374 
Ecklon and Zeyher, Krauss and Baillon, whose work has lain in the 
field or has been in the main confined to the citation of specimens. 
These difficulties make themselves apparent even in the pages of 
careful monographers like Sonder, Mier, Knauf and Pax, all of 
whom have essayed a critical revision of this genus. 
of Kew. In 
had the benefit of the personal assistance of Dr. Daydon Jackson, 
has been to some extent instrumental in originating the confusion 
which marks the work of the earlier writers. To the courtesy of 
Professor Juel we owe an opportunity of examining the types of 
Thunberg, to that of Professor Urban we are indebted for the 
privilege of studying the types of Willdenow, and to that of 
Professor Lindman for the use of the types of Sonder. In addition 
the writer has to thank Geheimrat Engler for the loan of specimens 
from Berlin, Professor Schinz for the use of the material at Ziirich, 
Dr. Lenz for the use of the specimens at Liibeck, and Professors 
Balfour and Dixon for the use of those at Edinburgh an 
Dublin respectively. He has also had the privilege of the use of 
most of the important public and private South African collections— 
the South African Government Herbarium, the Natal Government 
Herbarium, the Transvaal Government Herbarium, the Bolus and 
Albany Museum Herbaria, and those of Dr. Marloth, Mr. Galpin, 
and the Rev. F. A. Rogers. 
It is not necessary to give here an exhaustive account of the 
contents of every one of these various collections, owing to the fact 
that the specimens they contain are being cited in detail in a 
forthcoming volume of the Flora Capensis, while the cases of mis- 
application of names which occasionally mark modern monographs 
will be dealt with critically under individual species in the subjoined 
synopsis of the genus. In the case of three collections, however, a 
more detailed review of their specimens is required, in order that 
the position created by their owners may be appreciated. These 
collections are those which belonged to Linnaeus, to Thunberg, and 
to Willdenow respectively, upon an appreciation or misappreciation 
of which has depended all the advances and most of the confusion 
of the period from 1753, when Linnaeus published the first edition 
of the Species Plantarum, to 1810, when Poiret published the second 
volume of the Supplement to the Encyclopaedia. 
LinnakEvs. The bi-nominal contributions of Linnaeus to the 
elucidation of the genus Cluytia—spelt by him Clutia, began with 
the first edition of the Species Plantarum in 1753, wherein (p. 104-2) 
he enumerated five species. Three of these do not come from 
South Africa and do not belong to the genus; they therefore do not 
concern us. The remaining two are C. Alaternoides and C. pulchella. 
o these Linnaeus added, in the second edition of the Species 
Plantarum in 1763, a third species C. polygonoides (p. 1475), and in 
