THE SYNONYMY OF POTAMOGETON ZIZII ROTH. 263 



of Mundia — •* Nomen cl. Macnabio curator! indefesso horti Edin- 

 burgensis Ericarum cultivatori diligentissimo dicatum, paullulum 

 mutavi, dum particula Mac nequaquam separabilis sit " (Benth. in 

 DC. Prod. vii. 612 (1839). 



In the case of Mundtia, Harvey's alteration has been generally 

 accepted. Bentham and Hooker (Gen. PL i. 137) do not even cite 

 the true spelling as a synonym, nor does it appear in Harvey's * Fl. 

 Capensis,' nor in Durand's 'Index Genernm.' Pfeiffer, on the 

 other hand, entirely ignores the alteration ; he does not give 

 Mundtia, even as a spelling of Mundia. 



I have not been able to find further information concerning 

 either Henry Mundy or "M. Mundt": can any reader supply it ? 

 Don (Gen. Syst. i. 366) gives another derivation for the word : 

 *'from mimdus, neat; appearance of plants." 



In neither of the above cases will there be any serious addition 

 to synonymy ; the names standing thus : — 



Nabea Lehm. (1831) [Macnahea Benth. (1839). 

 N. montana Lehm. {^L montana Benth.). 



Mundia Kth. (1821) {Mundtia Harv. (1838). 

 M. spinom DC. Prod. i. 338 (1824). 

 Kunth founded the genus Mundia on Polygala spinosa L., but did 

 not formally apply that specific name to the plant, so that the 

 species takes DC. as its authority. 



THE SYNONYMY OF POTAMOGETON ZIZII Roth. 

 By Arthur Bennett, F.L.S. 



In this Journal for 1879 (p. 291), Dr. Trimen, in an admirable 

 article on this plant as a British species, remarks in a footnote that 

 he has been unable to trace the " P. angustifolium Presl, fide 

 Fieber," saying, " this is not improbably an earlier name." Like 

 Dr. Trimen, I made attempts to do so, but unsuccessfully, until, 

 looking over the preface to Berchtold and Seidls' ' Flora Bohmens' 

 (1836), I found the key to the difficulty. They there mention a 

 work written entirely m Czech, as published in "1820," which is 

 not to be found either in Pritzel or Jackson's 'Guide.' It is 

 entitled *0 Prirozenosti Bostlin aneb Eostlinar. 1823. Prague,' 

 by B. W. Hrab Berchtold and J. S. Presl. 



The date, 1820, seems to have been an error, as the title-page 

 bears the date 1823. From various sources of information, I am 

 inclined to think the fascicles 1 to 10 were published in 1821, and 

 the whole probably republished in 1823. By the kindness of Dr. 

 L. Celakovsky, of Prague, I am enabled to give a translation of the 

 description of P. angusti/olium, as given in the ' Rostlin ': — " Folia 

 alterna, lineari-lanceolata acuta, stipulis angustiora, pedunculi 

 incrassati folio duplo longiores, caules teretes. — Crescit in piscinis 

 et stagnis ad Bohdanec, ubi a dom. Opiz inventum." 



