200 Howe: LICHENS OF THE LINNEAN HERBARIUM 
Second, those that have the Sp. Plant. number; the equivalent 
name in Linnaeus’ handwriting; but without a Fl. Suec. number, 
e. g.,L.vulpinus. These are for the most part authentic types, yet 
in some cases they do not agree entirely with Dillenius,* Linnaeus’ 
own descriptions, nor the conception of early post-Linnean authors, 
e. g., L. barbatus. Third, those without Sp. Plant. number; with 
names in Linnaeus’ handwriting; and no Fl. Suec. number, e. g., L. 
chalybeiformis. Fourth, those that have a seemingly erroneous 
Sp. Plant. number and name but an evidently authentic Fl. Suec. 
number correctly referring to Dillenius and diagnostically de- 
scribed by Linnaeus, e. g., L. plicatus. The remaining sheets, of 
which there are a large number (95), again fall into three classes. 
First, those that are named in Linneus’ handwriting and are types 
of later species, which he described in Fl. Suec. 2 ed., 1755; SP: 
Plant. 2 ed., 1763; Syst. Nat., 12 ed., 1767; and Mantissae 1 and 
2, 1767 and 1771, e.¢., L. chrysophthalmus. Second, those that 
were named by Linnaeus’ son (Linn. fil.) in the latter’s handwriting 
and represent types of his, published in Suppl. Pl. 1781, e- g., L. 
capensis. Third, those that were evidently added by the pur- 
chaser of the Linnean Herbarium, J. E. Smith, including species 
of J. Dickson, Swartz, Ehrhart, and other later workers, few if 
any of which constitute types. 
The figure accompanying this article is of the two leaves of the 
MS. catalogue of the Linnean Herbarium giving the lichens in his 
handwriting ‘‘ presumably compiled in the year 1755.’ The dot in 
front of the name indicated “‘such [plants] as were in the Herba- 
rium.’’ These accord well with the plants at present preserve 
in the herbarium, as a comparison will show. (I have placed 
dots in the printed list.) In a future paper on the Usneaceae ! 
shall publish photographs of all the Usneaceae types. 
Below is given the list of specimens that can be considered a$ 
authentic types printed in heavier types. In italics are placed thos€ 
having less verifying data, which, however, can be properly co 
considered types. All these are listed because they bear published 
Linnean names. Numbers in brackets were not given om the 
sheets, and the numbers following the names refer to Fl. Suec- 
Names underlined appear in Linn. fil. handwriting. The modern 
ang. eee 
Eng 
, 
* Through the kindness of Dr. S. H. Vines, of the Botanic Gardens, Oxford: : 
Th the Dillenian t f to which will be made in a later pape 
