400 ADDITIONAL NOTES, ETC. 



neighbourhood of Arbroath." But if so, it is remarkable 

 that Lightfoot should have described the plant in his 

 Flora Scotica, as being frequent in dry mountainous pas- 

 tures. The same indication is repeated in Hooker's Flora 

 Scotica, where it is not given on Lightfoot's authority, 

 but as if it expressed a fact ascertained by the Author 

 of the second Flora Scotica. That second indication, 

 however, being in the very words of Lightfoot, may have 

 been copied from the work of the latter without acknow- 

 ledgement, a practice too often followed in other in- 

 stances in Hooker's Flora Scotica. The practice is faulty, 

 because it gives the false appearance of two authorities 

 for a record, where there was only one ; and that one 

 I)erhaps only an error in the present instance. 



643. SoUdago Virgaurea, vol. ii. p. 112. 



The term ' sylvatical ' has accidentally been left here 

 instead of ' sylvestral ' ; and it suggests a few words of 

 exjilanation. In making my series of terms to express 

 situations of growth, the former of these two adjectives 

 was first adopted on the same analogy that via is converted 

 into viatical. Subsequently, it apj)eared more desirable 

 to follow the analogy of agrestal, &c., and the change was 

 made. I think it is Mr. Hort who has since somewhere 

 objected to the term ' sylvestral', because Linneus used 

 the word sylvestris to express a wild plant, in contradis- 

 tinction to sativus for a cidtivated plant. This is true ; 

 and possibly the word ' sylval ' or ' sylvatical ' might have 

 been thought better ; although I am not aware that sylves- 

 tral has ever been used or i^roposed as an EngHsh word to 

 express wild. The sylvestral plants are woodland plants ; 

 and in its primary meaning sylvestris will well enough cor- 

 respond with oui' own term looodland. 



644. Senecio sylvaticus, vol. ii. j). 113. 



Province 18 may be added to the area, on authority of 



