438 ON SOME CRITICAL SPECIES OF ECHIUM. 
a ticket in his own hand: * Æ. caule ramoso aspero, foliis calloso-verrucosis, 
staminibus corollis longioribus," which is the diagnosis of angustifolium and 
“ E, erelicum angustifolium rubrum C. B. P." to which Solander has added 
in pencil “Æ, orientale” and “ angustifolium Mill. Dict. no. 6.” Unfortu- 
nately, the plant is not ereticum angustifolium rubrum and does not agree 
with Miller's description. It is referable to Æ. pustulatum, which was often 
confused in early times with Æ. hispidum, e. g., by Smith himself. (See my 
note on the chia of Herb. Sibthorp, p. 386.) We must not be governed by the 
specimen and ignore the excellent description, especially when the specimen 
is a garden plant. It is common to find specimens in the old herbaria 
which do not agree with the species described. The case is different from 
that of X. maritimum, Willd., which is represented in that author's herbarium 
by a single piece of X. plantagineum, for Willdenow has told us that he never 
saw but one example of his maritimum. See de Coincy in Morot’s Journ. 
Bot. xiv. p. 162, who consequently alters the name maritimum to confusum, 
a proceeding in which Rouy has refused to follow him. I may quote the 
apposite remarks of Bonnet in his account of Lamarck’s herbarium, Journ. 
Bot. xvi. p. 137 :—** On connait les incohérences de l'herbier de Linné et 
les confusions de Willdenow .... un échantillon d'herbier ne doit servir à 
infirmer une description publiée que s'il n'existe aucun doute sur son authen- 
ticité ; la description originale, méme incomplète ou défectueuse reste entière, 
tandis que l'échantillon d'herbier est trop souvent soumis à des causes qui en 
altérent l'intégrité et l'authenticité." Now, though we know that Miller 
wrote ihat ticket, we do not know who at some later time gummed it to the 
sheet where we now find it. 
On the whole, I think we should not be deterred by these three obstacles 
from reviving the neglected name, which seems to have been noticed by no 
one but Poiret in Dict. Encl. viii. p. 671, where he quotes it as var. b of 
E. creticum, L., and equivalent to /. ereticum angustifolium rubrum, Tourn., 
which is known to be Æ. hispidum. Poiret is, of course, wrong in assigning 
as synonyms of angustifolium, Mill., Lamarek’s angustifolium and Darrelier, 
ic. 1011, which represents Lamarck’s plant. 
