G6 
THE FLORIST AND POMOLOGIST, 
[ Mat, 
“ Now we are accustomed to see such excellencies 
of form, colour, and habit in exhibition plants as are 
not found in the uncultured species from which they 
may have sprung. But in so high degree have all 
these points been gained in the Auricula, that it is 
nothing short of an acquired flower, developed past 
resemblance to any wild original. 
“ I pi’opose to divide my subject into three sec¬ 
tions, and will trust to make none of them too tedi- 
ous for your patience : — 
I. The first shall be upon the derivation and his¬ 
tory of the flower. 
II. The next, the Auricula from a florist’s point 
of view. 
III. The last, a very brief touch upon its culture 
—not that I have any secrets which brevity should 
conceal. 
“I. If there are any among my hearers who, so 
far, only regard this flower with a cold and distant 
admiration, as a new and rather curious feature in 
a flower-show, that ought to have novelty now and 
then, to keep it up, I shall be glad if, in any degree, 
I can show them how very much more than this a 
flower is to those who love it. 
“ Derivation. —In the Botanical Census, by which 
plants are grouped according to natural orders, 
the Auricula is classed with the Primulaceoe. The 
family is a large one. Some of its members bear 
such resemblance to our most familiar type, the 
Primroses, as to be easily recognised for Primulas ; 
others are apparently so far removed, both from it 
and from each other, as to seem no blood relations 
at all, but only distant connections-in-law—botanical 
law. However, I shall not here introduce a larger 
circle of the Primula family than may interest you, 
as showing the resemblance and dissimilarity of con¬ 
sorted plants. 
“The nearest native relatives of the Auricula are 
the Bird’s-eye Primrose (P. farinosa), frequent in 
the North of England in marshy places, and on 
the broken banks of little moorland rills ; and also 
Primula scotica, of Sutherland and Orkney. But, 
after the Cowslip and Polyanthus, what a mixed 
group the Primulaceoe appear! The Cyclamens 
belong to it, and the more aspiring Dodecatheons of 
America, with their not far dissimilar flowers, 
clustered on tall stalks, as if they w 7 ere the bold 
Oxlip form of the primrose Cyclamen. Another 
class-mate is the Anagallis, A. arvensis, being the 
red Pimpernel, of our arable lands ; and A. tenella, 
the slender little beauty that threads its way 
daintily among the green mosses on the peaty 
moors. Bitter marshes by the sea contribute a 
member to the order in the Sea Milkwort (Glaux 
maritima) ; while in that lovely aquatic, Hottonia 
palustris, the water violet, we see the Primulaceae 
taking a decided plunge under water, and here, as 
it were, is a veritable mermaid Primula. Thus from 
the top of a mountain to the bottom of a pond, we 
have primulaceous plants, as widely separated in 
habitat as in habit. 
“ Besides the Primula Auricula of the Alps, the re¬ 
mote ancestor of our cultured flower, and one given 
by Paxton as hortensis, a European plant, with name 
suggestive of some degree of cultivation, and flowers 
described as variegated, there are several primulas 
of Switzerland and Southern Europe interesting, as 
bearing a resemblance to the Auricula on a small 
wild scale. There is P. marginata, with serrated 
mealed foliage and lilac flowers, with rudiments of 
that meal in the centre which is intensely developed 
in the Auricula. Also P. Balbisii, with a habit of 
foliage in white and green quite that of the Auricula, 
and half-pendent flowers, ‘ like cowslips wan that 
hang the pensive head,’ and also slightly mealed in 
the eye. Again, P. intermedia, pubescens, viscosa, 
villosa, and others, with pink and purplish flowers, 
have the habit of diminutive Auriculas. Still, all 
primitive and allied forms are a far remove from 
the derived flowers of so long a period of culture as 
extends over 300 years, for Gerard states that prior 
to 1507 there were Auriculas in English gardens. 
“ These early varieties were yellows, browns, and 
purples, and as you look upon the beautiful flower 
to-day, in its jewellery of emerald and pearl, and its 
velvet textures of many lovely colours, you will 
wonder how all this investiture of different orders 
of beauty descended upon a little pale wild flower of 
the Alps. 
“ The first advances from the purely wild type 
were the results of carefully seeding this sportive 
flower, which, in its attribute of infinite varia¬ 
bility from seed, has the fundamental qualifica¬ 
tion for being what is known as a florist flower. 
But a more full and rich illustration of this than 
written history well could be, are the interesting 
revelations which the Auricula makes to the raiser 
of seedlings. In them the history of the past will 
repeat itself in varied retrospect, and among those 
that must be discarded as missing the standards they 
were meant to equal or excel, are many w'hose 
faults are but tracings of their derivation towards 
its distant sources. They show how petals now 
substantial, round, and flat, had been flimsy, frilled, 
and pointed ; the white meal thin and ill-defined, 
the curious edge of green, a slight and broken rim. 
“ Historv. —In a glance at the history of the Auri¬ 
cula, there comes, of course, the interesting question 
of its first introduction into England. When is, 
perhaps, not so exactly known as zuhere, on which 
point there is the evidence of well-kept, unshaken 
tradition, corroborated by local evidence that its 
eaily English home was especially Lancashire. It 
is know r n that Flemish weavers in woollens, driven 
from their country by persecution for their faith’s 
sake, settled about 1570 at Norwich, Ipswich, and in 
Lancashire villages in the neighbourhood of Roch¬ 
dale and Middleton. As things of home too dear to 
leave behind them, these refugees brought with 
them their favourite flowers, the Tulip and Auri¬ 
cula. It is no matter of surprise that for about 50 
years after this we have no record in Auricula 
culture. These early growers would doubtless, for 
a time, be shyly looked upon as aliens, and it 
would lead them to keep their occupations and 
interests a great deal within the bounds of their 
own communities ; but in 1725, we have evident 
proof that the culture of Auriculas w r as estab¬ 
lished in Lancashire. Parkinson, in his Theatre of 
Plants, 1640, names 25 varieties of Auricula Ursi, 
or Beares Ears, or French Cowslips. They are de¬ 
scribed by colours such as heaven’s ‘ blew,’ striped 
and double purple, blood-red, sundry blushes, paper- 
white, and yellowish-white, &c. In an old manu¬ 
script of 1732, and which was published in the 
Florist many years ago, Beares Eares or Auriculas 
were quaintly classed as ‘ pures,’ probably what we 
should call seifs; ‘ flakes or stripes,’—which I confess 
I do not recognise by the description; and also 
‘ bizarrs,’ spoken of as admirably variegated with 
meal and colours, and raised in England or brought 
from thence. 
“ Auriculas were grown abundantly in the Lan¬ 
cashire districts until about 1830, when a great 
change in the habits of the people, wdio were hand- 
loom weavers, began to take place. Steam power 
and the factory system were being developed about 
1825, and, during the transition from hand to power- 
loom weaving, those whose bread ‘ came through 
the shuttle-eye ’ felt the change severely, and 
numbers of them were for a time in great distress. 
From the hand-loom that filled the long window they 
could now and again in the day break their time, 
and work longer at night, and in this way their 
