102 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY 



R. scotica to be very near E. minima, and says (* Mon> 

 luiph.' 171) that the only difference of importance hes in the 

 length of the capsule in proportion to the calyx, but adds 

 that he does not know if this difference is constant. Shortly 

 after Townsend (' Mon.' p. 426) declared that it is not con- 

 stant, as he has found specimens of E. scotica with capsules 

 exceeding the calyx ; he says that a marked distinction seems 

 to lie in the form of the upper leaves and bracts of E. scotica^ 

 which are narrower than those of E. viininia and have a 

 cuneate base. I have examined many hundreds of speci- 

 mens of E. scotica from Scotland, Shetland, and the Faeroes,, 

 and have compared them with many specimens of E. viinima 

 both from the Alps and Scandinavia, and I cannot find any 

 distinction which holds good. I feel pretty sure that the 

 Scottish, etc., plant is identical with true E. minima. Town- 

 send, who has seen a good deal of my Faeroese material, has 

 determined many specimens with capsules exceeding the 

 calyx as E. scotica, specimens which are quite like the typical 

 E. mi?iima from the Alps. As pointed out by R. Wettstein 

 ('Mon.' 159), E. minima varies much with regard to the 

 colour of the corolla ; the true E. scotica represents a form 

 with pale or whitish flowers (f. pallida, Gremli) ; but from 

 this we find all possible variations of colour until a form with 

 dark purple corolla (f. purpiwascens, Wettst.) ... it is the 

 same form which has been described as E. fonlaensis, Towns.^ 

 apud Wettstein. I have examined Mr. W. H. Beeby's 

 specimens from Hamnafeld on Foula, upon which F. Town- 

 send has made his description, and they are after my opinion 

 only rather coarse, unbranched E. minima with dark purple 

 corollas and long capsules ; the specimens were found among 

 heather, and this explains their somewhat flexuose stem. 

 Both Wettstein and Townsend compare it with E. latifoliay 

 Pursh ; but it is easily distinguished from it by its nearly 

 glabrous leaves ; common to both forms are the obtuse teeth 

 of the leaves and bracts. The same form has been described 

 in 1870 by E. Rostrup (' Faeroernes Flora,' p. 48) as E, 

 gracilis, f. atropurpurea, Rostr., which consequently is the 

 name to be used. I have seen Rostrup's specimens (from 

 Hesto), and found them almost identical with Beeby's 

 specimens of E. fonlaensis. The synonymy of the form iS;, 



