SOME CRITICAL SPECIES OF ECHIUM. 433 
. Parkinson in 1640 and Merrett in 1666 first apply Lobel’s name, 
probably known to them through Gerard, to an English form of 
He 
vulgare. 
This idea is taken up by Richardson in Ray, who assigns Lobel's 
name to the pistillate form of vulgare from northern England, 
forgetting that the figure shows protruded stamens and a totally 
different habit, and refers Lycopsis, C. B. P., to the Jersey plant, 
i.e. to E. plantagineum. 
. Morison refers Lycopsis, C. B. P., to the Jersey plant and suggests 
that Lobel's may be the same. 
7. Boerhaave refers Lobel's, C. Bauhin's, and Dodoens's names all to 
E. plantagineum. 
Or 
for) 
So far, the identity of Lobel’s plant with some form of X. italicum does 
not seem to have been suspected. But Linneeus, Sp. Pl. p. 139 (1753), 
quotes Lycopsis, Bauh. Pin. as var. 8 of ŒE. italicum, showing that he 
recognised the true significance of Lobel’s figure, but misunderstood 
Bauhin's Lyeopsis. In ed. 2, p. 200 (1762), he adds some characters to 
distinguish var. 8 from typical italiewn, which do not alter the position. 
Only, as the English authors had quoted both Bauhin's and Lobel's names 
for British plants, he not unnaturally fell into the trap and supposing 
italicum in some form to be British, quotes for it * Anglia.” In the same 
year, 1762, Hudson reproduces the theory that Lobel's name is one of the 
English forms of vulgare, for which he now must coin a binomial name, and 
therefore creates /7. anglicum, though he oddly applies that name to the 
common form of FK. vulgare and the name vulgare to the rare pistillate form, 
just as Buddle had done before him. He also identified Lycopsis, C. B. P., 
with the Jersey plant, but finding it already quoted by Linneus for 
FE. italicum, thinks it necessary to call it italicum, using the Linnean 
diagnosis of this, which is inapplicable to the Jersey plantagineum. 
Linnzeus saw Hudson's work in time to insert a reference in the Appendix 
of Sp. Pl. ed. 2, p. 1678, where he treats Hudson's Æ. anglicum as synony- 
mous with his own Æ. italicum, and Hudson's Æ. italicum as equivalent 
to his Æ. italicum B, which afterwards became Æ. pyrenaicum in the 
*Mantissa. These disastrous identifications are based entirely, as so often 
in Linnzeus’s work, on the old synonyms quoted by Hudson. Thus he, Miller, 
and Hudson between them introduced a fresh error, that Æ. italicum in some 
form isa native both of England and of Jersey. This will be dealt with 
under Miller's third species. 
Miller's third species is ECHIUM ITALICUM corollis viz calycem e«cedentibus, 
margine villosis. Hort. Upsal. 35; Mehium majus et asperius flore albo, 
C. B. P., 255, This grows naturally in the south of France, in Italy, and in 
