82 
AMARYLLI DACEiE. 
Tliis genus is unknown to me, but amply describe^ by Dr. 
Martins. They are natives of Brazil, having a habit between 
Barbacenia and Fourcroya, and give a peculiar appearance 
to the country where they abound, the largest acquiring some 
resemblance to the form of a Yucca, with less rigid leaves, and 
flowers which are either white or blue, borne on a single stalk. 
Yellosia has the same remarkable peculiarity as Gethyllis, 
producing an occasional superfluity of stamens in groups. 
3. Barbacenia — Germen erect, perianth continuous tubed; 
filaments bifid longer than the anthers ; style acumi- 
nate longer than the stigma ; seeds small, numerous, 
angular by contact with a bay shell margined with 
white. PI. 1. f. 29. (Limb reflex. Inhabit Brazil.) 
1. Purpurea. — Bot. Mag. 54. 2777. — Flowers purple. — 
2. Tricolor. Mart. Braz. t. 10. orange ; branching. 
— 3. Tomentosa. ib. t. 11. orange; branching. — 
4. Longiflora. ib. t. 12. yellow. — 5. Bicolor, ib. t. 13. 
yellow, green without ; branching. — 6. Rubro-vi- 
rens. ib. t. 14. f. 1. dull red.— 7. E'xscapa. ib. t. 
14. f. 2. yellow; scarcely branching. 
These plants have great resemblance to Yellosia, though 
of very inferior stature. I believe that no species but pur- 
purea has been introduced into this country. It was raised 
by me from seeds concealed in the small quantity of vegetable 
mould and moss adhering to some epiphytes which had been 
collected in the neighbourhood of Rio Janeiro, which it is 
always advisable to save, and spread upon a pot full of 
earth, for it will generally be found that some seeds are 
lurking in it, and probably better preserved than if they had 
been gathered intentionally. 
It is immaterial, as far as concerns the Amaryllidaceous 
plants, whether the branching, the caulescent, and the scapa- 
ceous divisions be considered as three separate orders, or as 
portions of one; but they should not be separated without 
carefully examining how far a similar limitation would be 
desirable in other orders, and whether it is not more conve- 
nient, for the purpose of giving a clear and easy view of the 
whole vegetable creation, to reduce the number of orders by 
converting some of those now defined into suborders, than 
to multiply them by further dismemberment ; I entertain no 
doubt upon the subject, and I consider that Dr. Lind ley’s 
