[ 126l 3 



Iris pumila, var. violacea. Violet-blue 

 dwarf Flag. 



♦ ♦ ♦♦ .♦.♦>♦ ♦.*♦.♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ■ 



Specific Characler, &c. See above, No. 1 209. 



Among the gardeners, the prefent plant has pretty generally 

 paflecl for the Linnean bijiora • and, if we are to take the 

 fpecies from the fpecimen depofited by Linnaeus in Clif- 

 ford's Herbarium, and made to refer to the fpecies in his 

 thrifts Oiffortianus correfponding with the biflora of his 

 Species Plantarum, the gardeners may be right ; for that is 

 certainly pumila. But if we found the fpecies on the plant 

 cued bv Linn/eus from Besler's Hortus Eyftettevfis as a 

 fynonym, and affume that he has erroneoufly judged the 

 above fpecimen to be the fame with the plant represented in 

 that work ; then bijiora certainly is a very diftincx fpecies 

 from pumila, and moil probably a dwarf fpecimen of the fub- 

 biflora of No. 1130 of the prefent work. From a fpecimen 

 out of the Kew Gardens preferved in the Bankfian Herbarium, 

 we have little doubt but that the biflora of Hortus Kewenfis 

 ts likewife the fame fpecies with our fubbiflora. We have 

 never feen the fpecimen in Linn^eus's Herbarium, and his 

 defcription gives no clue beyond the above fynonym. We 

 mould obferve, that the length of the leaves and ftem, in re- 

 lation to each, is in this genus of no avail in fpecific diftinc- 

 tion. The prefent is the handfomeft of all the varieties of 

 Pumila t as well as one of the rareft. We have ufually found 

 u preferved in a frame ; perhaps it is tenderer than the 

 others. G. 



CORRIG ENDA. 



No. 986. In enumerating as diftinft the Iris microptera 

 (feorpioides. Desfont. Flor. Atl. tab. 6.) and alata, we find that 

 ^ e have been mifled by the figure in the above-cited work of 

 M. Desfontaines, where the three <fmajler fegments of the 



corolla 



