UK I 'M 



VI. HONACHAV. 4JJFQ HI 



leaves as they were intended to be shown. I will try to 

 give some examples in the course of this year. 



2. I find also, sorrowfully, that the references are 

 wrong in three, if not more, places in that chapter. S. 

 9T1 and 972 should be transposed in p. 72. S. 294 in 

 p. 74 should be 981. D. 407 should be inserted after 

 Peregrina, in p. 76 ; and 203, in fourth line from bottom 

 of p. 78, should be 903. I wish it were likely that these 

 errors had been corrected by my readers, the rarity of 

 the Flora Danica making at present my references virtu- 

 ally useless : but I hope in time that our public institutes 

 will possess themselves of copies : still more do I hope 

 that some book of the kind will be undertaken by Eng- 

 lish artists and engravers, which shall be worthy of our 

 own country. 



3. Farther, I get into confusion by not always re- 

 membering my own nomenclature, and have allowed 

 i Gentianoides ' to remain, for "No. 16, though I banish 

 Gentian. It will be far better to call this eastern moun- 

 tain species ' Olympica ' : according to Sibthorpe's local- 

 ization, " in summa parte, nive soluta, montis Olympi 

 Bithyni,'' and the rather that Curtis's plate above re- 

 ferred to shows it in luxuriance to be liker an asphodel 

 than a gentian. 



4. I have also perhaps done wrong in considering 

 Veronica polita and agrestis as only varieties, in No. 3. 

 Xo author tells me why the first is called polite, but its 

 blue seems more intense than that of agrestis; and as it 



