1916] Robinson,— The Doctors John Brickell 229 



It is easy to infer that John Brickell of Georgia, the friend of Muhlen- 

 berg and Elliott, may have been the son or grandson of the earlier 

 John Brickell of North Carolina, but no evidence on this matter has 

 come to hand. 



It may be mentioned that even before Elliott dedicated his genus 

 Brickellia to his friend Brickell, Rafinesque had used the name Brick- 

 ellia in one of those hurried, careless, and in no way justified changes 

 of name so frequent in his works. Thus in the Medical Repository, 

 hex. 2, ii. 352-3 (1808) Rafinesque characteristically writes "Having 

 found in the Elora Boreali-Americana of Michaux, many new genusses, 

 which had already been published under other names by different 

 authors, or to which unappropriate names were given against the 

 usual botanical rules, I shall rectify those errors; in the former case 

 annulling Michaux's names and adopting the former ones, such as 



While, in the latter I shall create new names more appropriated, 

 and I shall call * * * 



Brickellia, the sponeopsis of do. [Michaux]." 



By sponcopxis ' it has been generally inferred that Rafinesque meant 

 Ipomopsis, a name employed by Michaux for the plant now called 

 Gilia rubra (L.) Heller. Rafinesque clearly had no right to change 

 the name used by Michaux and his Brickellia has no validity under any 

 code, even in the unlikely contingency that this particular section of 

 Gilia should regain generic standing. Our interest in the matter at 

 present lies solely in the circumstance that it was an attempt to give 

 recognition to the same Dr. John Brickell for whom Elliott later 

 named the now well known genus Brickellia of the Compo.sitae. It is 

 true, Rafinesque made no explanation of his Brickellia, but that very 

 fact would indicate that it was given in honor of a man then promi- 

 nent, and it is to be noticed that it was published in the Medical 

 Repository, a journal to which Brickell was at that period a not infre- 

 quent contributor, a fact which probably led Rafinesque to assume 

 that explanation as to his identity would have been superfluous. 



Regarding the earlier Dr. John Brickell little is known. His 

 Natural History of North ( 'arolina, now a work of rarity, prized by 

 collectors of early Americana, was drawn largely, though without 

 acknowledgement, from an earlier History of Carolina, by John 



l This misprinted name has received still further distortion by Reichenbach, who in his 

 Conspectus Itegni Vegetabilis 212° (1828) cites it as Spogoptit, a spelling which is copied by 

 Pfeiffer in his usually very accurate Nomenclator, i. 467 (1873). 



