PREFACE. xiii 



considered as distinct, without very satisfactory 

 proofs of their identity. 



To some he may seem unnecessarily minute in 

 the description of species, but the very nature of a 

 Monograph seems to imply attention to every cir- 

 cumstance which distinguishes the objects ofit(e): 

 while, on the other hand, he who undertakes an 

 entire department in Natural History, should select 

 those features principally which distinguish the ob- 

 jects he describes from their congeners. As mi- 

 nute traits of character, and familiar anecdotes, 

 which are beneath the dignity of the historic muse, 

 are accounted a great beauty in biography; and 

 enter into its essence, at the same time that they 

 constitute its most agreeable ornament. Against 

 this objection he cannot shelter himself more se- 

 curely, and under a greater name, than that of the 

 learned Professor Afzelius, who, in his papers on 

 three species of Trifolium, and on the genus Pausus, 

 in the Linnean Transactions (jf), has exhibited, as 

 nearly as possible, a perfect example of a 7V/o?2o^r«jf>^. 



It may perhaps be urged, as another objection 

 against the author, that he has taken an unwar- 

 rantable liberty in altering so frequently the No- 

 mina Specifica of Linneus and other authors. His 



(e) Monographi vegetahile unicum operc singulari proseculi 

 sunt, lit eo accuratius constent omnia in particulari casu. Na~ 

 tiirce curiosorum institutinn laudandum . 



Lin, Philos. Botan. §.13. 



(/) Vol. 1. p. 202, and vol. 4. p. 243. 



reply 



