33 o THE ORCHID REVIEW. 



CATTLEYA PORPHYROGLOSSA. 



This is a very rare species of Cattleya, whose history has been much 

 confused. It was originally described in 1856 (Lind. and Rchb. f. in 

 Allg. Gartenz. xxiv, p. 98) as a native of Santa Catherina, Brazil, sent by 

 Director Linden, of Brussels. It was said to be allied to C. granulosa, but 

 the flowers only half as large; the sepals and petals yellowish brown, and 

 the lip purple, with the unguis of the front lobe very narrow. A year 

 later a plant flowered with Consul Schiller, at Hamburg (Allg. Gartenz. 

 xxv, p. 336.) The plant remained rare for some time, but in 1866 

 Reichenbach remarked that there were some specimens of the original type 

 scattered about on the Continent. 



In 1862 this author described the plant asEpidendrum porphyroglossum 

 (Xen. Orch. ii, p. 33), but without adding anything to its history, though he 

 cited as a synonym Cattleya amethystoglossa, Lind., a plant then 

 undescribed, but which afterwards proved to be very different. These two 

 plants now became hopelessly confused, for in 1866 Reichenbach described 

 what was really a new variety of the former as C. amethystoglossa var. 

 sulphurea (Gard. Chron., 1866, p. 315). This had been introduced by Mr. 

 Stuart Low, and its flowers were said to be nearly or quite of as pure a 

 lemon colour as those of Cattleya citrina, with the lip cream-coloured. 

 Reichenbach then remarked : — " In England the species has not been well 

 understood, Mr. R. Warner having unfortunately represented the splendid 

 white and amethyst variety of C. guttata, which we have called Prinzii, in 

 lieu of the true plant." A woodcut typical of C. amethystoglossa was given 

 as an illustration of the new variety. This note brought a reply from Mr. 

 Warner (p. 365) to the effect that the plant was obtained from M. Linden 

 many years before under the name attached to it, and that he was not 

 responsible for any error that there might be in the name. 



In 1873 Reichenbach figured the plant as Epidendrum porphyroglossum 

 {Xen. Orch., ii, p. 172, t. 171, fig. 1, t. 172, fig. 2), but still wrongly 

 included Cattleya amethystoglossa, Lind., as a synonym, besides explaining 

 that his Epidendrum amethystoglossum (Walp. Ann., vi, p. 319) was a slip 

 for E. porphyroglossum. The latter was based upon Cattleya amethysto- 

 glossa, Lind. and Rchb. f., and no description is given, but a flower which 

 he sent to Lindley labelled C. amethystoglossa (now preserved in the 

 latter's Herbarium) belongs to C. porphyroglossa, and so far bears out 

 Reichenbach's remark. 



The plant was afterwards imported by Messrs. Hugh Low & Co. 

 Mr. Day has a painting (Day Coll., xii, t. 57), dated July 6th, 1867, with 

 the note:— "From Low & Co. Imported from Brazil, in 1864, with 

 Cattleya Harrisoniae, which as regards the habit of the plant it much 



