146 
three-seeded, while the ‘‘ polyspermous’’ follicles of the Siberian 
re usually more than ha sore 
description of the ‘‘ Pericarp”’ as follows, ‘‘ Capsulae plures lunu- 
atae recurvae uniloculares,’’ though the follicles in Z. fumarv- 
oides are neither definitely ‘‘ recurved crescent-shaped ”’; 
the “‘observation’’ was at the same time modified to ‘* most 
akin to Helleborus, but very different in habit.”’ 
in the sixth (1767) edition of the Genera (p. 282, No. 701) the 
misleading “‘semina plurima’”’ reappeared, but Haller again 
failed to recognise its significance, though, having meantime 
received specimens of J. thalictroides from Jacquin, he noted 
(1768) in the Historia (ii, 58) that the Austrian plant appeared 
to differ from the Siberian in character, and recorded certain 
marks in the European species which certainly support his view. 
This state of matters was due to the efforts to identify the 
-original samples of Dioscorides, a task which, as Sprengel points 
out (Dioscorides ii. 626), was particularly hard in the case of 
Isopyron—‘‘erutu difficillimum est.’’ Sprengel hazards Cory- 
99 
is at least no worse than 
of the Bogbean (IJenyanthes). Cesalpini guessed Lathyrus; 
while Fabio Colonna opens his Phytobasanos (1592) with an 
argument supported by a really fine illustration to show that 
Dioscorides’ ‘‘ flame-like-’’ plant was the familiar Columbine; 
but, supposing that he was right, Linné was none the less justi- 
fied in appropriating the name for his new genus, if only as a 
partial safeguard against Mattioli’s device (Comment. p. 328 
and 493, ic. 4), who tacked root-leaves of Anise to the stem and 
flower of a Nigella, with the plea that Dioscorides had employed 
these for comparison with the corresponding parts in Isopyron. 
Colonna’s arguments failed to convince Sprengel :—but Isopy- 
rum, once it was fixed by Linnaeus in his binomial system, auto- 
matically retained its attachment. 
Unfortunately it was not furnished with an adequate or certain 
‘connotation. In Species Plantarum ed. i. (1753) p. 557; three 
species are discriminated, the first being Z. fumarioides, and the 
‘second 7. thalictroides, the latter founded on the Ranunculus 
‘praecox 1 thalictrifolio discovered by Charles de l’Escluse in 
glades near Vienna and described in the Historia at p. 233 (1601). 
he annexed a good engraving to his Dissertation. It proved to 
be Aquilegia viscosa, Gouan. The citation from Bauhin is of 
urse the sole basis of Linné’s third supposed Jsopyrum; 
Ray simply cited that without comment, and the subsequent — 
confusion rests on Morison, who abbreviated Bauhin’s text 
