152 p. BUBANI FLORA PYEENAEA. 



many cases unnecessarily and for the worse altered the names of 

 Tournefort, Bauhm, and other of his predecessors, and that, while 

 infringing the rules which he himself had. laid down, he substituted 

 names of his own, inaccurate or wrongly chosen, both for genera 

 and species ; for example, Cataria of Tournefort was called Xepeta 

 by Linnaeus, although Nepeta was declared by Dioscorides to be 

 synonymous with Mentha, and the true Xq^eta of Pliny is thought 

 to be a Melissa [Calamintha) ; Bubani contends that therefore 

 Xepeta was erroneously used by Linnaeus, and N. Cataria L. he 

 accordingly calls C. tomentosa Gilib. The Ilhabarbarum of Ammann 

 and Tournefort was changed by Linnaeus into Rheum ; and other 

 such innovations are instanced and objected to. 



Bubani exercised a critical scrutiny into the correct application 

 of ancient names, and does not scruple to discard them, however 

 much sanctioned by modern adoption and usage, whenever he finds 

 that errors are involved in using them. Thus he explains that no 

 Glaux of Dioscorides or of any of the ancients, except Dodoens, 

 was the plant now known to us by that name, and he therefore 

 thought it a good opportunity to change the name into Vroedea, and 

 in this way to avoid confusion and to commemorate John de Vroede, a 

 Belgian correspondent of Dodoens. But he does not use or even 

 cite for the genus the synonym Glaucuides Kupp. Fl. Jen. 21 (1718), 

 non Micheh (1729). 



The following passages from a letter addressed by Dillenius to 

 Linnaeus are transcribed in support of the author's action : — 

 "I think the names of the ancients ought not rashly and pro- 

 miscuously to be transferred to our new genera, or to those of the 

 new world. The day may possibly come when the plants of 

 Theophrastus and Dioscorides may be ascertained, and till this 

 happens, we had better leave their names as we find them." 

 "1 do not, like Burmau, blame you for introducing new names, but 

 for the bad application of old ones." He shows that many excellent 

 botanists have in former times changed names for good and sufficient 

 reasons, and he claims the same liberty for himself. 



For the names of genera he refers with approval to the opinion 

 of Cassini that in general meaningless names or those which do not 

 indicate any character are the best, though he accepts diminutive 

 names derived from a true comparison with well-known plants, and 

 he has constructed such a name for Cicendia, which he deals with 

 as follows : he says that Cicendia Adans. is one of the synonyms of 

 Gentiana Tournef., and that Exacuin L., which some botanists use, 

 is a synonym of Erythraa ; he therefore substitutes for it his new 

 name Cicendiola. He also dismisses the name EnjthrcEa on the 

 ground that it comprises some species with white flowers, and he 

 calls it Libadion, a name which he finds used by Pliny, but which is 

 unknown to modern science. For species he thinks that names 

 should be expressive, and he selects for them the best rather than 

 the oldest names, and does not countenance the principle of 

 De CandoUe and of many later authors in prohibiting the alteration 

 of the trivial name of a plant whenever the species is transferred 

 from one genus to another. Bubani forcibly urges against such 



