SYNOPSIS OF THE GENUS LONICERA. 29 
with connate ovaries as Jstka and called the other two 
genera Xylosteum and Caprifolium, while Borkhausen 
and Roehling, who took up his Jstka, called them Lonicera 
and Caprifolium. A different division into three genera 
was made by Sweet (1830), who separated the climbing 
species with flowers in pairs from Lonicera and Caprifo- 
lium as Nintooa. Webb (1838) adopted Nintooa, but 
substituted Xylosteum for Lonicera and Lonicera for 
Caprifolium. The four genera of Tournefort were ac- 
cepted by Medicus (1789), but for Xylosteum he substi- 
tuted the name Jsika. Rafinesque at first (1820) also 
recognized all the Tournefortian genera, but changed 
Periclymenum to Periclyma and Chamaecerasus to 
Chamerasia; and on Lonicera sempervirens as the type, he 
founded a new genus, Phenianthus, probably not realiz- 
ing that Tournefort’s Periclymenum is based on the same 
‘species. In his New Sylva (1836) he had changed his 
view, using Lonicera for the climbing, and Xylosteum for 
the upright honeysuckles, and he founds on L. tnvolucrata 
the genus Distegia, a genus which has not been recognized 
by any botanist except recently by Greene. The only 
other botanist who took up the Tournefortian genera was 
Spach (1839), who distinguished Xylosteum, Lonicera 
( Chamaecerasus Tourn. ), Caprifolium and Periclymenum, 
referring Nintooa to Caprifolium as a section. 
Most botanists, however, especially after the first quar- 
ter of the last century, accepted the genus Lonicera in the 
Linnean sense with some emendations. The emended 
genus is usually ascribed to Desfontaines, Flora Atlantica 
(1798). There seems, however, no reason for this, since 
he says nothing to indicate that he deviates from the Lin- 
nean conception of the genus except that the two species 
he describes happen to belong to Lonicera proper; but 
for this same reason the emended genus could be cred- 
ited as well to Hudson, Seopoli or Loureiro. The first 
place where the genus appears in the now accepted concep- 
