406 MR. C. C. LACAITA : A REVISION OF 
Echium asperrimum, MB. (non Lam.) Fl. Taur. Cauc. i. p. 135 (1808), where 
tlie diagnosis, quoted from the author's Tabl. Casp. (1798), runs * E. strigo- 
sum ramosum, spicis axillaribus conjugatis paniculatis.” — In vol. iii. p. 131 
(1819), he adds “corolla constanter apud nos leucoph:a, extus levitur 
pubescens, pilis longioribus perpaucis. Pro Æ. italico L. hoe demum habeo." 
This form of italicum has unfortunately been confused by many French 
botanists * with the specifically different E. pyrenaicum = E. pyramidale, 
* [n judging the French specimens that I refer to one form or another of E. italicum to 
belong to the same species as those from central Italy, in spite of some discrepancy in the 
alleged colour of the corollas, in reducing Æ. albereanum to a mere form of E. italicum, and 
in identifying the huge E. pyrenaicum of Apulia with the pyrenaicum — pyramidale of the 
vicinity of Toulouse, I have had to rely entirely on herbarium specimens of the French 
plants, as it has not been possible in war-time to study them in their native haunts. It is, 
of course, possible that as intimate an acquaintaince with living French examples, as I have 
with Italian, might modify some of my opinions. 
Lapeyrouse, Abr. Pyr. pp. 89-91 (1812), mentions three species of the italicum group 
for the Pyrenean region: E. italicum, E. pyramidale, and E. luteum. For italicum he quotes 
the old diagnosis, mentioning that the plant grows by roadsides etc., and observes “ tiges 
droites, élancées, rameaux courts égaux," which agrees well with the Linnean italicum ; but 
itis difficult to understand how he can say “ fleurs distantes, secondes solitaires” of any 
member of this group. — Pyramidale is spendidly described, quite in accord with Linnwus's 
account of pyrenaicum. -It is “rare aux Pyrénées .... à foison le long des chemins prés 
Toulouse.” Its rarity in the Pyrenees may account for its misinterpretation by some authors. 
The diagnosis of luteum, being that of the totally different favum, Desf., is useless, and it is 
only from the habitat and the observation that the species ean be identified, practically witli 
certainty, with Æ. albereanum, Naud. & Debeaux. 
Bonnet, whose views have been rather uncritically adopted by Rouy in Fl Fr. x., 
synonymises in Bull. Soc. Bot. Fr, xxv. p. 209 (1878), E. luteum as well as E. pyramidale 
with E. pyrenaicum, L. Mant., quoting the exsice. Bourgenu, Fréjus, no. 285, and Billot, 
no. 2395. But both these are italicum (see my list B. nos. 4 & 5), not pyrenaicum, Then 
for italicum he quotes Reichb. no. 995, Jamin Pl. Alger. no. 184, and Billot 2325 bis et ter. 
Now Reichb. no. 095 is true tadicum, but the other three are unquestionably pyrenaicum ! ! ! 
(see my lists A and C). No wonder then that Bonnet's descriptions are unintelligible and 
contradictory. P 
Then Timbal-Lagrave in Soc. Agr. Pyr. Or. xxiii. p. 175 (1878), whilst insisting that 
pyrenaicum and italicum are different species, misinterprets both, for his italicum is really 
pyrenaicum, and his pyrenaicum or pyramidale is not Lapeyrouse's plant but obviously 
. albereanum, a variety of true italicum. Thus and thus only can be explained his remark 
“ E. luteum n'est qu'une forme de la méme plante " (sc. pyrenaicum). 
This inversion or transposition of the names prevails in Cosson's determinations, and was 
subsequently adopted (blindly) by Kerner. It frequently occurs in French exsiccata. 
I have examined 41 French examples of so-called italicum and pyrenaicum in herb. Mus. 
Paris. Of 26 labelled acum only 11 belong to that species, the remaining 15 are 
pyrenaicum. But of the 15 labelled pyrenaicum only 8 are rightly so named, the other 
7 being forms of italicum. | 
Such confusion has produced its natural result in the amalgamation of the two species by 
Grenier & Godron, by Coste, and even by de Coincy, whose views on European species are 
not so infallible as on Algerian. The amalgamation is a mere counsel of despair, due, 
I think, to confining attention to differences of outline and ramification, and disregarding 
other characters. 
