[ iv ] 
Advantage. Not having hitherto had an Opportunity of examining 
this Matter my fcif, I have thought fit to infert the Obfervations 
of thefe two Authors} together with fome Letters of the ingenious 
Mr. Fairchild upon the fame SUbjeft. 
From thefc Authors who have indifputably all of them mentioned 
this Plant, I proceed to fome others who arc thought to "have de- 
feribed it, but I am fully fatisfied, have not. 
Of thefc, Cliijius is the firft in order. This Author has indeed gi- 
ven us an Account of two Plants, called by him Narcijfus Latifolius 
Indictis rubro fiore^ and the other Ltilio Narcijjus Hemerocalliuis Va- 
lentine facie, which agree in Ibme things with our Lilly, bi’i in ma- 
ny others they appear to be quite dirferent ; neither do his '.igu' es of , 
them at all rcfemblc it ; The fame thing is to be faid oi th j N^ircijfus 
Jacobeus, fo firft called by This has remarked to be 
a Plant quite difiinft from his Lilic Nafcijfus Indicus, and it is ftill 
more fo from my Lilio Narcijfus Sarnienjis. 
I have heard it very confidently aflerted. That Aldinus under the 
Title of Lilio Narcijfus Indicus Rubeus', and Ferrarius, by the 
Name either of Narcijfus Indicus Liliaceus Saturato aut diluto co- 
lore purpurafeens, or Narcijfus Indicus fore Liliaceo Sphericus had 
deferibed this Lilly i and I own that I was once inclined to be of 
the fame Opinion, but at prefent, I am perfwaded that they are al- 
together different ; for rcafons which will plainly appear by the 
Comparifon of my Defeription, with the Text and Figures of thefc 
two Authors. 
I have confultcd as many other Botanical Authors, as I could rca- 
fonably exped might have mentioned this Plant, but in none of 
them do I find either Defeription or Figure that is not more diffe- 
rent from it, than any of thefc that I have juft now named. 
The Nobile par fratrum Johannes and Cafparus Bauhini, I am very 
well fatisfied had no knowledge of it } for if C. B. has mention'd it 
any where, it muft be by the Name of Narcijfus Indicus totus Ruber, 
but then, he clafles the Narcijfus Indicus totus Sanguineus , and 
Narcijfus Jacobeus as fynonymous Terms for that, both which arc 
known to be nothing like the Guernfay Lilly. And as for J. B. 
both his Deferiptions and Figures of any Plant that comes in the Icaft 
near it, arc all copied from Clujius. 
SweertziuSyRaJfeus, Farkinfon,^ti^ others, who have all written 
cxprefly of Flowers, take no manner of Notice of this beautiful 
Flower. 
Bejlerus in the Hortus Eyjletenjis, the Authors of the Hortus 
Malabaricus, and Comntelinus in the Hortus Amjtelodamenfs, have 
neither deferib'd nor delineated it. Thus 
