100 THE JOUKNAL OF BOTANY 



practically = i. crispus, and is cited in Sp. PI. ed. 1 for L. J/ispidus 

 var. />. and also for Crepls nudicaul/s, l>ut in ed. 2 for i. hirfus. 



G. Ibidem, no. xi., Hieracium dent is leonis folio hirsutie asperum 

 m(((jis laciniatum, " quod in Prodr. i. est." It is therefore L. crispus, 

 though cited m Sp. PL ed. 1, for L. Jiispidiis var. y. as well as for 

 Crepis midicaulis, but in ed. 2 for L. hirtus *. 



7. Ibidem, no. ix., Hieracium asperum Jlo7'e magno dentis leonis. 

 Wrongly quoted by Linnaeus, in the Mantissa only, for L. hirtus. 

 Ray, Hist. i. p. 245, had recognised in it his "Dandelion Hawkweed" 

 = L. hispidus L., to which it is also referred by Villars, jd. 89. 



8. J. Bauhin, Hist. ii. p. 1038 (IGol), describes and figures a 

 species very different from any of the above as Hieracium parvum 

 hirtum, caule aphyllo, crispum uhi siccatum, "a multis annis 

 habemus Monspelii lectum." Hereafter referred to simply as JB. 

 It is an excellent figure of L. Villarsii, to which it is i-eferred by 

 Villars himself, p. 82. Ray knew the species well, giving an in- 

 teresting description of it in Hist. i. p. 246, where he says, " caulem 

 tactu asperum et singularem," and " folia ex radice gracili complura 

 per terram sparsa densa rigidaque lanugine spinula quodammodo 

 imitata, hirta et incana, semiunciam aut duas uncias longa, satis lata, 

 divisione Erucae purpurete nobis dictte ; siccata crispa videntur. Nos 

 quoque in agro Monspessulano (legimus)." Note the proportion and 

 shape of the leaves, which is characteristic of L. Villarsii t- Here 

 we have the source of the specific name hirtus adopted by Linnaeus, 

 who, as before, quotes the synonym for L. hispidus (o. and y., and for 

 Crepis niidicaulis in Sp. PI. ed. 1, but for L. hirtus in ed. 2. Ray's 

 interpretation of the early names is of the greatest importance. No 

 other botanist knew so manjr species or was so nearlj^ infallible in 

 regard to those he speaks of. Had Linnanis paid as much attention 

 to Rav as to some other authors, whose entire volumes are not worth 

 a page of Ray, many of the confusions in the Species Plantarum 

 might have been avoided. 



9. Tovu'nefort, Inst. p. 468 (1700), Dens Leonis fol Us hirsutis 

 et asperis saxatilis, quoting as synonyms Colonna and CB x. This 

 name is not alluded to by Linnaeus, but is rightly quoted by Villars, 

 p. 84, for L. crispus, although, in conseqvience of Dillenius's heresy, 

 he had quoted CB x. for L. hirtus. 



* Dillenius, Cat. PI. Giss. p. 114 (1719), argues that C. Bauhin must have 

 (accidentally ?) transposed his minus and niagis in the Pinax, and that really 

 CB i. = CB X. and Colonna's plant =CB si. This idea was probably sug-g-ested 

 by the occurrence of the word minus in CB i. as well as in CB x., but the 

 argument rests on the false assiimption that the plant found at the "little mill" 

 near Giessen is CB i. = CB xi., which of course is impossible, and on the fact that 

 this Giessen plant is not that of Colonna. Moreover, he contradicts himself, 

 for he first assumes CB i. = CB xi. and then tries to prove that CB i. = CB x. His 

 remarks may therefore be ignored, although Villars, p. 85. note 1, seems to 

 accept them ; but that note farther confuses matters by bringing in the second 

 species of Bauhin's Prodromus, which, as we have seen, has nothing to do with 

 the question, and is not alluded to by Dillenius. 



f There is a specimen in Herb. Sloane, vol. 16G, p. 21. The volume of Herb. 

 Sloane being temporarily inaccessible, I have not been able to inspect the 

 specimens of this and allied species referred to in the margin of the Mus. Brit. 

 copy of Ray's Hinturia. 



