32 



JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. 



also simplicity of nomenclature, I think we cannot do better 

 than follow Linnaeus. Dr. Gray, however, insists on its being 

 a garden creation derived from decapetalus. In the Kew 

 Herbarium, among the H. decapetalus forms, there is only one 

 large-flowered specimen, which I should say was H. multiflorus. 

 I do not see why, in this particular case at any rate, we should 

 not use the name in the sense Linnaeus intended. Between 

 H. multiflorus and H. decapetalus there is a much greater 

 distinction than between, for instance, H. giganteus and H. 

 Maximiliani, H. stvumosus and H. irachellifolius, H. rig id us 

 and H. Icetiflorus, or H. decapetalus and the garden forms of 

 H. divaricatus. Going a little further, I should say that 

 H. multiflorus and H. decapetalus are as distinct as any other 

 two plants in the genus, taking those in cultivation only as our 

 standard. (See figs. 9 and 10.) 



H. tuberosus, the Jerusalem Artichoke, gives a striking 

 instance of how names are corrupted. The name Jerusalem, 

 which has puzzled many in its connection with this plant, is 

 simply a corruption of the Italian girasolc, which literally means 

 Sunflower.* II. tuberosus was introduced to this country about 

 1616, and was first found by Columnae in the garden of Cardinal 

 Farnese at Rome, and named by him Aster peruanis. This 

 plant, which has changed somewhat by cultivation, has evolved 

 from what Dr. Gray in his early Floras called H. doronicoides, 

 and which I now believe to be the H. doronicoides of many 

 s gardens. The true H. doronicoides was described by Dr. Gray 

 in his early editions as H. cinereus var. Sullivantii, and it was 

 only recently that a comparison with Lamarck's type of H. 

 doronicoides showed the plants to be identical. As I have stated 

 above, there is a suspicion that our H. doronicoides may be the 

 wild H. tuberosus, however much the plants may differ. The 

 similarity in habit of growth, the lateness in flowering, and 

 the height I take collectively as arguments in favour of this 

 view. 



H. divaricatus, as we have it in gardens, is very far from being 

 typical. In wild specimens the leaves are narrow, sessile, or 

 nearly so, opposite and horizontally divaricate— hence the name. 



* This derivation of the name "Jerusalem Artichoke" is, however, 

 disputed, vide Gardeners' Chronicle, vol. ix., 1891, p. 151 ; vol. x., 1891, pp. 

 482, 526, 650, 707.— Ki»s. J. K. H. S.] 



