76 
In this list, therefore, we find evidence that Sprengel had not 
ascertained that C. obliqua and C. verbascifolia are merely 
different names for the same species, or learned that C. Burmanni 
is merely a somewhat different condition of C. Rottlert. 
In 1834 Decaisne (Flor. Sin. p. 242) recorded C. oblongifolia, 
A. Juss. as collected by Bové in Sinai, an important indication, 
since the identification is accurate, that as yet no confusion had 
arisen with regard to the name of Delile’s plant. 
We have already discussed the considerations which may have 
led Visiani in 1836 to refer Croton obliquifolium (Pl. quaed. Nilot. 
p. 39, t. 7, fig. 2) and Chrozophora Brocchiana (1.c. t. 8, fig. 2) to 
different genera. Dealing with them as individual species, Visian1 
suggested that the former might be the same as Croton tinc- 
torium?, Forsk. (Cent. vi. p. 162); it certainly is very near that 
plant, which is the type of Croton plicatum, Vahl (1790). Pro- 
fessor Saccardo informs us that there is not now at Padua any 
specimen written up by Visiani as ‘Croton obliquifolium,’ and 
the present whereabouts of Visiani’s type cannot be traced. The 
same, Professor Saccardo has explained, is also unfortunately true 
as regards Visiani’s second species, the description of which does 
not agree exactly with the corresponding figure. The plant 
described is clearly closely allied to the one described by Lamarck 
s Croton senegalense, but differs in having leaves softly woolly 
above as well as beneath, whereas in Lamarck’s plant the leaves 
are nearly and at length quite glabrous above. The relationship 
of the various forms in the group Senegalenses will be dealt with 
in a subsequent paragraph. 3 
In 1839 Fischer and Meyer (Kar. Enum. Turc. p. 171) named, 
without description, a new species, C. gracilis, from Turkestan. 
In 1841 Karelin and Kirilow (Bull. Soc. Nat. Mosc. xv. p. 446) 
described a new species, C. sabulosa, from Soongaria. In 
1844 Presl (Bot. Bemerk. p. 109) described as C. Sieberi 
the plant that Sprengel in 1826 had nam . 
hierosolymitana. About 1850 Ledebour dealt with all three 
(Fl. Ross. i. 2. p. 581) keeping C. gracilis and C. sabulosa, 
which are identical, as distinct species, but merging Caucasus 
specimens of C. hierosolymitana in C. tinctoria, A. Juss. 
In 1851 Bunge (Rel. Lehm. p. 314) recognised C. sabulosa but 
not C. gracilis, and (l.c. p. 315) treated Turkestan examples of 
Sieber’s plant as pessibly distinct from C. tinctoria. At the same 
time Bunge re-described as a new species, C. integrifolia, what 
Sprengel had diagnosed as C. obliqua, A. Juss.” 
In 1851, also, Richard (Tent. FI. Abyss. ii. p. 252) recorded 
C. plicata, A. Juss., from Abyssinia; all the specimens he dealt 
with are identical with Croton plicatum, Vahl (1790). But 
Richard collected in Lower Egypt specimens, which he identified 
with C. plicata, that agree with Croton obliquifolium, Vis. These 
specimens prove that as late as 1851 no author had regarded the 
plants of Vahl and Visiani as distinct. 
,In 1858 Baillon issued a list of nine species of Chrozophora 
(Etud. gén. Euphorb. p. 322). This list is rarely studied, perhaps 
because it has no descriptions. Under each of his species, how- 
