396 MR. C. C. LACAITA: A REVISION OF 
N. Inscript. * ereticum 4,” L. and a tergo “ Echium creticum,” L. 
O. Inscript. “ Echium argenteum 145,” L. The number is doubtless that 
of the specimen in the list of those sent by Tulbagh to U psala about the 
year 1767, which was published as a Supplement to the * Proceedings 
of the Linnean Society for 1917-1918. In that list No. 145 is said 
to come from the Swartberg, but is there referred by Linnzeus to 
Zehiwum fruticosum. 
P. Inscript. “ Sp. 86,” L., indicating that it came from Sparrman, who 
collected in South Africa. 
Q. Inscript. “ capitatum,” L. 
R. Inscript. “ Echium fruticosum,” L. 
S. Inscript. “ fruticosum 98,” L., which again suggests Sparrman. 
T. Inscript. “ fruticosum,” L. 
U. Inscript. “ levigatum,” L., and “H. D. et Willdenow,” J. E. S. 
meaning Herb. Banks. — 
V. Inscript. “levigatum,” L. 
W. Inscript. ** Echium spicatum,” I. fil. 
Z. No inscription by Linnæus, but * Lithosp.apulum?” J. B.S. Smith's 
determination seems correct. 
Hpi 
w. 
(I.) ECHIUM CRETICUM of Linnæus is an inextricable compound of two 
distinct species :— 
1. E. creticum angustifolium rubrum, C. B. P. = E. angustifolium, Mill.* 
(1768), non Lam. =Æ. hispidum, Sibth. & Sm. (1806) =Æ. elegans, Lehm. 
(1818) = Æ. Sibthorpii, Roem. et Sch. (1819). 
2. E. creticum latifolium rubrum, C. B. P. — E. creticum, herb. Linn. 
=F, australe, Lam., non Coincy, a garden form certainly not derived from 
any native of Crete or the eastern Mediterranean, and. not specifically dis- 
tinguishable from Æ. grandiflorum, Desf. 
The herbarium specimen is identical with that of X. australe in hb. 
Lamarck, which I have examined. I have discussed Lamarck’s species in a 
preceding paper, which should be read with the present observations. It 
only differs from E. grandiflorum, Desf., in having corollas about one-third 
smaller. Its identity with the species of Desfontaines has already been 
claimed by Moris, who visited the Linnean herbarium and remarks in Fl. 
Sard. iii. p. 128, * Herbar! specimen e planta luxuriante.” De Coiney 
declined to grapple with the problem of the identity of E. eretieum, L. In 
May 1918, I received seeds of qrandifforum from Prof. Battandier of 
Algiers, which by the end of July had produced plants in my garden at 
* The justification of the revival of Miller's name, which has been overlooked. will be 
found in my paper on the eAia of Miller's * Gardener's Dictionary,’ infra, p. 497. 
