819 
PHONIA cretica. 
Candian Peony. 
——— 
POLYANDRIA ZARIGYNIA. 
Nat. ord. RANUNCULACER. Dec. prodr. 1. 2. syst. 1. 127. 
PAONIA. Supra vol. 1. fol. 42. 
P. cretica, foliis sublucidis bullulatis coriaceis subtus glaucis tomentosis, fo- 
liolis obtusis planis intermedio bilobo v. integro, ovariis lanuginosis pa- 
tentibus. Sabine MSS. 
P. arietina, oxoniensis. Anderson in Linn. trans. 12. 275. 
P. arietina, carnea. Dec. prodr. 1. 66. 
P. cretica. Sabine MSS. Clus. hist. 1. p. 281. Dec. syst. 1. 394. no. 14. 
Caulis 15-2 pedales, simplices, erecti, foliosi, obtusè angulati, ad basin 
glaberrimi, sursum puberuli. Folia erecta, biternata, plana, luteo-viridia, 
opaca, suprà glabra rugosa, subtus glauca pubescentia, petiolo communi te- 
rete, basi puberulo, suprd subcanaliculato, 4-unciali, partialibus pubescenti- 
bus, teretibus: lateralibus brevioribus ; foliola lateralia obliqua, basi decur- 
rentia, segmenti medii ovalia, lateralium ovato-lanceolata ; intermedia ovali- 
lanceolata, integra aut biloba. Flores erecti, ultra folia exsurgentes, pal- 
lidè carnei, demum albidi. Pedunculus teres, striatus, 3-uncialis, apice 
pubescens, paulo sub flore bracteam gerens lanceolatam, patentem, subcom- 
plicatam. Calyx 5-phyllus, subpilosus, sepalo exteriore parvo, ovato, apice 
foliaceo, spatulato, reliquis subrotundo-ovatis, cochleatis, venosis, paulo co- 
loratis, margine membranaceo colorato, interioribus duplo majoribus. Petala 
tenuia, corrugata. Ovaria bina, patentia, lanuginosa, stigmate compresso, 
gyratim recurvo, rubescente. 
This is principally characterized by its dwarf habit, 
early flesh-coloured flowers changing to nearly white, and 
shining, coriaceous, flat, blistered leaves, which are very 
glaucous beneath. 
We have lately had many opportunities of examining 
the genus Peonia, and of considering the various forms of 
it in a living state; and we cannot bring ourselves to any 
other conclusion than this: that, of the supposed species 
which have been adopted in recent publications, nearly the 
whole of which we have repeatedly compared, the following 
only can be considered distinct. The practised eye may, in- 
deed, distinguish them, as it can the varieties of other cul- 
tivated plants; but their differences are not tangible, nor 
limits to those differences assignable. 
