SCROPHULAKIA 373 



S. nodosa, Linn. Sp. PI. 619 (1753). Figwort. 



S. nodosa foetida, C. B. Pin. 235, S, major, Gerard, 579. 

 Top. Bot. 293. Syme, E. B. vi. 123, t. 949. Nyman, 533. Fl. Oxf. 210. 

 Native. Sylvestral. Damp woods, thickets, hedges, &c. Generally 



distributed and rather frequent, P. May 15-August. 

 First recorded by Mr. Bobart in Ray, Syn. ed. 2, 161, 1696 (a variety), 

 and as Figwort in Spencer s Complete British Traveller. 1771. 



The typical plant is so widely distributed in our woodland districts 

 as to render it unnecessary to give localities. 



Var. Bobartii, Pryor in Journ. Bot. (1877) 238. S. nodosa, var. b, Sm. 

 Engl. Fl. iii. 138. S. Ehrharti, Britt. Contr., not of Stevens. 



This is the plant mentioned in Bay's Synopsis, 1. c, as * S. major, 

 caulibus, foliis etforibus viridibus, D. Bobert. Common Figwort is called 

 Brownwort from its remarkable brown colour. This hath nothing of 

 brownness in it.' 



The plant was found at Cumnor by Bobart, and specimens are pre- 

 served in the Herbaria of Morison and Du Bois at Oxford. They show 

 that the jjlant is a form or variety of S. nodosa, not as Mr. Britten calls it 

 in the Contributions, S. Ehrharti, with which it has nothing in common. 

 Archbishop Whately refound it in 1830, and Baxter states in Phaen. 

 Bot. n. 385 (1835) 'that it was introduced by him into the Botanic 

 Garden at Oxford,' where it remained unchanged by cultivation for 

 many years. 



Var. BRACTEATA, mihi. This plant, which grows in muddy, shady 

 ditches on the London Clay near Loddon Bridge, Coleman's Moor, 

 Ruscombe, and Hurst, has much of the appearance of S. alata, Gilib. 

 Fl. Lituan. ii. 127, the inflorescence having foliaceous bracts, the stem 

 being more conspicuously winged, and the leaves much larger and of 

 a thinner texture. The plant is also much more branching than the 

 type. These characters, it may be said, are insufficient to mark it as 

 a variety, and are possibly caused by its place of growth, but they are 

 sufficiently marked to warrant attention, since by more than one 

 botanist it has been referred to S. alata, fz'om which the rootstock, 

 covered with fleshy knobs, at once distinguishes it. Can this be the 

 plant recorded as S. Ehrharti from Chalfont in Bucks ? 



A var. verticillata is described by Brebisson, 1. c, with the leaves in 

 threes, but I have not noticed it in Berkshire. 



S. nodosa is found in all the bordering counties. 



[S. ALATA, Gilib. Fl. Lituan. ii. 127 (1781), not of Asa Gray. 

 S. umbrosa, Dumort. Fl. Belg. 37 (1827) (made synonymous with S. aquatica 

 in Index Kewensis). S. Ehrharti, Stev. in Ann. Nat. Hist. v. (1840) 3. 

 S. aquatica, Linn. Sp. PI. 620 p.p., and Nyman, 533. 



Syme, E. B. vi. 122, t. 948. 



Error. Cumnor, in Britt. Contr. 52. The plant is S. nodosa, var. Bobartii.] 



