776 C. SKOTTSBERG 



"17. II Thekel. Strumar'ia Chilensis, getta da una radice fibrosa molte folgie 

 lunghe due piedi strette apuntate lisce, d'un bel verde; tra le quali sorge un 

 fusto diritto sugoso alto da cinque o sei piedi, guernito di tre o quattro folgie 

 pill piccole amplessicauli e alterne. I fioro corimbosi sono composti di tre gran 

 petali bianchi alternati con altri tre assai piu piccoli a punte rosse. II frutto e 

 una capsula triangolare di tre celle." 



This is not a bad description, though the number of stamens is not stated, 

 whereas the Latin diagnose on p. 284 is useless: "foliis linearibus; flor. altern. 

 majoribus; struma libera." And the species figures under Hexandria! I shall not 

 deny that MOLINA may have had L. fortnosa before him, but I do not see that 

 in the absence of a "type" this could be proved. GuNCKEL refers to Anal. Univ. 

 de Chile 22 (1863), where PliiLiPPl deals with certain plants described by MOLlNA. 

 He suggests that Stnanaria cliilensis was = Libertia ixioides of Gay (not of 

 Sprengel), but later (ibid. 1867) he changed his opinion, because he found that 

 Feuillee's plate (see below) does not represent L. ixioides, huiformosa. MOLINA, 

 however, does not mention this plate. It is not easy to tell what Feuillee's 

 "Bermudiana Narcisso-Leucoij flore", (1. c. 9, pi. IV) is; the specimen figured 

 has a depauperate inflorescence, but the description indicates 12X8 and 5X1.5 

 mm for the petals and sepals, respectively, and Gay 3 1 cites it under ixioides. 

 Under these circumstances it seems better not to reject the wellknown name 

 forinosa given to an ornamental plant which has been in cultivation more than a 

 hundred years. 



The type species of Libertia Spreng. is L. ixioides Spreng. , based on Sisy- 

 riiu'/iii/ifi ixiodes Forster from New Zealand, but when Sprengel published the new 

 combination (1825, 1. c. 168) he cited as place of origin both New Zealand and 

 Chile. He did not tell where he got his Chilean specimens, but the name con- 

 tinued to be applied also to a Chilean plant believed to be conspecific with ix- 

 ioides from New Zealand. In 1862, when Klatt published his monograph of 

 Libertia (2) he did not mention this at all; in its place we find "Z. restioides 

 Spreng., Syst. Veg. I. 168, where, of course, no such name is found: "restioides", 

 a senseless name in this case, is either a slip of the pen, perhaps a contamina- 

 tion by Sisyrinchium restioides Spreng. on the preceding page, or just a mis- 

 print. Specimens from Klatt's herbarium are in the Nat. Hist. Museum in 

 Stockholm; no label has "restioides", all "ixioides", written by Klatt — even 

 a devoted lover of mis-spelt names will, I presume, admit that this is a case of 

 unintentional error. Index Kewensis quotes ''restioides, Klatt = ixioides." The 

 story does not end here: when J. D. HoOKER (1. c. 274) quoted Klatt, the name 

 turned out as vestioidesl Klatt refers to Reichenbach who figured a specimen 

 from New Zealand, and to S\yeet's L. grandiflora, also from New Zealand and 

 regarded by some as a closely related species, by others as a variety. He did 

 not keep the Chilean ixioides distinct, nor did he quote Feuill:^E. L. elegans 

 Poepp. was regarded as belonging to forviosa. 



L. ixioides reappeared in Klatt 3.530, pi. 6"^, II, based on a specimen 

 which had been wrongly labelled "Brasilia". As synonyms were listed "L. res- 

 tioides Hook. Fl. Novae Zelandiae 252, Reichenbach Icon. bot. exot. tab 157, 



