228 
THE JOURNAL OF ROTANY 
noted that at a later period in the century It. A. Salisbury visited 
the locality and found the plant: in the fragment of his Genera of 
Plants, published by J. E. Gray in 1866, he writes (p. 52) : “ Forty 
years have elapsed since I gathered a living flower of Anthericum 
serotinum on Mount Snowdon”;—Salisbury died in 1829; he adds 
a description, from a dried specimen, which will be found in an 
amplified form (ix. 884) in the volumes of Salisbury’s drawings and 
MSS. in the Department of Botany; these are too little known, but 
should be consulted in connexion with Salisbury’s work, to the care¬ 
fulness of which they bear abundant testimony. 
In the course of writing these notes my attention was attracted 
to a fact which, so far as 1 am aware, has hitherto escaped notice. 
The genus Lloydia is universally cited as of Salisbury, with a refer¬ 
ence, as in Index Ilewensis, to Trans. Hort. Soc. i. 328 (1812). 
Salisbury here indicates the genus, which he bases on “ Anthericum 
serotinum Smith in Engl. Bot. n. 793, cum ic.,” with references to 
L. Sp. PI. ed. 2, 444 and to B. Syn. ed. 3, 374. After the passage 
relating to William Alexander quoted above (p. 225) Salisbury con¬ 
tinues : “As it constitutes a distinct genus, I have named it after 
the celebrated Edward Llhwyd (sic) Esq.” .... but he gives no 
diagnosis. In the fragment of The Genera of Plants already re¬ 
ferred to—a work which incidentally contains a good deal of interest¬ 
ing information—Salisbury forms for it a special section of his Order 
Veratrece , which he characterises (p. 51) as: “Sect. 3. Stylus 1. 
Flores 1-rii vel rarissime 2. Must go to Bulbocodese having a true 
Bulb prominent on one side like Co/chicum ”—in Trans. Hort. Soc. 
he had spoken of “ examining the root, which is not bulbous ” ; but 
even if were possible to regard this as a diagnosis, it was not pub¬ 
lished until 1866, nor does his MS. description contain any generic 
character. 
The first publication of lloydia as a genus seems to be that of 
L. Iteichenbach in Flora Fxcursoria (p. 102), who, however, cites 
Salisbury as its author, rightly discarding Salisbury’s specific name 
alpina in favour of serotina, which Linnaeus gave the plant under 
Anthericum. The date of the first section of the Flora (pp. 1-142) 
is definitely given by Reiclienbach on the half-title to the complete 
work as 1830; but it appears from a long review (pp. 273-285) in 
Flora for May 14, 1830, that the section was issued in two parts, 
to the first of which (pp. 1-54) the review was devoted. The second 
part (pp. 55-140), in which Lloydia is contained, is reviewed in the 
Literaturberichte of Flora for 1832 (pp. 65-77) ; the date of the 
Flora Fxcursoria stands at the head of the notice as 1830-31. 
That this second part was published later than the first is evident 
from the last paragraph of the review of part 1; and the date 1830- 
31, with that of the review (1832), suggests 1831 as the year of its 
actual appearance. The matter is of some interest, for, in the event 
of Lloydia dating from 1831, it would bv antedated by JSfectaro- 
bothrium of Ledebour (FI. Altaica, ii. 36 (1830)) which is established 
on the same plant; but in view of the uncertainty as to Reichen- 
bach’s date, it would be undesirable to make any alteration of the 
accepted name for the genus. 
