262 JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. f March 29, isss. 
tive. I contend that of all the varieties of Incurved Chrysanthe¬ 
mums Princess of Wales is the best; it is one that is most to be 
depended upon to produce fine blooms, and has an excellent habit of 
growth. 
Inner Temple I have not yet made out as a distinct variety. In 
my opinion it is Refulgence under a new name, which name never 
ought to have been given. Some catalogues describe it as synony¬ 
mous with Arigena; if so that is a very poor recommendation, as I 
have not yet seen anything approaching a good bloom of that 
variety, nor do I think anyone else has. With me it has always 
produced flowers, the petals of which remind of the bristles on the 
back of a hedgehog. 
Mrs. Parnell is the same as Mrs. G. Rundle in all respects except 
size the former grows large, and I consider it the better of the 
two. Golden Queen I never thought good enough to grow; it is 
much too coarse in the petal. It differs from Emily Dale in the 
petals being not so broad, and not so well incurved. Baron Beust 
and Orange Perfection are distinct enough for twelve if necessary. 
The former is a first-class variety, not nearly sufficiently grown, as it 
is of such easy growth. Orange Perfection has a brighter hue of 
colour, and does not show the golden tips as in the case of Baron 
Beust. 
Nonpareil, though an old variety, introduced, I believe, in 1846, 
is desirable, colour deep lilac; the flower is of good form with 
perfectly incurved petals. Much has lately been said in favour of 
Beverley or White Beverley, as it may be. I fail to see its good 
qualities as set forth by some. It is not large, the petals are too 
erect, the habit of the plant is not good, being too weak to carry a 
fair-sized bloom without so much support. There are plenty of white 
kinds far superior. These remarks apply to Golden Beverley also. 
I am not at all surprised that Jardin des Plantes attained so high 
a position in the election. I own the form is not good in all hands, 
but the colour is very rich, and good plants are pretty sure of 
producing fair blooms under ordinary treatment. It was sure to be 
pounced upon for a first place. I named Mr. Bunn in preference to 
it for the first twelve. 
Should the election of the Incurved varieties be followed by one 
of Japanese the results will be rather surprising, I fancy, as to 
some varieties. Much more progress has been made with the intro¬ 
duction of new varieties in that section than the Incurved. Many 
new kinds are much superior to the older ones, and are not so well 
generally known, therefore electors will have more difficulty in 
naming all the first twelve.—E. Molyneux, Srvanmore Park. 
MR. HIBBERD’S LECTURE ON THE AMARYLLIS. 
At the meeting of the Royal Horticultural Society on Tuesday, 
March 27th, Mr. Shirley Hibberd gave a lecture on the Amaryllis. 
The occasion was made the more interesting by the exhibition of 
collections of these beautiful flowers, in some cases not for com¬ 
petition, in others for the prizes offered by an amateur desirous of 
encouraging the production of hybrid Amaryllis of high floral 
quality. 
Mr. Hibberd said the name of the flower suggested that its history 
should begin somewhere in the 106th Olympiad ; or, say some three 
hundred years before the Christian era, in order to bring the country 
girl, Amaryllis herself, to furnish the subject of the opening chapter. 
But there is nothing to be gained for our present purpose from the 
pleasant verses of Theocritus or the later lines of Virgil, for neither 
of these poets gives aught beyond the name, and, as a matter of fact, 
Amaryllis does not anywhere in classic poetry rise to the dignity of 
a heroine. But it is one of the glories of the Linnasan nomenclature 
that by means of symbols selected from imperishable Nature we are 
brought into contact with the sweet stories of old, the flower of 
to-day taking us to the very fountain-head of pastoral poetry—the 
idylls of the poet of Syracuse. 
The Amaryllis in some form was known long before the time of 
Linnaeus, for John Gerarde had the one now known as Sternbergia 
lutea, which he figures at page 113 as Narcissus autumnalis major. 
John Parkinson had this same plant, and figured it at page 75 of the 
“ Paradisus,” and he had another which he figured at page 71 as 
Narcissus indicus, the Indian Daffodil, with a red flower. This 
became known as the Jacobeea Lily, and was figured in the “ Botanical 
Magazine ” (t. 47) as Amaryllis formosissima. This Jacobaea Lily is now 
catalogued as Sprekelia formosissima, having been so named by the 
German botanist Heister in honour of Dr. Sprekel, and not, as is 
generally supposed, by Dean Herbert, who, however, adopted it and 
thereby sanctioned it. The plant has been of late years met with in 
Guatemala, but its native habitat was long unknown. It appears to 
have been introduced to Spain before the year 1593, in which year, 
according to Linnseus, it began to be known generally in Europe. 
Linnaeus classed as Amaryllis a number of plants that have since 
been separated under other generic designations. But he made 
considerable progress nevertheless towards a clear definition, prepar¬ 
ing the way thereby for the labours of Dean Herbert half a century 
subsequently. This good churchman devoted to these plants an 
immensity of labour in determining distinctive characters, raising 
\=— --- 
hybrids, and reducing to order all the Amaryllids known in his time. 
The first publication of his views occurred in the “Botanical Maga¬ 
zine ” in the year 1820, under the description of Amaryllis reticulata 
(t. 2,113). These views were illustrated in a remarkable manner in a 
paper on “ The Production of Hybrid Vegetables,” published in Ihe 
Transactions of the Horticultural Society ” in the year 1822. In a 
treatise on the order published subsequently he developed a complete 
system of classification, one result of which was to give to Amaryllis 
Belladonna, otherwise known as the Belladonna Lily of the Gape ol 
Good Hope, the sole honour of representing the classic beauty 
Amaryllis. The South American plants that are nearest allied to the 
Belladonna were classed under Hippeastrum, this generic designation 
being in reality adopted from Linnseus, who at least supplied the idea. 
It is necessary here to be explicit. In the “ Paradisus Batavus of 
Paul Herrman, published 1698, is a description of a pjant called 
Lilium americanum puniceo, the Red American Lily. This plant 
Linnseus named Amaryllis equestris and it is so entered m the 
“ Hortus Kewensis,” and under the same name is figured in the 
“ Botanical Magazine ” of the year 1795 (t. 305) and the ‘'Botanical 
Register,” 1817 (t. 234). The flower of this species is somewhat 
irregular in form, and the spathes of two leaves stand up like a 
pair of ears, and thus, according to story No. 1, the specific 
name equestris refers to a fancied resemblance of the flowers to the 
head of a horse. But story No. 2 alters the case. In a description of 
the lovely Amaryllis reticulata, by Dr. Sims, in the “ Botanical Maga¬ 
zine ” of the year 1803 (t. 657), the learned editor says, “ We take this 
opportunity of correcting a mistake of the late Mr. Curtis, in saying 
that Linnseus gave the name equestris to the Amaryllis referred to as 
such. The fact is, this name was given from the remarkable likeness 
the front view of it has to a star of some of the orders of knighthood.” 
Thus the Hon. and Rev. William Herbert followed out the suggestion 
of Linnseus when he made a bold separation between the Amaryllis 
of Africa and those of America, renaming the western group Hippe¬ 
astrum, the Equestrian Star, the justification for which will be found 
at page 144 et seq. of his treatise on the Amaryllidacese. The dis- 
t notion is not geographical merely, but is founded on minute details 
of structure and the order of the leafing. 
It is proper here to say that to Dean Herbert we are not solely 
indebted for scientific knowledge of the Amaryllis. Of the labours 
of the professional botanists it is not needful to speak in a special 
manner, because we must refer to them again and again in the treat¬ 
ment of a subject of this kind. But at this point I feel bound to 
mention that, concurrently with the study of these plants by Dean 
Herbert, they were collected and cultivated with spirit and discretion 
by Mr. Griffin of South Lambeth, to whom the “ Botanical Register ” 
was often indebted for figures of the more characteristic species. 
Mr. Ker named the pseudo-genus Griffinia in honour of this gentleman. 
In a few of the references cited it will have been noticed that the 
Amaryllis has been at one time designated a Narcissus, and at another 
time a Lily, and again the compound term Lilio-narcissus has been 
used. The distinction between a true Amaryllis and a true Lily rests 
on the position of the ovary. For the casual observer—or say, for a 
visitor to the flower show—there are some obvious distinctions that 
will be found of service. The Lilies have leafy flower stems without 
spathes; the Amaryllis have naked flower stems, and the flowers 
spring from a spathe such as Parkinson would describe as a “ skinny 
husk.” But these distinctions have no scientific value, as the orders 
are at present defined, for the exceptions would not prove the rule ; 
thev would destroy it. 
To give an account of the several species would needlessly prolong 
this discourse. But a certain number must be referred to because of 
their importance as cultivated plants. One of the earliest and most 
distinct is 
Amaryllis Reginse, which was flowered by Fairchild of Hoxton in 
the year 1728. A folio pamphlet containing a history of the plant 
was written by James Douglas, who named it Lilium Reginas. Its 
first appearance in the “ Botanical Magazine ” occurred in the year 
1799. The flower has a short funnel and a capacious limb, the 
colour is crimson, and the star is fully displayed. 
A. vittata was first figured in the“ Botanical Magazine” in 1788 
(t. 128). The flower is always smallish, with a decided funnel, and 
the petals are elegantly striped, and the progeny, even at two or 
three removes, partakes of this character. 
A. reticulata was introduced in 1777 by Dr. E. W. Gray, and was 
figured in the “ Botanical Magazine ” in the year 1803 (t. 657). It is 
of the most elegant form, approximating to that of a Convolvulus. 
The tube of moderate length, the limb delicately reticulated in shades 
of rich lively rose. 
A. equestris dates from 1710. It is a fine flower of medium size, 
with short funnel, the limb crimson or scarlet, displaying a bold 
green star. A variety of this, named major, grown by Mr. Griffin, 
and figured in the “ Botanical Register ” of 1817 (t. 234), very 
strikingly resembles some modern hybrids of A. pardina, and in place 
of a green star it has a bold white centre, the outer portions of the 
limb being of a fiery vermilion colour. 
The more celebrated A. aulica was first figured in the “ Botanical 
Register ” in 1820 (t. 444). It was imported from Brazil by Mr. 
Griffin, and flowered with him at South Lambeth for the first time in 
December, 1819. In this the elements of a crown are perceptible, 
and the leafage is peculiar. The form of the flower is far away from 
what would be termed the florist type, the petals being narrow and 
— y 
