Linnaeus's interpretation of Prospero Alpino's De plantis exoticis, with special emphasis on the flora of Crete

33 Pages·1995·16.7 MB·

by  Nicholas J Turland

Bull. not. Hist. Mus. Land. (Bot.)25(2): 127-159 Issued30November 1995
Linnaeus's interpretation of Prospero
De
with
Alpino's plantis exoticis, special
emphasis on the flora of Crete
NICHOLAS TURLAND
J.
DepartmentofBotany, TheNaturalHistory Museum, London SW75BD
CONTENTS
Introduction 127
Liberprimus 128
Libersecundus 146
Summaryofnewtypifications 157
References ..158
.
SYNOPSIS. ProsperoAlpino'sDeplantisexoticis,firstpublishedin 1627,describes 135plants,ofwhich84aresaidto
originate from thesouth Aegean islandofCrete. Thispaperexaminesthe treatmentofAlpino'splantsbyCarolus
Linnaeus, and the determinations later offered by Sprengel and later still by Baldacci and Saccardo. As far as is
possible,thepresentauthoroffersdeterminationsbasedoncurrentknowledgeoftheCretanfloraforthe84Cretan
plants. Of the 35 Linnaean binomials which include in their protologues a reference to one of Alpino's Cretan
plants, 17arelectotypifiedhere,while 16havealreadybeentypifiedandtherelevantspecimenorfigureiscited. In
addition,AcersempervirensL. isneotypifiedhere, andDianthusarboreusL. islectotypified, asaretwonamesfirst
published by Antonio Turra (Buniasspinosa and Thymus tragoriganum), which have been wrongly attributed to
Linnaeus. It is argued that the names Acer orientale L., Acercreticum L., and Cenchrusfrutescens L. should be
proposed for rejection, and that the same should be considered forthe name Staticeechinus L. A summaryofthe
namestypifiedinthispaperisprovided.
INTRODUCTION ment included in synonymy which does not appear in the
protologueofthesamenameinthefirsteditionin 1753. Once
again, the Alpino figure cannot be an original element for
such aname.
woADaPffhlaetipdCepcirrulhneaatotn8ehft4.eAirlsoaTpdrmehieexneao1sott6ab,ih3ico1diwooshftktwoooiaihts1ssha6dev3paile7uuvd.btichldaTooiehprmdso,heeisenidPwfttrrooiiooorntsnmkwVpaoetedthnreseiostecchcsreAetoiilubbioptnneoihsstn1:aAo61n,e2L3i7ig5c,bbeeygpatlraenarhnpnidritsyessie,lnmsaauornoasnsdft tfLoeofxroaAonDtmnmdheiooentnBpih.ilanedaugrnehOtn,ihnitnisims'tomseyarxanoeonPtnfioiyictnniAaadsolti,xfpriienotntcnhohotesew'awsiptanllryiapohtldiieasgbnsnoeottwdhswahennaicitchcachiatnohspLeb(iyweBnLraoniiufiatnhnettnitueheennsear,'pnps1ro61oeSl56tpoy62eicn3dniro)eiemtipoisyrnaainblnoadystsf
and Liber secundus, the former incorporating the great Tournefort's Institutiones reiherbariaeand Corollarium insti-
9smotr.hayi9ejCngoaoiprfrnrniooaoytolltytmuoneysololfoteLoegmtif)uhen.eenhnitoaCsSferfouoteomshrtwaeantainnnLcossailfppuneemdccnAeeiialeseep(sscia..mfnn.aoAnG'bnrsyienuooAftfmilegipAuarilrlnepeostionnafollai.'ry,gseui1rfn9eiia9nt4mcc:iealsuns1cd1ie,ibtndeeAdrtabthi.nyen tqmnpueouantlomAtiyftesnotes.oned,muriimLonLaifrilnttensnhienaenmhaeeepautrursyobse'ga'ssberseetinahattcneieinrpmto(eaetT,pwdaoeitbuortiyrt.honhLneetsifrhoneafrnutrac,toeohumro1sr7rDe0sis0enp,htoaph1nvle7dae0nis3tncy)igo.nsmoATemnlhxeyopetmnisiytnecioeossdfaealhmoreiene-s
pLoilnynnaoemuisalisn,theespescyinalolnyymiyn oHforptrues-stcalritfifnogrtipaoniunst ((Lpirnen-a1e7u5s3,) 3th8e4-i3d8e6n)titayndofBaAlldpaicncoi's&plSaantcsc,arpdroinc(i1p9a0l0l)y. STphreenglaetlter(1d80e7a:l
1738), but do not appear in the protologues of binomials in only with those 84 plants which are mentioned by Alpino as
Stpheeciperse-psltaarnttianrgumpoi(nLtinpnaoeluysn,om1i7a5l3)moarylabteercwitoerdksi,natlhtehosuygnh- oaruitghionrastianrge ciintedC.rete. The determinations given by these
ooardnidygsimntyaolotefhleaeemlleaentmteerfnobtrisnsoiumncichallua.debTdinhwoeimtiAhaillnp.ihnOicosccafosinigcoureneapltclaoyfn,naLoitsnpenbcaeieeausns. faonrEdvtnehoermy8e4necfCfloraretttuarhnaespflobalenletosnwaTmmuarodlneagndhA,elrpCeihnitolo'tsoofnffi&egruPrdereset.sesrTm(ai1x9no9a3tn)io.omnys
For example, a binomial in the second edition of Species Forthose Linnaean binomialsforwhich an Alpinofigureis
plantarum (Linnaeus, 1762, 1763) may have an Alpino ele-
TheNaturalHistoryMuseum, 1995
128 N.J.TURLAND
citedin theprotologue andis, therefore, anoriginalelement, present plant, since P. cretica Willd. is the basionym of
the type specimen or figure is indicated. If the type has Amelanchier ovalis subsp. cretica (Willd.) Maire & Petitm.
previouslybeen designated, then full details are given; ifnot, and there does not appearto be anyextant name in Pyrus, at
thetypeisdesignated here. Incaseswhereachosenlectotype the rank ofspecies, forSorbus ariasubsp. cretica.
figure isstylized orsimplified to the extent that itstaxonomic
position is unclear, an epitype specimen is designated to 3. 'Chamecerasus Idea', p. 5, fig. p. 4.
ser1een9lna9e4blv:leaecn1tt1po,rtLeyAicprnietnss.ea,e9eaa.pp7nip)t.lpyirpFcoeaotstroialoaonnllgduonenfasemtoahetreysepnetryasepmpiarefroieed(diuclfcil.enudsGtt,rhriaeastunetpdde.arptehreet,chatloh.-e, L.:croe'rn.Mtely4s3p.Ai'mleuBsl.acn&rcehtSii.ce:ar,Aomfvoeallliaionsccishruicbeisnrpa.tcorcert&eitciaqcua(aWs(iWilillcdlo.dr).d)iDfMCoar.miir(.ecuTr&.-
Beforedesignatingatypeforapreviouslyuntypified name, Petitm.)
the author has carried out a careful examination of all the Comments: Neither the Alpino element nor the Tournefort
extant original visual elements for the name in question. polynomial in Linnaeus's annotation appears to be men-
Particular care is necessary when considering, for example, tioned in any of Linnaeus's works. The figure obviously
specimensin the Linnaean Herbarium at the Linnean Society depictsAmelanchierovalissubsp. cretica.
ofLondon (LINN). Some ofthese are often wrongly consid-
ered to be original elements for Linnaean names merely 4. 'Adrachni, seu PortulacaTheophrasti', p. 7, fig. p. 6.
because Linnaeus annotated them with the relevant 'nomen
tbreievinalien'h(issppecoisfsiecsseipointhuentt)i,lawfhteernthienpfuabcltictahteiyonmoafythnaottnahmaev.e CinomamnyenotfsL:inTnhaeeuAsl'psinwooreklse.meItntisanpopteaprosssniobtletotboeimdeennttiifyontehde
Such specimens are notcited here. plant figured.
The numbered sequence of capita in the original 1627
imprintofAlpine'sbook(1-78in Liberprimus, 1-58inLiber 5. 'AcerCretica', p. 9, fig. p. 8.
secundus) has been followed in this paper, with all page L.: 'Acercretica. Tournef. cor. 43'.
numbers and figure captions quoted exactly as they are B. & S.: Acercreticum L. (see below).
eptrsinftoedl.loAwincgurarnenytlcyitaecdcenpatmeed nwahimcehisisalnwoaylsonggievreninincburrarcekn-t Comments: Linnaeus includes the Alpino element in the
use. protologue of Acer monspessulanum in Species plantarum
The following abbreviations are used, in orderto minimize (1753: 1056), under the unnamed var. (3, but in the second
excessive repetition: editionhetransfersittoA. creticum (1763: 1497), whichis an
eLx.o:ti-cisL.inTnhaeeuss'ysmbanonlotVatiisonussfedrotmohiisndoiwcantecowphyerofeDLeinplnaanetuiss iplulbelgiisthimeadteinrSeynsatmeimnag noaftuAra.e o1r0itehntaelde. L(.1,759w0h:ic1h310h)e. Tfihrset
begins a separate line in an annotation. Tournefort polynomial in Linnaeus's annotation is not cited
BS..: &= DSe.:te=rmiDneatteiromnisnagtiivoennsbygiSvpernenbgyelBa(l18d0a7c)c.i & Saccardo innameei,theArceerditoiroinentoaflisS,pechieedserpaleanftolairou,m;isacniottehderinTstoeuardn.efTohret
(1900). Ofthe 84 Cretan plants, 14 are listed in an appendix lectotypeofA. monspessulanumisaspecimen in Herb. Linn.
with no determination offered, and are marked 'indet.' here. No. 1225.15 (LINN),designatedassuchbyMurray(1979: 13,
as '1225.1'). Alpino's figure appears to be a greatly stylized
depiction ofthe shrub ortree currentlycalledAcersempervi-
rens L., first published in Mantissa plantarum (I761a: 128)
LIBER PRIMUS and simultaneously in Systema naturae 12th ed. (I161b: 674).
Hisfigure iscorrect in thatthe species has three-lobed leaves
and sometimes pubescent twigs and petioles, but wrong in
1. 'LauroSyluestriCretica', p. 1, fig. facingp. 1. that the leaves should be opposite, not alternate.
L.: 'Thymelaea cretica, oleae folio subtus villoso. Tournef. A
tricitttlr.A. fol. trilobis intcgerrirnis pubcfccntibuj. filill. Jifi,
cor. 41.'
B. & S.: DaphnesericeaVahl
Comments: Neither the Alpino element nor the Tournefort 9. ACER foliistrilobis intrgerrimis pubcfccntibus. Mitt.criou,
polynomial in Linnaeus's annotation appears to be men- titft. 10.
tidieonnteidfyintheanfyiguorfe Lwiintnhaecuerst'asinwtyo,rkasn.dIBtalisdacncoit apnodssiSbalcecart-o AAccteeorrikcorroeirteiinectnaat.l,iAsjl,ypi..hec/x.doetgr^.z.9.fotl.io8.. TDouubrtnemf..a(rokr.. i4.3./>.PioS-.
do'sdetermination seems unlikely. *. 10,/.9
Habitat in Orientc- 1j.
2. 'Cerasus Idea', p. 3, fig. p. 2. The typification of Acer orientale is more problematic,
SB..: &'PySr.u:sScorertbiucas'g(rsaeeecbael(oSwp)a.ch) Kotschy (currently Sorbus stihnecenatmheereevaipdpeentalrytboabseednoonexAtcaenrtfoorliiigsintarlilvoibsiusalinteelgeemrernitmsi,s
ariasubsp. cretica (Lindl.) Holmboe). s1u0bv(i1l7l5o9s)i,s Msialild.,byThMeilglaerrdteonegrrsodwicitnio'ntaheryLe7vtahnetd'..:FArcoemr Nthoi.s
Comments: TheAlpinoelementappearsnottobementioned and the synonyms added by Linnaeus to the illegitimate A.
in any of Linnaeus's works. The plant depicted is either creticum in 1763, it would seem that A. orientale is a species
Sorbus aria subsp. cretica or 5. umbellata (Desf.) Fritsch. with pubescent leaves and petioles. Yaltirik (1967: 519) was
Sprengel may have intended to determine the following unable to trace any original material forA. orientale and felt
Alpino element (No. 3) as 'Pyrus cretica\ instead of the the name could not be applied to the eastern Mediterranean
ALPINO, LINNAEUS AND CRETE
129
species which earlier authors had consistently referred to as 6. 'Acacia secunda', p. 11, fig. p. 10.
eailtwhaeyrsAh.avoirnigengtaltaebroorusA.lecafr-ebtliacduems,,oanndacicnosutneatdoafdtohpattedpltahnet B. & S.: Cytisus creticus B&oiss. & Heldr. (currently Chamae-
name A. sempervirens. This treatment has been followed in cytisuscreticus (Boiss. Heldr.) Rothm.)
laterworks, notably Flora Europaea (Tutin et al., 1968: 239) Comments: The Alpinoelementappearsnottobe mentioned
and the Med-Checklist(Greuter, Burdet & Long, 1984: 42). in any of Linnaeus's works. The plant depicted is a good
likeness of Calicotome villosa (Poir.) Link, but alternatively
n. ACER could be Chamaecytisus creticus or one of the other spiny
Temper- foliisi ovttij intcgcrrimis fcmperviredtibus. leguminousshrubswhich occurin Crete.
vircns. Mill. <tifi. f
Habitat in Oriente.
1j. 7. 'Aspalathussecundus', p. 13, fig. p. 12.
&
The name Acer sempervirens appears also to lack any B. S.: Calicotome villosa (Poir.) Link
extant original elements, and is based on another Miller Comments: TheAlpinoelementappearsnottobe mentioned
name, Acerfollis ovatis integerrimis sempervirentibus Mill., in any of Linnaeus's works. The plant depicted is scarcely
Thegardeners dictionary 7th ed.: AcerNo. 11 (1759), said by distinguishable from that on page 10 and likewise could be
its author to have originated as seeds from the Levant. The either Calicotome or one of the other spiny leguminous
plant which is currently called A. sempervirens is an eastern shrubs in Crete.
Mediterranean species similar and closely related to A.
monspessulanum, with leaves sometimes ovate and more or 8. 'Echinopoda', p. 15, fig. p. 14.
less evergreen if the plants are heavily grazed, but tri-lobed
and deciduous where out ofreach ofgrazing animals. In the L.: 'Genista Spartium Spinosum alterum aphyllon, tribus
absence of any original material, it is necessary to choose a aculeissemperjunctis, floribus luteis. C.B. 394T.C. 44.'
neotype for the name. The following specimen is here desig- S.: Genista lusitanica L., nom. confus. (currently Stauracan-
nated as such, since it exhibits not only ovate, entire leaves, thusgenistoides (Brot.) Samp.) orSpartium horridum Vahl
ttrhiu-sloabgerdeelienavgewsiotfhuLnignrnaazeeuds'pslacnotnsc:eCprtetoef,t'heAcsepreccireest,icbuumtLt.h'e, B.(&curSr.e:nGtelyniEscthaiancoasnptahrotculmadhaoDrrCi.dum (Vahl) Rothm.)
Omalos, 10June 1938, Ogilvie-Grant25 (K) (Fig. 1). Comments: Neither the Alpino element nor the Tournefort
The typification ofAcerorientale still remains unresolved. polynomial in Linnaeus's annotation appears to be men-
Murray (19700: 145, b: 36; 1977: 7; 1979: 27) accepts the tioned in any of Linnaeus's works. The figure is greatly
name and designates an element in Herb. Tournefort (P) as stylized, but seems to depict a spiny leguminous shrub,
the type, but fails to indicate which specimen he hasin mind. possibly Genista acanthoclada. Neither Echinospartum horri-
Several sheets ofAcer exist in that herbarium in addition to dum nor Stauracanthus genistoides are known to occur in
the single element which appears to agree with A. sempervi- Crete.
rens as currently understood (sheet No. 6083, IDC micro-
fiche!). If Murray had explicitly cited No. 6083, his 9. 'Colutea Scorpioideodorata', p. 17, fig. p. 16.
statementscould have been accepted as effective designation
ofa neotype (cf. Greuteret al., 1994: 11, Art. 9.8). (It could S.:&Coronilla argentea L. (currently C. valentina L.)
not be a lectotype since not only is there no reference to B. S.: Coronillaargentea L.
Tournefort in the protologue, but the specimens in Tourne-
fort's herbarium are not known to have been studied by 4-. CORONILLA fruticofa, foliolisundents:evtimoma-rfirc.
Linnaeus and are not, therefore, original elements for Lin- jorc.
naean names.) Nevertheless, the fact remains that there is Colurcafcorpioides odorata. Alp. txot. 17.
insufficient evidence to allow a reasonably confident correla- Habitat in Crera. t>
tion between A. orientale and a currently recognized taxon, Comments: Linnaeus includes the Alpino element in the
and the name should be considered a 'nomen ambiguum\ A.
protologue of Coronilla argentea in Speciesplantarum (1753:
orientalecouldhave been based on anexample ofA. semper- 743). The only extant original element for this name appears
virens with pubescent twigs and petioles: indeed Linnaeus's tobe the Alpinofigurewhich, althoughsomewhatstylized, is
(1763)inclusionoftheAlpinoelementinthesynonymyofthe a good likeness of C. valentina, in the synonymy ofwhich C.
ialllseogiptoismsaitbeleA,.tchroetuigchumunlleinkdeslyc,retdheatnctehteonthaimsehywpaotshebsaisse.dItoins adregseingtneaateids acsurtrheentlleyctiontcylpuedeodf.CT.haergfeingtuerae(iFsi,gt.h2e)r.efore, here
one ofthe eastern Mediterranean, pubescent-leaved subspe-
cnieeostyopiffiAe.domnonassppeescsiumleannbueml.ongIfinAg.tooAr.iesnetmalpeervwierreens,tothbeen 10. M.inum Arboreum', p. 19, fig. p. 18.
the formerwould be the correct name forthespecies and the S.: Linum arboreum L.
nomenclatural stability of nearly thirty years would be dis- B. & S.: Linumarboreum L.
A
rupted. neotype belonging to A. monspessulanum subsp.
assyriacum (Pojark.) Rech. f. or subsp. oksalianum Yalt. iz. LINUM foliis cuneifoftnibus, caulibus arborefcenti-
could be chosen without causing any disruption, but there Linum arboreum. Alf. exot. 19. /, 13,
seems insufficient justification forconsidering either ofthese Habitat in Greta. t>
names to be taxonomically synonymous with A. orientale. It
therefore seemsthat there exist sufficientgroundsto propose Comments: Linnaeus includes the Alpino element in the
that the names A. orientale and A. creticum be rejected. A protologue of Linum arboreum in Species plantarum (1753:
formal proposal has been submitted to Taxon. 279-280). The only extant original element for this name
TURLAND
130 N.J.
'3
"S
3 I
ALPINO, LINNAEUS AND CRETE
131
appearstobetheAlpinofigure, whichisstylized, butbecause 14. 'Spartium Spinosumalterum', p. 29, fig. p. 28.
oafnytithsinCgreottahnerprtohvanenaL.ncearbisoruenulmi.kelTyhetroefboere,a tdheepicfitgiuorneoifs Comments: TheAlpinoelementappearsnottobementioned
here designated as the lectotype (Fig. 3) and in view of its in any ofLinnaeus'sworks.
lack of useful diagnostic features, the following specimen as
the epitype: Iter Aegaeum VI [Crete], Linum arboreum L., 15. 'Cyanus Arborescens Longifolia', p. 31, fig. p. 30.
22 April 1942, Rechinger 12202 (BM) (Fig. 4). L.: 'Jaceafrutescens, plantaginisfolio, fl. albo. T. cor. 32'.
&
B. S.: Staehelinafruticosa (L.) L.
11. 'Lycium Creticum', p. 21, fig. p. 20. Comments:TheAlpinoelementappearsnottobementioned
L.: 'Berberis cretica, buxi folio. Tournef. cor. 45.' [error for inanyofLinnaeus'sworks. However, theTournefortpolyno-
'42'] / 'Rhamnus creticus, buxi folio minori. T. cor. 41 ?' / mial in Linnaeus's annotation is included in the synonymy of
'Berberis alpina cretica. CB 454'. Centaurea fruticosa L. in Species plantarum 2nd ed. (1763:
B. & S.: Berberiscretica L. 1286), but not in the protologue of that name in Systerna
naturae 10thed. (1759a: 1229). Thespecieswastransferredto
i.BBerEbeRrBisERexIotSicap,edbuunxciulfiolsiou.n,ifTloourrrsn.ef.. cor. TthheegpelnaunstSdteapeihcetleidnabyinASlypsitneorniasnaamtoudreaera1t2etlhyegd.oo(d17l6i7k6e:ne5s3s8)o.f
Berberis alpina cretica. Daub.fin. 45-4. 5.fruticosa, exceptthat the leaves are too narrow.
Lycium crcticum. 'Alp. cxot. zi. t. zo.
HLaybciituatm icn CGarnedtiaa..-t>Pon. ital. 137. 16. 3'2C.yanus Arborescens altera, Styracisfolio', p. 33, fig. p.
Comments: Linnaeus includes the Alpino element in the L.: 'Staehelina'.
protologue of Berberis cretica in Species plantarum (1753: S.: Staehelina arborescens L., nom.&illegit. superfl. (currently
331), together with the first Tournefort and Bauhin polyno- S&taehelinapetiolata (L.) Hilliard Burtt).
mials in his annotation. The onlyextant original elementsfor B. S.: Staehelina arborescens L.
B. cretica appear to be Alpine's plant and the figure cap- Comments: Linnaeus includes the Alpino element in the
tioned 'Licio I. di Candia ouero Berberi alpina del Belli' in protologue of Staehelina arborescens in Mantissa plantarum
Pona, Monte Baldo descritto: 137 (1617)! Both illustrations (1767'a: 111). Thisisanillegitimatesuperfluousnamebecause
obviously depict a species of Berberis in fruit and, since the a Schreber element cited in the synonymy by Linnaeus is in
sppreocvieensakncneowisnCrteotoe,cctuhristmhuerset.bTehBe.Aclreptiincao,fwihgiurceh,isbetihnegontlhye Sf.actarabnoreeasrcleiners,Lv.a,lindalmyepluyblSitsaheheedlibnianoamribaolrewaitShchprreibo.r,itIycoovneers
moredetailed, isheredesignatedasthe lectotype (Fig. 5) and et descriptiones plantarum minus cognitarum: 1 (1766). The
since there are insufficient diagnostic characters shown to basionym of the currently accepted name is Gnaphalium
distinguish it from other species of Berberis, the following petiolatum L., first published by Linnaeus in Species plan-
specimen is designated as the epitype: Iter Aegaeum VI tarum (1753: 854). This was transferred to the genus Staehe-
[Crete], Berberis cretica L., 7 July 1942, Rechinger 14293 linabyHilliard & Burtt (1973: 384), as ataxonomicsynonym
(BM) (Fig. 6), isoepitype at K. ofboth 5. arborescens and 5. arborea, over which its epithet
has priority at the rank of species. The lectotype of G.
12. 'Spartium Creticum', p. 24, fig. p. 23. petiolatum is a specimen in Herb. Clifford: 402, Gnaphalium
B.c&ytiSs.u:sCcyrtetiiscuussc(rBeotiiscsu.s B&oiHsesl.d&r.)HeRlodtrh.m(.currently Chamae- Nciot..).1T6he(BpMl)a,ntddeespiigcntaetdedbyasAlspuicnhobisyoHbivliloiuasrldy&S.Bpuetritotla(tlao.c.
Comments: TheAlpinoelementappearsnottobementioned 17. 'Scabiosaarborea', p. 35, fig. p. 34.
in anyofLinnaeus'sworks. Baldacci and Saccardo'sdetermi-
nation may well be correct, but the plant depicted could be L.: 'Scabiosa cretica frutescens, auriculae ursi folio. T. cor.
one ofthe other leguminous shrubswhich occurin Crete. 34.'
S.: Scabiosa limonifolia Vahl (currently Pseudoscabiosa
13. 'SpartiumSpinosum', p. 27, fig. p. 26. B.l&imoSn.i:fSolciaabi(oVsaahlc)retDiecvaesL.a)(.currently Lomelosia cretica (L.)
&
L.: 'Barba jovis cretica, linariae folio, fl. luteo parvo. T.C. Greuter Burdet).
44.'
S.: Anthyllis hermanniae L. Comments: Linnaeus includes the Alpino element in the
B. & S.: Anthyllis hermanniae L. stiysnfeorneyimnyteogferSrciambiisoisnaHcoorrotlulsulcilsifqfuoirntqiuaenfuisdi(s1,73f8o:li3is1-l3a2n)c,eobluat-
Comments: The Alpino element and the Tournefort polyno- does not appear to cite it explicitly in any ofhis otherworks,
mial in Linnaeus's annotation are included in the synonymy although he includes the Hortus cliffortianus name in the
ofAnthyllis hermanniae in Speciesplantarum 2nd ed. (1763: protologue of Scabiosa cretica in Species plantarum (1753:
1014), but are absent from the protologue in the first edition 100). In the same protologue, the Tournefort polynomial in
(1753: 720). Linnaeusalso includestheTournefortnamewith Linnaeus's annotation isincluded underthe unnamed var. (3.
some doubt, indicated by a question mark, in the protologue The plant depicted by Alpino is obviously Lomelosia
of Cytisus graecus L. (currently Anthyllis hermanniae) in minoana (P.H. Davis) Greuter & Burdet, endemic to Crete
Speciesplantarum (1753: 740), aswellasinthesecondedition and aclose relative ofL. creticawhich is, in the current strict
(1763: 1043). The plant depicted by Alpino is obviously A. sense, endemic to the western Mediterranean region. The
hermanniae. oblanceolate-spathulate leaves rule out the only similar spe-
N.J.TURLAND
132
ffl
>
^
CJ f
O
fe; I
C
oo
ALPINO, LINNAEUS AND CRETE 133
1
MD
S
HCJ
f
J
<3
ft<
*3
O
ft<
ft
134 N.J.TURLAND
cies in Crete, L. albocincta (Greuter) Greuter & Burdet, fact belongs to D. juniperinus. Indeed, Linnaeus actually
which has broader, much more rounded leaf-blades. Pseudo- excluded this synonym from D. arboreus in Mantissa plan-
scabiosalimonifolia isendemic to Sicily. tarum altera (1771: 385). The only extant original elements
forD. arboreus appearto be a specimen in Herb. BurserXI:
18. 'LeucoiumSpinosum', p. 37, fig. p. 36. post 83, b (UPS-microfiche!) and the figure illustrating
&
Betonica coronaria arborea cretica in Bauhin, Cherler
L.: 'Verbascum creticum spinosum frutescens. Tourn. cor. 8'
B./&'LSe.u:cVoejrubmacsrceut.mssppiinonso.suimncLa.n. luteum. C.B. 201.' wCGrhheiaubctrheeryt,h,eoHpfi.oslctliotor.w:iia1n9gp2l)sa:pneBtceainrimunemcnausinsaivasep.rnps.aa,rliecsnultt3l:iyva3at2e8tdyap(t1o6tM5yo1p)ne!t,b(ceof-.f
liard by J. Bauhin (BAS). The specimen in the Burser
124.VERBASCUM (fpiw/um) caule frutlcofo fplnofo. Herbarium is sterile and of poor quality, and cannot be
Verbafcum creticum fpinofurn frutefcens. Lob. iUufl.t/j. identified with any certainty, or be said to agree with the
Lcucojumcreticumfpinofum incanumluteumBaub.pinzoi* current usage of D. arboreus. Therefore, the Bauhin figure,
Leucojum fpinofum, Afp.exot.j6. which is a good likeness of D. juniperinus subsp. bauhi-
Glafttvlda prima e candia. Potubald.u^ norum, is here designated as the lectotype of D. arboreus
Habttatin Creta ft. (Fig. 9).
Comments: Linnaeus includes the Alpino element in the 20. 'CasiaLatinorum', p. 41, fig. p. 40.
protologue of Verbascumspinosum in CenturiaII(1756: 10),
where the Bauhin and Tournefort polynomials in his annota- Comments: Linnaeus includes the Alpino element in the
tion also appear, with the latter incorrectly ascribed to protologue of Osyris alba L. in Species plantarum (1753:
L'Obel. In Species plantarum 2nd ed. (1762: 254), the 1022). The lectotype is aspecimen in Herb. Linn. No. 1116.1
Tournefort name is correctly ascribed, and L'Obel's name, (LINN), designated assuchbyA.G. Miller(1993). Theplant
Verbascum spinosum creticum, is cited separately. The only depicted by Alpino is greatly stylized and quite unrecogniz-
extant original elements for V. spinosum appear to be Alpi- able as O. alba.
no's plant and the figure captioned 'Galastivida prima di
Candia' in Pona, Monte Baldo descritto: 114 (1617)! Both 21. 'Chamedaphnoides Cretica, idest Laureola Cretica humi-
figures obviously depict V. spinosum. Alpino's plant is here lls', p. 44, fig. p. 43.
designated as the lectotype (Fig. 7) because it is more
detailed and less stylized. In spite ofthis, itis notan accurate L.: 'Thymelaea cretica, oleae folio utrinque glabro. T. cor.
representation of the species and it seems appropriate to 41.'
designate the following specimen as the epitype: Iter Creti- S.:&Daphneoleoides Schreb.
cum Alterum, Verbascum spinosum L., 11 July 1899, Bal- B. S.: Daphneoleoides Schreb.
i241 (BM) (Fig. 8). Comments: Neither the Alpino element nor the Tournefort
polynomial in Linnaeus's annotation appears to be men-
19. 'CaryophylusSyluestrisarboreus', p. 39, fig. p. 38. tioned in any of Linnaeus's works. The figure appears to
S.: Dianthusjuniperinus Sm. depict a Daphne species, but it is impossible to be sure
B. & S.: Dianthus arboreus L. (currently D. juniperinus whether it is intended to represent D. oleoides&or another
subsp. bauhinorum (Greuter) Turland). Cretan species, forexample D. gnidioidesJaub. Spach.
DIANTHUS 22. Toterium', p. 47, fig. p. 46.
J3-Cnryophyllus creticcauuslearfbrourteiucso,foj,unfippleiirs!ffuobliuol.ads. B. & S.: Astragalus creticus Lam. (currently Astracantha
fur. 13.
Caryophyllns arborefccns creticus. Baub. fin. zo8. cretica (Lam.) Podlech).
HBcarfborirot.adirtc.aic1no0r4C.orneatrai.a arboreactetitt.'Baub.jbift. 3-/:318. iCnoamnmyenotfsL:inTnhaeeuAsl'spiwnoorkesl.emTehnetfaipgpueraerissnsootmteowhbeatmestnytliiozended-
particularly the two small flowers, which suggest Caryophyl-
Comments: Linnaeus adds the Alpino element to the syn- laceae-but obviously depictsAstracanthacretica.
onymy of Dianthus arboreus in Mantissa plantarum altera
(n1a7m71e:i3n85S)p,ecnioetshpalvainntgarmuemnt(i1o7n5e3:di4t1i3n).thGerperuotteorlo(g1u96e5o:f1t9h2a)t 23. 'Poteriumalterumdensiusramificatum', p. 51, fig. p. 50.
referred the Alpino element to his D. aciphyllus var. bauhi- L.: Tragacantha cretica incana, flore parvo lineis purpureis
norum Greuter. The figure obviously depicts one ofthe two striato. T.C. 29.'
shrubby Dianthus specieswhich occurin Crete (D.fruticosus B. & S.: Astragalus creticus Lam. (currently Astracantha
L. and D. juniperinus), and is indeed a good likeness of D. cretica (Lam.) Podlech).
juniperinus subsp. bauhinorum. The name D. arboreus has
beenmisappliedtobothD.fruticosusand D.juniperinus, and Comments: Neither the Alpino element nor the Tournefort
its typification here seems worthwhile, in order to prevent polynomial in Linnaeus's annotation appears to be men-
any further misunderstanding. Greuter (op. cit.) treated it as tioned in any of Linnaeus's works. Again, the figure obvi-
a 'nomen ambiguum' and included it in the synonymy of his ouslydepictsAstracanthacretica, andisabetterlikenessthan
D. aciphyllus var. bauhinorum, but only in the greater part, that on page 46.
since the polynomial Caryophyllus creticus arboreus, juniperi
folio (Tournefort, 1703: 23), included in the protologue, in 24. 'Tragacantha', p. 53, fig. p. 52.
ALPINO, LINNAEUS AND CRETE 135
c
/y
f
136 N.J. TURLAND
Comments: The Alpinoelementappearsnottobe mentioned serious nomenclatural disruption would result if the Alpino
in any ofLinnaeus'sworks. figure were designated as the lectotype, since the epithet of
the more widespread species A. ulicinum (based on Statice
25. 'Tragacanthaaltera'. p. 55, fig. p. 54. ulicina Willd. ex Schult. (1820)) would instead be displaced.
Therefore, 5. echinus is not typified here and the option of
L.: Tragacantha cretica, foliis minimis incanis, fl. majore proposingthe name forrejection will beconsidered.
albo. T. cor. 29.'
S.: Astragalus echioides Willd. (currently A. angustifolius 27. 'Tragacanthaquarta,velSpartiumSpinosumalterum',p.
B.L&amS..): AstragalusangustifoliusLam. 59 ['56'], fig. p. 58 ['20'].
Comments: TheAlpinoelementappearsnottobe mentioned
Comments: Neither the Alpino element nor the Tournefort in any ofLinnaeus'sworks.
polynomial in Linnaeus's annotation appears to be men-
AtsitornaegdaliunsaannygusotfifLoilniunsa,eursa'tshewrortkhsa.n Tthhee opnllayntotdheeprictspeidnyi,s 28. 'Scamonea Macroriza', p. 61, fig. p. 60.
pinnate-leavedleguminousdwarfshrubinCrete,Astracantha B. &S.: indet.
cretica(Lam.)Podlech, onaccountofitsstemslackingathick L.: 'Periploca orientalis, foliis longioribus et acutioribus.
layerofwool. Thiswoolisclearlyvisibleinthetwopreceding Tournef. cor. 2'.
figures. Comments: Neither the Alpino element nor the Tournefort
polynomial in Linnaeus's annotation appears to be men-
26. 'Echinus, idestTragacanthaaltera', p. 57, fig. p. 56. tioned in any ofLinnaeus'sworks. The stylized nature ofthe
L.: 'Limoniumcreticumjuniperifolio. T. cor. 25'. figure renders accurate identification impossible, although
S.: Staticeechinus L. (see below). the rootstock, leaf-shape and flower suggest Calystegia
B. &S.: indet. sepium (L.) R. Br. However, theConvolvulaceaehaveleaves
arranged alternately, whereas in Alpino's figure they are in
Eetow, g. S.TcrAonTatIisC.Ecaulc nudo panicujato,foliis fubulatis mu loepapvoesdi,teCpaaliyrsst.egTiha-e\ifkiegurCeynmaanycihnusmteaadcudetpuimctLt.he(oApspcolseiptiea--
Limonium foliis.caulinis fubulatis pungentibus. Roy. daceae), although the flower is completely wrong and the
litgdb. 191. stemsaretooshortandarenotshowntotwine. InLinnaeus's
LLiicmmuoolnneiiuuummmrciecgrfiipcdniitcdaoilfmcuumfm,hratfbcoclfuicinestnesa.c,uTlceoaaurtryixosep.fhTy.>lulc*irb.f.olt2i5e-on.ti.n ai.- opawgnesco6p0yaonfdA6l2pianroe'tsrabnosopkos(etdh,es1o6t5h6erpeprreisnetn)t,ftihgeurfeigauprpeesaorns
j>. 18. /. 10. on page 62 under the caption 'Tythymalus Arboreus',
|3-Limoiiiurn graxrum,juniperi folio.-7curncf. cor. if. togetherwith Linnaeus's annotation.
HEcMhtianutsifn. TGrraxgcaicaxnt&haMaletedria.zAdlefpt.rteixto.t. -57. t. j-6.
29. 'TythymalusArboreus', p. 63, fig. p. 62 ['46'].
Comments: The Alpino element and the Tournefort polyno- B. & S.: Euphorbia dendroidesL.
mial in Linnaeus's annotation are included in the protologue
ofStaticeechinusin Speciesplantarum (1753: 276), underthe Comments: TheAlpinoelementappearsnottobementioned
unnamed var. (3 (with Tournefort's name incorrectly cited as in any of Linnaeus's works. The figure obviously depicts a
'Limonium graecum ...'). The only extant original elements speciesofEuphorbia, butifitisintendedtobe E. dendroides
for 5. echinus appear to be Alpino's plant and the figure it isgreatly stylized.
illustrating Limonium cespitosum, foliis aculeatis in Bux-
baum, Plantarum minus cognitarum centuria II: 18, t. 10 30. 'TytymalusCyparissius', p. 65, fig. p. 64.
(1728)! There is no specimen in the van Royen Herbarium,
Leiden (L), and a specimen in Herb. Linn. No. 395.13 L.: 'Euphorbiaaleppica.'
(LINN), which bears the annotation 'Statice Echinus' in S.: Euphorbia aleppica L.
Linnaeus's hand, lacks a species number from Speciesplan-
tarum, which almost certainly means that it was not received dtfpiea. 38. EUPHORBIA umbellaqitinqucfida: dichotorna, in-
by Linnaeus until after 1753 and is not, therefore, relevant voluccllis oyutb-lanccolatis mucronatis, foliisinfcrio-
original materialforS. echinus. ribus fctaccis. Diff. eupb. 37.
The plant depicted by Alpino is somewhat stylized but Tithymalus foliis infcrioribus capillaccls; fnpcrioribus
cannot be interpreted as representing any species in Crete Tirtahyyrmtaolufsimciylpiabruisf.fiAufso.riAfl.p.bifefx.ot3.. p6.f.3t3.8.64.
other than Acantholimon ulicinum (Willd. ex Schult.) Boiss. Habitat in Greta, Aldppo. Tf
Linchevskii (1967: 253) includes the name Statice echinus in
the synonymy of the eastern Transcaucasian Acantholimon Comments: Linnaeus includes the Alpino element in the
tenuiflorum Boiss., but only in the part consisting of the protologueofEuphorbiaaleppicainSpeciesplantarum (1753:
Buxbaum element. Buxbaum gives the provenance of his 458). The only extant original elements for E. aleppica
plantas 'desertisMediae intraHansem & Schamachiam', i.e. appeartobetheAlpinofigure,whichisagoodlikenessofthe
between Kirovabad and Shemakha in present-day Azerbay- species, and a specimen in Herb. Linn. No. 630.46 (LINN!),
dzhan in eastern Transcaucasia. If Buxbaum's figure were which alsoclearly agreeswith the current usage ofthe name.
designated as the lectotype of 5. echinus, on the basis of The specimen exhibits more ofthe diagnostic characters and
Linchevskii's taxonomic opinion, the correct name for A. is, therefore, here designated as the lectotype (Fig. 10).
tenuiflorum would become A. echinus (L.) Boiss., since
Linnaeus'sspecificepithetpredatestenuiflorum (1846). More 31. 'Phylitis ramosa', p. 67, fig. p. 66.