Researches (Hardwicke 1799).Secondly, there are a few taxa validated by Smith in Exotic Botany.Thirdly, Roxburgh based a number of species in his Flora Indica partly or wholly on Hardwicke's specimens or descriptions.
Below I review the names relating to Hardwicke's journey to Srinagar published in Asiatick Researches (in the order in which they appear in the original publication), followed by those in the works of Smith and Roxburgh.

Justicia thyrsiformis
Hardwicke described this plant, ascribing the name to Roxburgh.Though Roxburgh (in litt.)actually suggested 'thyrsiformis' as the epithet, he used 'thyrsiflora' in Flora Indica, and appears to have corrected Hardwicke in a pencil annotation on the relevant drawings in the Plants of India (Vol.V nos.71 and 72).I can confirm the observation by Mabberley (1980) that there are no Hardwicke specimens of this species in the BM or K herbaria.I therefore designate the Hardwicke drawing in the Natural History Museum Botany Library as lectotype.I prefer to choose this over the British Library copies as the Natural History Museum set are individually mounted and accompanied by Hardwicke's manuscript descriptions.

Salvia integrifolia
This name is cited in a paper on Roxburgh's Hortus Bengalensis (Turner 2013).Britten (1906) effectively lectotypified the Hardwicke name to the drawing in the Natural History Museum collection.There is a similar drawing in the British Library (Vol.III no.62).

Ixora tomentosa
Hardwicke's entry for this species is very brief: "Ixora tomentosa of Doctor Roxburgh.-Found in the neighbourhood of Ghinouly near the Koanullah, acquires the size of a pretty large tree, though of deformed growth, now in flower.Flowers white, numerous." It is questionable whether this description is sufficiently detailed to consider the name validly published here and as little would be gained from doing so, I will not take up the name from this source.There are drawings in the British Library (Vol.VII nos.32-34) that show the plant is Pavetta tomentosa as validated by Sir J.E.Smith in Rees's Cyclopaedia (Rees 1814).Madden (1849) opined that the reference to deformed growth was the result of goat browsing.Roxburgh described Ixora tomentosa in the first edition of Flora Indica (Roxburgh 1820)

Androsace rotundifolia
Though Hardwicke did not acknowledge him, it was Roxburgh (in litt.) who suggested 'rotundifolia' as the specific epithet for this species.There is a specimen in BM that has the same number as the drawing referred to by Britten (1906).There is also a drawing in the British Library set (Vol.IV no. 5) which is presumably the one that Smith had copied for the plate in Exotic Botany (Smith 1804(Smith -1805: t. 113): t. 113).

Lonicera quinquelocularis
This is another case where Hardwicke did not state Roxburgh as the source of the binomial.The name was effectively lectotypified to the drawing in the Natural History Museum collection by Britten (1906).There is a similar illustration in the British Library (Vol.VII no.67).There is also a specimen in the herbarium of the Natural History Museum (BM000945008).

Echites antidysentericus
Hardwicke's entry for this species is as follows: "Echites Antidysentricum Rox.-A small tree in the forests about Hurdwar.Leaves opposite, half or subpetioled, ovate, oblong, pointed, entire, waved, smooth, shining, one nerved, with many pairs of lateral, parallel, ribs.The Linnean characters of the fructification, do not strictly agree with this plant.The nectary is here wanting.Anthers almost at the bottom of the tube, filaments, scarcely any.The follicles agree with those of Nerium Antidysentricum.The seeds are in great repute among the natives of Hindustan as a vermifuge." Hardwicke provided a reasonable description that clearly applies to the plant now known as Holarrhena pubescens Wall.ex G.Don.However, he also cited Nerium antidysentericum L. as a synonym.Linnaeus confounded two taxa in describing this species (Panigrahi 1987) -the Sri Lankan endemic, now referred to as Wrightia antidysenterica (L.) R.Br., and Holarrhena pubescens, which is widespread across East Africa and Asia (De Kruif 1981).As Hardwicke did not explicitly exclude Linnaeus's type or name from his Echites antidysentericus, it has to be considered a new combination based on Nerium antidysentericum.This represents an earlier publication of the combination than that by Fleming (1810).

Linum trigynum
Hardwicke's description of this species is brief: "It is perennial, shrubby, grows to a spreading bush about four feet high, stem and branches erect, slender, piped.It makes a handsome appearance with its numerous yellow flowers ..." But I believe that it is adequate to validate Roxburgh's name Linum trigynum.It was accepted as such by botanists of this period.However, it is an illegitimate later homonym of the name of a European flax species described by Linnaeus.Dumortier (1822) described the same plant under the name Reinwardtia indica, which is the correct name for the species.Reichenbach (1837) effectively provided Macrolinum trigynum as a new name for L. trigynum Roxb.ex Hardw.Abdulla (1972) treated Linum trigynum and Reinwardtia indica as homotypic and referred to Roxburgh's icon no.1048 at Kew as the type.This is effectively a neotypification as neither Hardwicke nor Dumortier are likely to have seen Roxburgh's drawing before publication of their respective names.I have not found any herbarium material of Reinwardtia indica collected by Hardwicke.There are two drawings in the British Library collection (Vol.XVI nos. 1 and 2).Drawing no. 1 has little information on it.Drawing no. 2 is good with detailed floral dissections.It is annotated 'Futtehghur Dec 1796' and 'a native of Sireenagur'.Futtehghur (Fatehgarh) was the departure point for the journey to Srinagar and its final destination.Hardwicke appears to have completed his writing up of the botanical material at Futtehghur (Britten 1906), so drawing no. 2 can be considered original material and is here selected as lectotype for Linum trigynum Roxb.ex Hardw.to supersede the neotypification of Abdulla.The drawing appears to be the basis of the plate (t.17) in Smith's Exotic Botany.Dumortier did not cite any specimens of R. indica, and there are no specimens in BR (S.De Smedt, pers.comm.).I therefore select Smith's plate as the lectotype for Reinwardtia indica as it was the only direct citation of an illustration by Dumortier, which again replaces Abdulla's typification.

Lagerstroemia montana
Hardwicke's descriptive statement for this name is slight: "Lagerstroemia Montana, Roxburgh.-This tree grows to sixty or seventy feet high.Stem straight, thick, and clear of branches to a great height (forty feet).Flowers with much beauty in the month of May.Grows both above and below the ghats.Trees not numerous." The name appears never to have been taken up elsewhere.There are three similar drawings in the British Library collection (Vol.X nos.30-32) that represent this species.The first is annotated 'Coadwara 6 May 1796'; the second has a note saying 'No.66 Cor Pl. vol 1'.This citation of Roxburgh's Plants of the Coast of Coromandel (Roxburgh 1795(Roxburgh -1820) ) refers to Lagerstroemia parviflora Roxb.The drawings match L. parviflora, which was published before L. montana.Therefore, it seems best to consider Lagerstroemia montana as an invalidly published name.Surprisingly, Roxburgh did not originally recognise his own species, writing in August 1797 that Hardwicke's plant was "a charming new Lagerstroemia .... you must give it a specific name".

Volkameria bicolor
Hardwicke's description of this species is reasonably detailed.It was Roxburgh who had suggested 'bicolor' as the epithet.There is a specimen in BM that was designated lectotype by Mabberley.There are also drawings (no.15 in the Natural History Museum set, and Vol.VI nos.87 and 88 in the British Library).

Terminalia alata-glabra
Hardwicke's description is brief."Terminalia Alata-glabra.-Grows to a very lofty tree in the vallies of these mountains.Stem streight, and clear from branches to a great height.The characters given to the genus Chuncoa, in Gmelin's edition of the Systema Naturae, agree well with this plant."Gmelin's description of Chuncoa cannot be cited to validate a species name as it refers to a genus (ICN Art. 38.11(c), McNeill et al. 2012).The remaining descriptive statement does not seem adequate to validate the name.

Ficus laminosa
Hardwicke's description is reasonably detailed: "Ficus-laminosa.-An humble species, growing among detached rocks in a small water course, and other moist places along the valley of the Koa-nullah.The stem is procumbent, shrubby, diffuse.Leaves opposite, lanceolate, entire; fruit laminous.The natives collect the leaves to feed their cattle with, and call it Chancherree."I reproduce the extract as published, including the internal hyphenation of the binomial.Various species names are similarly hyphenated in the original publication.I consider these typographic errors to be corrected, but others might cast doubt on the correct use of a binomial.However, the name did appear unhyphenated in the extract version of Hardwicke's paper in the Asiatic Annual Register (Hardwicke 1801).Correspondence indicates that it was Roxburgh who suggested the name to Hardwicke. Britten (1906) pointed out that Ficus laminosa is the correct name for the fig species variously referred to as Ficus saemocarpa Miq. or F. squamosa Roxb.Unfortunately, his publication seems to have been overlooked by all subsequent fig specialists, a lacuna reinforced by the absence of any Hardwicke herbarium material of this species.The drawing no.65 referred to by Britten is here designated lectotype of the species.There is a similar drawing in the Plants of India set (Vol.III no.9).

Hardwicke plants named by Sir James Edward Smith
Smith had access to Hardwicke's Indian plant drawings and used these in describing several species in his Exotic Botany.

Rhododendron arboreum
Probably the most important of these Smith names is Rhododendron arboreum.Smith acknowledged that the species was based entirely on Hardwicke's description and drawing.Hardwicke had included it as 'Doubtful' on pp.359-360 in his paper but did not provide a name.Britten (1906: 240) wrote, in reference to drawing no.40 in the Natural History Museum collection, 'the drawing is practically the type of Exotic Botany, tab.6'.I take this to be an effective lectotypification of Rhododendron arboreum Sm. to drawing 40.The use of 'practically' has a degree of ambiguity but in the literal sense -for practical purposes -it seems acceptable and it is clear that the section refers to Rhododendron arboreum.In the absence of any Hardwicke specimens, the choice of type seems limited to the illustrations which comprise drawing 40, a drawing in the British Library set (Vol.VII no.23) and Smith's published illustration (t. 6).Britten's selection does not therefore present any problems, and, surprisingly, I have not found any other attempts to designate a type for this species.
Hardwicke's description was used to validate another name.Raper (1810) produced a long report on another expedition to the same area of India as Hardwicke's.This was communicated to the Asiatic Society by, the then President, H.T. Colebrooke.The published account in Asiatick Researches contains a number of footnotes -the first of which states that the note is by the President.Raper's account mentions a number of plant species, mostly using vernacular names.For boorans, the native name reported by Hardwicke for Rhododendron arboreum, there is a footnote that gives the name Rhododendron puniceum Roxb.and a direct reference to Hardwicke's description.This link provided by Colebrooke between Roxburgh's name and Hardwicke's description validates Rhododendron puniceum more than 20 years prior to its publication in Flora Indica.I lectotypify R. puniceum to the Plants of India copy of the drawing.In fact, Roxburgh did see the Hardwicke drawing of boorans.William Hunter, in a letter of 24 September 1797, included a request from Roxburgh for another copy of the drawing as his had been 'carried away' by Sir J. Murray (possibly Sir John Murray 1745-1822, Auditor General of Bengal).

Bignonia undulata
In describing Bignonia undulata, Smith wrote that the species was discovered by Hardwicke who conveyed living plants to Calcutta, but he did not explicitly state that the description was taken from Hardwicke.The species is not included in Hardwicke's Asiatick Researches paper, but the plant was undoubtedly found by Hardwicke.There is drawing no.33 in the Natural History Museum set and four drawings (Vol.V nos.57-61) in the British Library.Of these, Vol.V no.57 comes closest to Smith's tab.19, though it appears to be laterally reversed.I here lectotypify Bignonia undulata, now known as Tecomella undulata (Sm.)Seem., to Smith's plate.
Tecomella undulata (Sm.)Seem.It should be noted that an earlier publication of Tecomella undulata listed in the International Plant Names Index (IPNI) (Seemann 1862: 30) is not valid on two counts: the generic name was invalid in the absence of a description and the combination was not validly made.

Dillenia aurea
Another species described by Smith entirely based on Hardwicke's drawings is Dillenia aurea.This was not found by Hardwicke on the expedition to Srinagar, but came from much further east, probably in what is now Bangladesh.There are drawings in the British Library collection (Vol.XVI, nos.70 and  Sm. Exotic Botany 2: 65, tt. 92-93 (1806).-Lectotype (designated here): Smith, Exotic Botany 2: t. 92.1806.

Hastingia coccinea
Hastingia coccinea was described by Smith based on a specimen sent to Sir Joseph Banks and a drawing from Hardwicke.The name is a synonym of Holmskioldia sanguinea Retz.Smith's plate (t.80) is based on a drawing in the British Library collection (Vol.VI no.99) which is annotated in pencil 'Tab.80' at the top and 'to be tab.80' in the lower right corner.The same hand has noted 'drawing unfinished in many aspects'.
The typification of Holmskioldia sanguinea Retz.has a rather convoluted history.Fischer (1932: 160) noted that there was a relevant specimen in the Lund Herbarium, but his comment that it was 'presumably the type' seems too indefinite to be considered effective.Moldenke (1981) referring to the same specimen as 'probably the type and should be so considered', made an effective lectotypification.There is a second Retzius specimen of this taxon in the Lund Herbarium (P.Frödén, pers.comm.) that was misplaced under another genus until 1993.It is clear that both Fischer and Moldenke were referring to the specimen long recognised as Holmskioldia.Platunium rubrum Juss., Annales du Muséum national d'histoire naturelle 7: 76 (1806).-Lectotype (designated here): India orientalis, Herb.Jussieu Catal.no.5029 (P-JU (IDC 6206, 347/14!)).

Hardwicke plants published by William Roxburgh
As noted above, Roxburgh was directly involved in naming many of the plants collected and drawn on the journey to Srinagar.However, Hardwicke's published list included a number of species only identified to genus, or in a few cases unidentified.Through further study, new collections or cultivation of material forwarded by Hardwicke, names were established for some of these.They were eventually published in Flora Indica, some more than 30 years later, and included reference to Hardwicke's work.I go through these in the order in which the cited descriptions had appeared in the Asiatick Researches paper.

Jasminum chrysanthemum
In describing this species, Roxburgh (1820) referred (among other material) to what Hardwicke called 'Jasminum 3'.The correct name for the plant is Jasminum humile L. Roxburgh's species seems not to have been typified.The Roxburgh drawing at Kew, now held by the Illustrations Section of the Library, Art & Archive Department, is here selected as lectotype.

Hypericum cernuum
Roxburgh (1832b: 400) referred to Hardwicke's description of a Hypericum (of which there was only one) and that seeds of this were sent by Hardwicke to Calcutta for cultivation.There is a Hardwicke specimen of the plant in BM (no. 4 sides of High mountains Flos in April Figurd no. 4) and the matching drawing is in the British Library (Vol.XIV no.60).Roxburgh's name for the plant had first been validated by David Don in the Prodromus Florae Nepalensis without reference to Hardwicke.Don referred to a Kamroop (a plant collector employed by Wallich) specimen from Srinagar.I could not find this in the BM collection where it would be expected.The earliest name for the species is Hypericum oblongifolium of Choisy, who apparently based his species on a Roxburgh specimen labelled Hypericum cernuum forwarded to de Candolle by Aylmer Lambert.The de Candolle Herbarium (G-DC) sheet including this material also contains a later specimen received from Wallich.The shoot with Roxburgh's ticket in his hand and another with the Lambert details are indicated as separate specimens with different barcode numbers, as does the third shoot from Wallich.I take the Roxburgh and Lambert elements to comprise a single specimen and consider them in combination to make up the holotype.Hypericum cernuum Roxb.ex D.Don, Prodromus Florae Nepalensis: 218 (1825).Type: India, Uttarakhand, Srinagar, Kamroop (n.v.).

Morus serrata
In describing this species, Roxburgh (1832b) referred to Hardwicke's Morus 1.I have not found any Roxburgh material that could be used to typify this Himalayan mulberry.There are some Hardwicke drawings of Morus but none can be directly linked to Morus 1 of the Asiatick Researches paper.I therefore propose a neotype for the name -a collection made by R. Blinkworth from Kumaon in the East India Company Herbarium.

Zanthoxylum alatum
The Flora Indica description of this plant (Roxburgh 1832b) makes direct reference to Hardwicke's unnamed Zanthoxylum (as 'Xanthoxylum'), of which there is a drawing in the Natural History Museum set (no. 39) and a similar pair in the British Library (Vol.XIV nos.7 and 8).Roxburgh's name, however, was cited by Wallich in his Numerical List, rendering it a superfluous, and illegitimate, renaming of Z. acanthopodium DC.Thus Roxburgh's name becomes an illegitimate later homonym.Hartley (1966: 211) proposed Roxburgh icon 1916 as the lectotype of Z. alatum Roxb.but he did not state which set of drawings (Kew or Calcutta) he was referring to.I therefore clarify the issue by proposing the Kew copy below.

Ficus luducca
Roxburgh (1832b) included two of the figs that Hardwicke found on his journey to Srinagar (Ficus luducca and F. chincha).Hardwicke included four Ficus species in his Asiatick Researches paper -Ficus laminosa and unnamed species numbered 2-4.There is no clear direct link to relate Hardwicke's species to Roxburgh's names, but the descriptions indicate, as supported by Madden (1849), that Hardwicke's 'Ficus 2' refers to Ficus luducca, and 'Ficus 3' to F. chincha.There is a Roxburgh specimen in the BR herbarium that must have come from Hardwicke judging by the collection label.Corner (1960b) effectively lectotypified the name to this specimen.

Ficus chincha
At BR there is a specimen of this species with a ticket bearing Roxburgh's name in Roxburgh's hand.

Fig. 1 .
Fig. 1.Lectotype of Justicia thyrsiformis Roxb.ex Hardw., Hardwicke Drawing no.16 from the collection of the Botany Library, Natural History Museum.© The Natural History Museum, London.

Fig. 2 .
Fig. 2. Lectotype of Salvia integrifolia Roxb.ex Hardw., Hardwicke Drawing no.38 from the collection of the Botany Library, Natural History Museum.© The Natural History Museum, London.

Fig. 3 .
Fig. 3. Lectotype of Lonicera quiquelocularis Hardw., Hardwicke Drawing no.67 from the collection of the Botany Library, Natural History Museum.© The Natural History Museum, London.

Fig. 5 .
Fig. 5. Lectotype of Ficus laminosa Hardw., Hardwicke Drawing no.65 from the collection of the Botany Library, Natural History Museum.© The Natural History Museum, London.

Fig. 6 .
Fig. 6.Lectotype of Rhododendron arboreum Sm., Hardwicke Drawing no.40 from the collection of the Botany Library, Natural History Museum.© The Natural History Museum, London.

Fig. 7 .
Fig. 7. Lectotype of Gardenia tetrasperma Roxb., Hardwicke Drawing no.55 from the collection of the Botany Library, Natural History Museum.© The Natural History Museum, London.