DOUBTFUL, EXTINCT AND UNCOMMON FLORA OF SUFFOLK By
F.
W.
SIMPSON
IN the past we have often too readily accepted as authentic a number of records of plants supposed to have been found in Suffolk by various trusted authorities. The " Flora of Suffolk, 1889, by the Rev. W. M. Hind gives details of a number of plants which probably never occurred in the County. Others have become extinct before we have been able to verify the accuracy of records. Doubtful finds have also appeared from time to time in various publications, including our own Transactions. Hind's Herbarium is preserved at the Ipswich Museum and this has been examined from time to time by a number of botanists who have found that several of his specimens had been incorrectly identified. Unfortunately his mistakes were passed on to the Flora and appear as his records for some uncommon plants, then thought new to Suffolk. If his Herbarium had not been available we might have been inclined to accept the majority of new records. We all like to claim fresh discoveries and feel some satisfaction when finding a rarity for the first time. It is however most important that " voucher" specimens, especially of the more critical species should be collected and submitted for examination before records are published. To-day no one botanist claims to have sufficient knowledge of all the critical groups in the British Flora to be able to identify all finds, and doubtful specimens are submitted to specialists. Gone are those Victorian days when there were a number of excellent field botanists possessing a very wide knowledge of almost every flowering plant and fern then described. Specimens could be named with some ease from the comparatively simple floras of the day. There arose, however, a number of botanists who were not satisfied with the simple pattern of these early floras. Almost every species had to be attacked and sub-divided into more species with innumerable forms or varieties. There existed almost a keen rivalry to describe something new. Fortunately a great number of these " splits " have since been proved identical or worthless, and mere habitat variations. The " Flora of the British Isles," 1952, (Clapham, Tutin and Warburg) goes a long way to rectify some of the errors of earlier floras. However, this Flora must not be regarded as in any way final. We who learnt our Latin names and arrangement of the British Flora from earlier works, such as " Bentham and Hooker " are inclined to deplore the more recent changes— although we must accept a great deal of the revision of nomenclature as necessary.