Dillenius was a plain blunt man, and used great freedom of speech in writing to Linnaeus. Thus, in one of his letters, he says,--"I feel as much displeased with your Critica Botanica as I am pleased with your Lapland Flora, especially as you have, without my deserving such a compliment or knowing of your intention, dedicated the book to me. You must have known my dislike to all ceremonies and compliments. I hope that you have burthened but few copies with this dedication,--perhaps only the copy which you have sent me. If there be more, I beg of you to strip them of this vain parade, or I shall take it much amiss. At least I cannot offer you my thanks for what you have done, though I gratefully acknowledge the favour of the copies you have sent me of the Critica as well as the Flora. We all know the nomenclature of botany to be an Augean stable, which C. Hoffmann, and even Gesner, were not able to cleanse. The task requires much reading, and extensive as well as various erudition; nor is it to be given up to hasty or careless hands. You rush upon it, and overturn every thing. I do not object to Greek words, especially in compound names; but I think the names of the ancients ought not rashly and promiscuously to be transferred to our new genera, or those of the New World. The day may possibly come when the plants of Theophrastus and Dioscorides may be ascertained; and, till this happens, we had better leave their names as we find them. That desirable end might even now be attained, if any one would visit the countries of these old botanists, and make a sufficient stay there; for the inhabitants of those regions are very retentive of names and customs, and know plants at this moment by their ancient appellations, very little altered, as any person who reads Belonius may perceive. I remember your being told, by the late Mr G. Gherard, that the modern Greeks give the name of amanita ([Greek: amanita]) to the eatable field-mushroom; and yet, in Critica Botanica, p. 50, you suppose that word to be French. Who will ever believe the _Thya_ of Theophrastus to be our arbor vitae? Why do you give the name of cactus to the tuna? Do you believe the tuna, or melocactus (pardon the word), and the arbor vitae, were known to Theophrastus? An attentive reader of the description he gives of his sida, will probably agree with me that it belongs to our nymphaea, and indeed to the white-flowered kind. You, without any reason, give that name to the malvinda; and so in various other instances concerning ancient names; in which I do not, like Burmann, blame you for introducing new names, but for the bad application of old ones. If there were, in these cases, any resemblance between your plants and those of the ancients, you might be excused; but there is not. Why do you, p. 68, derive the word medica from the virtues of the plant, when Pliny, book xviii. chap. 16, declares it to have been brought from Media, &c.?