Lyte, 93 
cuts, I find editions mentioned^ with the 
dates 1600 and 1619, which, if genuine, 
and not in the title-page only, is a proof of 
its popularity ; and that it was not fuper- 
feded by the larger work of Gerard in 
ij;97. Seguier even quotes one, fo late 
as the year 1678. 
As in the interval between the publica- 
tion of Clusius's French tranflation in 
1557, and the Englifh verfion of it by 
Lyte in 1578, the author had at different 
times compleated the feveral parts of his 
Hijiorice Plantarum^ it may be prefumed, 
that Lyte profited by thofe works. From 
fome of the commendatory verfes prefixed, 
it fhould feem, that Dodoens himfelf com- 
municated additions to Lyte. As I have 
not had an opportunity of comparing the 
French verfion of Cliijius with Lyte, I 
cannot notice the nature of his alterations, 
or the extent of his additions. The intro- 
duftion of the Englifh names was a necef- 
fary augmentation. 
In the mean time, there feems to be no 
ground for the criticifm of Threlkeld ; 
who accufes Lyte of having omitted the 
Fiirgantiiim 
