supplementary to Encyc. of Plants and Hort. Brit 317 



A frame bulb, introduced by Mr. Cuming, and other collectors ; the figure 

 is taken from a specimen supplied by Robert Mangles, Esq, 



1052. GA^GE^ Sal. 8747 uniflbra G. Don, Hort. Brit. p. 134 



Synonyme • Orythyia (the fabled wife of Boreas) unifl6ra B. Don, Swt. fl. gard. 336 



The following reasons are given by Professor Don for changing the name 

 of this plant from Gagea to Orithyia : — 



" I have followed the suggestions of Professor Ledebour, in removing this 

 species, and oxypetalum, from amongst the Ornithogala, with which they have 

 been hitherto generally associated. They appear to form, alo g with Rhino- 

 petalum, the connecting link between the Liliaceae proper, and ^sphodeleae. 

 They have entirely the habit, and many of the characters, of Tulipa,ivom which 

 they are principally distinguished by their distinct and elongated style. The 

 present species has been even referred to Tulipa itself by Gebler, under the 

 trivial name of altaica; and, indeed, it is so like the single-flowered specimens 

 of T. biflora, that it might readily be overlooked for that species, which, more- 

 over, exhibits, in the attenuated apex of its ovarium, a striking approximation 

 to the style in this genus." {Swt. Fl. Gard., May.) 



We admit that this change is made in strict accordance with the theoretical 

 canons generally acknowledged by botanists; viz. that the characters of a 

 genus should be taken exclusively from the parts of fructification (Lindl. Introd. 

 to Bot., ed. 1. p. .367.) ; but, surely, there must be something defective in this 

 system of forming genera, when a plant so obviously, to general observers, a 

 tulip, and which, perhaps, after all, may prove to be only a variety of the com- 

 mon species (for, even according to botanists, it differs from the tulip prin- 

 cipally in having a distinct and elongated style, doubtless very different from 

 the common tulip, which has a sessile stigma), is made a separate genus. 

 It appears to us, that there is almost no end to the genera that might be esta- 

 blished on this principle, taken singly, unless it be controlled by some other 

 principle or principles. Not to speak of plants in cultivation, such as the 

 peach, in which the fruit, in some varieties, is smooth, and in others downy; 

 in some rich in flesh, and in others, as the almond, with a mere husk ; let us 

 take the common hawthorn, which is found in a wild state with flowers having 

 one, three, or five st3'les ; and which ought, therefore, not only to be formed 

 into three genera, but these genera ought even to be classed in three separate 

 orders. Many instances of the same kind might be mentioned ; but it is un- 

 necessary to go into detail. What we would wish is, to see genera founded 

 on the same general principles that tribes and orders are founded ; that is, 

 upon a totality of characters and their relations. Let the parts of fructifi- 

 cation, as being the most important for the continuance of the species, be first 

 considered, after its anatomy and physiology, but not before, for these are the 

 most important for its existence. Thus, the branching, rooting, leafing, 

 &c., would be taken into consideration as well as the flower and fruit. This 

 would no doubt lead to very great changes : we should no longer have plants 

 in the same genus both decidedly ligneous and herbaceous, as in iSolanum ; 

 lofty trees and twining shrubs, as in i?hus; plants with pinnated leaves, and 

 .simple leaves, as in Pyrus, &c. We think this would contribute greatly to 

 facilitate the knowledge of plants, and, as it were, effect for the practical 

 botanist and gardener what the natural arrangement has done for the scientific 

 student. In all this we may be mistaken ; and we shall, perhaps, be told, that 

 it is merely a question between the value of synthesis and analysis, or between 

 botanic genera and natural genera. Be it so : but let it always be recollected, 

 that we throw out hints of this kind as matter of speculation, and for the 

 consideration of others, with the most perfect good feeUng, and with all due 

 deference to those who know more than ourselves on this subject. 



Since writing the above, Mr. Denson has reminded us that Dr. Lindley 

 has suggested something analogous to our speculation in the Botanical Re- 

 gister for September, 1826 ; to which we may add that something farther may 

 be found on the same subject in that work, t. 1261., under the character and 

 description of Lowea berberiibWa.. 



