338 MORPHOLOGY. 



reckon among these the outermost circle of leaves, closely applied to the 

 flower, and so gathered together as to form a collective object in the flowers 

 of Dipsacete, in many Malvacece, Passiftoracece, &c. Many persons, in 

 defiance of all correct modes of naming, call these involucrum or involu- 

 cellum in the Dicotyledons, spatha in the Monocotyledons terms which 

 were originally applied to bracts, or a circle of bracts surrounding an 

 inflorescence, and are in the highest degree unsuitable ; and even in- 

 clude here parts which cannot be called anything but calyx without 

 a complete confusion of terminology as, for instance, the outermost 

 circle of floral envelopes in Scitaminece, &c. The only parts which can 

 be confounded with the epicalyx, and to which it naturally forms the 

 transition, are bracteoles upon the pedicel ; but of course, where nature 

 has not united them in definite form and arrangement to the flower, as 

 in the plants mentioned, no epicalyx exists, but merely bracteoles. It is 

 indeed very difficult to draw a line here, as in the distinction between 

 flos pedicellatus and t /?os sessilis, since it is not an absolute difference, but 

 merely a question of more or less that has to be decided on. It is again 

 a point, where the more refined cultivation of the perceptive faculty, 

 where the tact of the inquirer can alone give a correct determination, if 

 we do not agree to arbitrary absolute measurement, which would be ex- 

 ceedingly useless, since in difference of size of flowers that very absolute 

 measure, for instance a line, becomes relative. In some flowers, as in 

 Parietaria, a line is an enormous deal ; in others, such as Datura or 

 Brugmansia, &c., nothing at all. Where, as in Passiflora, elongated 

 internodes occur within the undoubted flower, it would be the readiest 

 expedient to measure ; but this is rarely the case, and therefore this best 

 expedient admits of only limited application. On the whole, a doubtful 

 case will rarely occur, if a man endeavour, with a genuine and refined 

 feeling for truth, to understand nature, and not try to adapt this to his 

 own preconceived opinions. 



The epicalyx, as I define it, may co-exist both with a true calyx and 

 with the perianth, but, in the latter case, only where it is separated from 

 the perianth by the inferior germen, since otherwise there is no cause why 

 it should not be called the calyx, as, for instance, in the Amarantacece.* 



The paraeorolla may also exist in the perianth, but it is always suffi- 

 ciently characterised by the aberrant structure of its foliaceous portions, 

 so that it cannot be confounded with the corolla, and the perianth taken 

 for a calyx. 



150, The perianth consists, according to the preceding consi- 

 derations, of one or more circles of leaves, which are developed so 

 as to be similar in colour, form, and structure. The following 

 series of its forms may be more minutely characterised. 



The individual foliar organs are always (?) expanded in a flat- 

 tened form, seldom divided into limb and claw, and, at least when 



* In almost all descriptions of the Amarantacece, one reads fiores tribracteati . That 

 one of these leaves belongs to a totally different axis, namely, the peduncle, is wholly 

 ignored here. In the Polycnemece, however, where exactly identical parts exist, and only 

 one leaf, namely, the only true bract, is green, we find, fiores quia in axilla fnlii ses- 

 siles bibracteati. If an Amarantaceotis plant should occur with coloured bract and 

 green calyx, it would probably run, flores quia in axillis foliorum duorum sesaiks uni- 

 bracteati ! ! How shall we describe this sort of thing adequately ? 



