390 MR. C, €, LACAITA : A REVISION OF 
Lehmann created the name elegans and Roem. & Sch. that of Sibthorpii 
(before he had seen Lehmann’s publication of the preceding year) for Sibthorp’s 
species, owing to the existence of Thunberg’s hispidum of 1794 (Prodr. Pl. 
Cap. p. 33), the much earlier hispidum, Burm. fil. Fl. Cap. Prodr. p. 5 
(1768), being reduced at the same time by Lehmann to a synonym of 
E. capitatum, L. Both these are Cape Lobostemons, but in any case the 
priority belongs to Miller's name, the identity of which with Sibthorp’s 
E. hispidum I have maintained in my notes on the Echia of Miller's 
* Gardener's Dictionary.’ 
This species, which is the E. creticum II. of. Clusius and the E. ercticum 
angustifolium rubrum of C. Bauhin and of Tournefort, is plentiful in Crete 
and in many parts of Greece. By Linnmus it has been mixed up with a 
totally different species under the confused name of E. ereticum. Smith 
was misled into supposing that Sibthorp had obtained the plant “in agro 
Neapolitano” by his false determination of the specimen in Herb. Banks, 
now at the British Museum, which, as stated above, is not hispidum but 
pustulatum. It is possible that Sibthorp himself at some period may have 
confused this South Italian pustulatum with the Greek species figured as 
E. hispidum. A similar confusion had been made by Miller (see my 
note on his E. angustifolium). 
(IV.) ECHIUM PARVIFLORUM, Moench, labelled by Smith * Echium ereticum.? 
(V.) ECHIUM PARVIFLORUM, Moench, labelled by Smith in ink * Echium 
ereticum” and in pencil * Sibth. at vix H [erb].L [inn]. perhaps from Naples." 
Both IV. and V. are parviflorum=calycinum, Viv., no. V. being the usual 
seaside plant, and no. IV. the stronger form that develops in richer soil — var. 
erectum, DC, Smith's pencil note shows that the error of taking this plant 
for E. creticum, L., was not due to him but to Sibthorp. I cannot account 
for the false colour attributed to the corollas in Prodr. p. 126, where Smith 
calls them “rubro-violacei,” and so they are represented in tab. 183, 
whereas in most cases they are pale blue. The false identification in 
De Candolle's * Prodromus; x. p- 22, of creticum, Fl. Gr., with creticum, L., 
is explained by the observation in a footnote “ plantam Linnæi et ic. Fl. Gr. 
non vidit pater nec ego." 
(VL) ECHIUM PLANTAGINEUM, L., labelled by Smith “ Echium plantagineum 
H. L.? It is quite typical; the corollas have dried partly blue, partly 
purple. 
(VIL) ECHIUM PLANTAGINEUM, L., from Zante, not named by Smith, but 
“no. 45 BovóóyAeecov." In this the corollas have dried blue. 
(VIII.) ECHIUM PLANTAGINEUM, L., also from Zante, not named by Smith, 
but labelled * 234 Botydwooor.” In this case the corollas have dried pale 
