‘72 THE ORCHID REVIEW. fJowx, roi 
STANHOPEA GRANDIFLORA AND S. BUCEPHALUS. 
AN interesting Stanhopea has just flowered in the collection of Sir Frank 
Crisp, Friar Park, Henley, which is apparently identical with Stanhopea 
grandiflora, Rchb. f. (not S. grandiflora, Lindl., which is a form of the 
earlier S. eburnea, Lindl.). It has a very confused history. In 1805 a 
plant, which was said to grow on the stem of old trees in shady woods near 
Cuenca, in Ecuador, was described and figured by Humboldt & Bonpland 
(Pl. Afquinoct., i. p. 94, t- 27) under the name of Epidendrum grandiflorum, 
and ten years later it was transferred to Anguloa, as A. grandiflora, Kunth 
(H. B. et K. Nov. Gen, et Sp., i.p. 343). It is a species of Stanhopea, but 
the inflorescence is shown as erect, and proceeding from’ the apex of the 
pseudobulb, both characters obviously erroneous—probably the artist had 
to draw an unfamiliar plant from fragmentary dried specimens. In 1832, 
Lindley referred the plant to Stanhopea insignis, Frost (Gen. & Sp. Orch. Pl., 
p- 157), but eleven years later transferred it to S. Bucephalus, Lindl. (Bot. 
Reg., 1843, sub. t. 44). Reichenbach, in 1856, called it Stanhopea grandi- 
flora (Walp. Ann., vi. p. 587), enumerating S. Bucephalus, Lindl., as a 
synonym, and giving a variety Jenischiana, based upon S. Jenischiana, 
Kramer (Rchb. f. in Bot. Zeit., 1852, p. 934), a Panama plant. This, how- 
ever, was a mixture, for a sketch of S. Bucephalus, Lindl., is preserved in 
Lindley’s Herbarium, and is labelled ‘ Mexico, Pavon, in hb. Lambert,” 
and the Lambert H-rbarium was afterwards purchased by the British 
Museum, where the original specimen still exists, labelled by Pavon him- 
self, ‘‘ Maxillaria de Mexico.” It is very distinct from the Ecuador plant. 
Lindley afterwards described and figured as S. Bucephalus (Bot. Reg., 1843, 
sub. t. 54; 1844. t. 24), a plant that had flowered with the Horticultural 
Society, stating that it was introduced by Hartweg, who found it near 
Quito. This, again, is different from Humboldt’s plant, though it agrees 
with that of Pavon, which casts a doubt upon the Quito habitat assigned to 
it by Lindley. Curiously enough, the Mexican habitat has been omitted 
from all subsequent records. The late Mr. F. C. Lehmann collected at the 
original locality, Cuenca, a Stanhopea, which he correctly, identified as S. 
grandiflora, Rchb. f., and also made a painting ofa single flower. Lindley’s 
Herbarium also contains a coloured drawing, with analysis, of what is 
clearly the same thing, though the source is not indicated, and we can only 
presume that it came from some garden.. The unknown sender suggested 
it to be a new species, bnt Lindley briefly wrote on it “ oculata,’’ which is 
quite erroneous. Now that the plant has again appeared it seems desirable 
to clear up the confusion. In S. Bucephalus the hypochil of the lip is 
elongated and much narrowed towards the base, as in the well known S. 
oculata, Lindl., while in S. grandiflora this organ is pandurate-oblong, and 
