SILENE BELLA 269 
Jardin... a Gcrenki the name only appears, and that apparently 
as a synonym of S. Aa pets with which it is bracketed, and Horne- 
mann’s description dates f: 
S. bella has apparently avitied out of sight; it is not mentioned 
by Rohrbach in his monogr aph on Silene, nor by Mr. F. N. Williams 
in his eran of the genus in son Linn. Soc. xxxii. 1- 106: 
may well therefore to reprint Clarke’s diagnosis, as given in 
Appendix V.—** List of the slant collected by the author scime 
friend Professor Pallas ’’—to his Travels (i. 746). It runs: “ Silene 
bella (nova species) .... Silene caule decumbente ramoso 
glabriusculis, foliis lanceolatis at iineevien: floribus fncionlatis 
[ste] te mbna ite calycibus s arintis pilos usculis ; longissimis ; 
petalis integris.’ Hennes d es ‘8. compacta Fisch. : 
floribus fasciculatis, petalis wiswe folie jee glabris, gupents 
oribus ovato-lanceolatis, inferioribus oblongo- -lanceolatis. Hab. i 
ussia? D. intr. 1812. S. Armeria duplo on jor. 
Rohrbach cites as a synonym of S. compacta, ‘* S. orientalis Mill. 
ex Wochenschr. f. Gartnerei u. Pflan lsat Hy 1858,110.” 8. ort 
entalis Mill. (Dict. ed. 8, no. bch is ignored by Williams, and is not 
taken up by Boissier, who s s to have ad unacquainted with 
Clarke’s book ; the name Retin capi n the Index Kewensis, but is nob 
correlated. From Miller’s description it would appear that it c 
ave nothing to ne ith S. compacta. He says, * calycibus pene ict 
striis hirsutis fenetibns grestioribus; caule erecto hirsuto, foliis ner- 
ym, “L 
#05 
and also a specimen from Chelsea Garden of the Boss cultivated 
there in 1723 under the Tournefortian name aoe cited, wiveh i 
S. noctijlora. Miller also describes each of these, but the 
plant is sometimes twice described by him under dierent ae 
yway the description is sufficient to eieinde 8 S.¢ 
The synonymy of the species seems to 
Smenz Becta E. D. Clarke, Travels, i. 746 810). 
S, create Fisch. Cat. Jard. Gorenk. ed. 2, 60 (1812), nomen; 
ex Hornemann, Hort. Hafn. i. 417 ie Seal 
Mon ogr. Silene, 150 (1868), excl. syn. Mill. ; liams in 
Journ. Linn. Soe. xxxii. 109 (1896). 
It may perhaps be suggested that monograpliers should endea- 
vour, as far as possible, to account for every name given in the 
the present instance, if S. bella had been looked up, its date and 
synonymy would have been ascertained, its erokan ould have 
followed, and this note need not have been writt 
i 
