URTICACE^J. 



S09 



Linnaeus knew only the three genera Urtica, Parietaria, and Fors- 

 Icohlea. Jussieu in 1789 published Procris of Commerson ; the 

 two Forsters founded Elatostema in 1776, and Jacquin BceJuneria in 

 1763. The other genera are comparatively recent. In 1821 

 Lindley made the genus Pilea for a number of species, and 

 Wallich made known Memorialis of Hamilton. Another Indian 

 genus Chamahaina, is due to Wight. Gaudicha.ud, from 1826 to 

 1829, in the accounts of the botany of the voyages of the Bonite and 

 Uranie, published the largest number of our modern genera. Of 

 those at present retained there are fifteen : Australina, Debregeasia, 

 Droguetia, Fleurya, Girardinia, Laportea, Neraudia, Obetia, Pelliouia, 

 Pouzohiu, Rousselia, Sarcochlamys, Touchardia, Urera, and Vittebrunea. 

 Yet more recently appeared Myriocarpa and Hemistylis of Bentham, 

 Didymodoxa of E. Meyer, Leucosyke of Zollinger. H. A. Weddell, 

 in the remarkable memoirs we shall refer to below, established the 

 seven genera Cypholophus, Distemon, Lecanthm, Maoutia, Phenax, 

 Pipturus, and Scepocarpus. Blume, whose researches on this group 

 are of later date, 1 distinguished two other generic types, Achudemia 

 and Nanocnide. To these thirty-six genera have been added Gyro- 

 taenia by Grisebach in 1860, Poikilospermum of ZirpEL by Miquel 

 in 1863, and Tlesperocnide by Torrey & A. Gray in 1857. 



Weddell, who has recently given most attention to this so 

 natural an order, and studied it with extreme care, 2 divides it into 

 five tribes, characterized as follows : 



I. Urere.e. — Plants with stinging (urticating) hairs, leaves 

 opposite decussate, or alternate and inserted in a spiral. Female 

 perianth 4-partite or 4-lobate, rarely 2-partite or 2-lobate, or tubular, 

 always free (3 genera). 



II. ProcridEjE. — Unarmed plants ; leaves opposite or (by abor- 

 tion) alternate and often distichous. Female perianth 3-partite, 



1 Weddell has shown {Monogr., 48, 5L 90. 

 588) that Bltjme's works on the Urticacew, 

 published in vol. ii. of ihe Museum Botanicum 

 Lugduno-Batavum, though dated 1842, only 

 appeared in 1856. 



2 In several remarkable works, especially his 

 Monographic des Urticees (in Arch. Mus., ix. 

 49) and the Urticaeece of De Candolle's Pro- 

 dromus (xvi. sect. i. 32-23S 64 ). These excellent 



publications date from 1856 and 1869 respec- 

 tively. We have used them as a guide in the 

 study of this order, and adopted as far as possible 

 the conclusions of their author. Bleme is the 

 last author who has made great investigations 

 into this family ; we have mentioned these in 

 note 1, and that they were really posterior to 

 Weddell's. 



