several British Species of Hicracium. 231 



marks in the latter work, according to the plan I have followed 

 respecting the former species. 



The specific character runs thus. " Foliis intcgerrimis lanceo- 

 latis, scapo nudo multifioro." This is continued in the 2d edition 

 of Fl. Suec. and the first of Sp. PL, the words " stolonibus rep- 

 tantibus" being added in the 2d edition of the latter. This cha-. 

 racter accords with my II. Auricula, the word lanccolatis being 

 precisely applicable to that and not to my dubium. 



1. Hieracium foliis integerrimis, caulc repenie, scapo nudo mulli- 

 floro. Hort. Cliff. 388. n. 8. Here we find a description in which 



the leaves are said to be " lanceolate, erect, green, scarcely so 

 long as the finger — flowers several — calyx encompassed with 

 black hairs — radical scyons slender, furnished with very small 

 leaves." These characters precisely indicate my Auricula, and 

 not the dubium. 



2. H. pilnselloides florentinum vulgar i simile. Vaillant Mem. de 

 V Acad, des Sciences for 1721, species 2. This is an erroneous 

 quotation, belonging to the H. florentinum of Allioni, FL Fed. 

 v. 1. 213, Haller's No. 54, a plant unknown to Linnaeus, on 

 which I need not at present dwell, as it is much more remote 

 from my dubium than from the species at present under consi- 

 deration. 



3. II. pilosellcB folio erectnm minus. Tourn. Inst. 471. Besides 

 Bauhin's Finax, hereafter mentioned, Tournefort quotes only the 

 Filosella major prima of Tabernaemontanus, which I have already 

 mentioned as quoted by Haller for 17. dubium, in my opinion 

 justly. The only way therefore of judging concerning this syn- 

 onym of Tournefort is by the species along with which he has 

 arranged it, and these are H. prtemorsum, cymosum, aurantiacum, 

 &c, all closely allied to my Auricula, and not to dubium, which 



■ 



latter 



