12 J. H. PRICE, I. TITTLEY & W. D. RICHARDSON 



NWH Castle (City) Museum, Norwich 



OXF Department of Botany, University of Oxford 



PLTH The Marine Laboratory, Citadel Hill, Plymouth 



RCR Eastgate House Museum, Rochester 



*RME Ramsgate Public Library and Museum 



SLBI South London Botanical Institute 



SRD London Borough of Newham, Passmore Edwards Museum 



STAG University of St Andrews, Gatty Marine Laboratory 



SUN County Borough Public Library, Museum and Art Gallery, Sunderland 



TCD Trinity College, Dublin 



UCNW Department of Botany, University College of North Wales, Bangor 



WRN Municipal Museum and Art Gallery, Warrington 



Throughout the distribution sections, records established under the name Padina pavonia are 

 treated as though they employed the correct P. pavonica. The conventional symbol for tetra- 

 sporangia () is used throughout the text as required. 



Aberdeenshire 



Aberdeen : 



C. Bauhin, 1620: 155, Cap. 8, no. 7. 'Fucus maritimus Gallopavonis pennas referens. . . . 

 a D. Cargillo ex Scotia accepimus'. 

 Secondary records based on this are: 



1. By the same name: 



How, 1650:43. Ray, 1670: 120. C. Bauhin, 1671 : 155, Cap 8, no. 7. Ray, 1677: 115. 

 Ray, 1686 : 75. 



2. As Ulva pavonia: 



Lightfoot, 1777 : 966. Houttuyn, 1783 : 317-318. J. E. Smith in Smith & Sowerby, 1790- 

 1814: t. 1276 text (1/2/1804). 



3. As Zonaria pavonia'. Hooker, 1821 : 90. 



4. As Padina pavonia: Greville, 1830 : 62-63. Harvey in Hooker, 1833 : 281. Harvey, 1846-7: t. 

 91 (April, 1847). Landsborough, 1849 : 129; 1851 : 138; 1857 : 138. 



On p. 154 of his Prodromos, Bauhin adds, regarding his first two entries under Caput VIII, 

 '. . . quorum duos priores anno 1603. D. Cargillo, Abredonia ex Scotia una cum descriptione 

 transmisit . . .'. This is apparently the sole basis for the statements by later authors that P. pavonica 

 occurred near Aberdeen, or in Scotland. Whilst Bauhin's remarks imply that Cargill sent material 

 from Aberdeen, they cannot be taken as firm evidence that the specimens were collected in that 

 neighbourhood; they may have come from anywhere. The legend of the actual growth of P. 

 pavonica in Scotland seems to date from How (1650), who indicated no basis additional to Bauhin 

 for his statement: '. . . scopulis adnascitur Scotia'. This therefore seems to be an unwarranted ex- 

 trapolation from the general habitat and descriptive statement in Bauhin (1620). Ray (1670, 1677), 

 Harvey and Landsborough all expressed doubts about the authenticity of the record, although 

 Ray later (1686) obscured his earlier doubts by repeating the habitat statement from How (1650). 

 He evidently changed his opinion yet again, because (Ray, 1690, 1696) he subsequently dropped all 

 reference to Scotland. As the next most northerly record on the east coast of Great Britain is from 

 Essex, these authors' doubts were justified. Indeed, in 1846, Johnson (in Smith, Sowerby & 

 Johnson) was already doubting that Greville had seen Padina in a recent state, since it was '. . . a 

 native only of the southern shores of England . . .'. Despite the acceptance by Roy (1887 : 149) of 

 the probable presence of Padina in Scotland pre-1603, we cannot concede that there is adequate 

 evidence of the species ever having grown on eastern Scottish shores. 



Plate 1 A: Sloane Herbarium, H.S. 114, f. 26, no. 2 [BM]. The Buddie specimen labelling is self- 

 explanatory. B: Dale (1730: Tab. II, facing p. 18). Harwich. The '. . . Stones that lie before the 

 Cliff . . .' can be clearly seen at I in the lower right-hand corner. 



