CHEIRANTHUS CHEIRI. COMMON WALL-FLOWER.
CHEIRANTHUS Cheiri ; foliia lanceolatis acutis integerrimis pube bipartita appressa, .siliquis linea-
ribus, stigmatis lpbis patentibus, caule fruticuloso angulato.
CHEIRANTHUS Cheiri. Lijm. Sp. PI. p. 9^4. Wm S l Attgl. p. S87. Light‘f . Scot. p. 357.
Hoffm. Germ. cd. g. ml. I . P . II. p. 53. With. Bot. A r r . cd. 4. ml. 3. p. 575.
Decand. Ft. Fr. cd. 3. ml. 4. p. 657. FI. Gall. Sm . p . 378. Syst. Feget, ml. 8.
p. 179. Pers. Syn. PI. vol. 2. p. 200. Alton Hort. Kezo. ed. 2. vol. 4 .p . 118.
IVilld. Sp. PI. vol. 3. p. 516.
CHEIRANTHUS fruticulosus. Linn. M a n t.p . 94. Smith Fl. B r it.p . 516. Engl. Bot. t. 1934.
JVilld. Sp. PI. vol. 3. p. 516. Pers. Syn. PI. vol. 2. p. 200. Hook. Fl. Scot. P . I.
p. 202.
LEUCOIUM foliis glabris lanceolatis integerrimis. Hall. Helv. n. 443.
LEUCOJUM luteum, vulgo Cheiri flore simplici. Wall-flower or Wild Cheir. Rail Syn .p . 291.
Dan. Guidefloler. Dut .Muurbloem. Fr. L a Giroflée de muraille. Germ. Gebbe Lackoje. It. Viola. Viola
gialla. Cheiri. Pol. Macica fiolkowa. Port. Goiveiro amarello. Span. Alheli amarello. Swed. Gulflol.
Welsh. Melyn y gauaf.
Class a n d O r d e r . TETRADYNAMIA SILIQUOSA.
[N a tu r a l O r d e r . CRUCIFERÆ, J uss., Decand., Brown, Hook.]
G e n . Ci-ia r . Siliqua compressa vel anceps. Gotyledones accumbentes. Calyx clausus, foliolis oppositis basi
saccatis. Stigma stylo insidens, bilobum, lobis patentibus, vel capitatum.
G e n . Ch a r . Pod compressed or two-edged. Cotyledons accumbent. Calyx closed, opposite leaflets saccate
at the base. Stigma placed upon a style, two-lobed, with the lobes patent or capitate.
R a d ix lignosa, ramosa, fibrosa, biennis.
Ca u l is subpedalis, erectus, ramosus, lignosus, teres,
sulcatus, glaber, viridi-fuscus, ramis viridibus,
subscabris.
Folia numerosa, conferta, lanceolata, acuta, rigida,
integerrima, basi in petiolum attenuate, apice
siepissime fusco-maculata, sub lente subtus prae-
cipue pubescentia, pube bipartita, segmentis seti-
formibus, patentissimis, arctissime appressis.
F lores corymboso-racemosi, majusculi, flavo-auranti-
Caly x tetraphyllus, fusco-purpureus, foliolis erectis,
duobus oppositis basi saccatis.
Corolla tetrapetala, petalis longe unguiculatis, limbo
patente, obcordato, demum flaccido, reflexo.
St am in a sex, tetradynamia : Filamenta alba, quatuor
longiora floris tubi longitudine, duo breviora
basi glandula viridi cincta : Antheroe oblongoe,
pallide flavo-virescentes : Pollen ovale, pellucidum.
PlSTlLLUM cylindricum, staminibus vix longius : Ger-
men compresso-cylindraceum : Stylus vix ullus :
Stigma bipartitum, lobis crassis, patentibus.
P e r ic a r p ium , siliqua subbiuncialis, erecta, stricta,
linearis, compressa, valvis dorso linea longitudi-
nali elevata notatis, canescentibus.
Sem in a numerosa, ovato-rotundata, fusca, submargi-
nata.' ,
E mbryo semini conformis : Cotyledones hemisphæricæ,
accumbentes : Radicula sursum curvata.
Fig. 1. Sin.
appear in.
Fig. 7. Pistil. Fig
showing the seeds.
all magnified.
Root woody, branching, fibrous, biennial.
St em about a foot high, erect, branched, ligneous,
rounded, with furrows, glabrous, greenish-brown,
the branches green and slightly scabrous.
L eaves numerous, crowded, lanceolate, acute, rigid,
entire, narrowing into a petiole at their base,
often spotted with reddish-brown at their points,
appearing under the magnifier slightly downy,
especially beneath, the pubescence bipartite, its
segments setiform,- very patent, and closely ap-
pressed.
Flowers in a branched corymb, rather large, orange-
yellow. .
Ca l y x o f four divisions, o f a brownish red hue, its
leaflets erect, two o f the opposite ones saccate"
a t the base.
Corolla tetrapetalous, the petals having a long claw,
their limb spreading, obcordate, finally flaccid
and reflexed.
Stam e n s six, tetradynamous: Filaments white, the
four longest of the same length as the tube of
the flower, the two shortest surrounded at their
base with a green gland: Anthers oblong, of a
pale yellowish green: Pollen oval, transparent.
P ist il cylindrical, a little longer than the stamens:
Germen a compressed cylinder: Style hardly
any: Stigma divided in two, the lobes,thick and
spreading.
Pe r ic a r p a pod, which is about two inches long, erect,
straight, linear, compressed, its valves marked
on the back with an elevated longitudinal line,
hoary.
S eeds numerous, between ovate and round, brown,
slightly marginated.
E mbryo of the same form as the seed: Cotyledons hemispherical,
accumbent: Radicle curved upwards.
gle flowers. Fig. 2. Flower deprived of its calyx and corolla. Fig. 3. Single petal. Fig. 4. Anther, as
* before the discharge of its pollen. Fig. 5. Anther bursting and'dispersing its pollen. Fig. 6. Pollen.
•. 8. Raceme of seed-vessels. Fig. 9. Single seed-vessel with its valves separating and
Fig. 10. Seed with its stalk. Fig. 11. Embryo. Fig. 12. Structure of the pubescence.—
The wild Wall-flower, so abundant on old walls and ruined castles in almost every part of the kingdom, and
sp much admired for its fragrance, is considered by Sir James Smith to be specifically distinct from that with larger
blossoms, so commonly cultivated in the gardens, and he has followed the Mantissa of Linnaeus in calling it
Ch. fruticulosus ; adding, in Fl. Brit., that “ it differs in the more acute leaves, which are hoary beneath, in
the smaller size of the flowers of a yellow colour, not ferrugineo-sanguineous;” and further observing, in E . Bot.,
that “ the petals do not as in Ch. Cheiri hang loose and flaccid, but are rather, as the late Mr. Crowe observed,
rigid and slightly recurved ; that the pods are destitute of a pair of small wings near the top, noticed by Mr. J. D.
Sowerby in Ch. Cheiri, and which, if. constant, greatly strengthen the specific difference*.”
In the Flora Scotica I have expressed my doubts as to their being really distinct; and since the publication of
that work, having had the opportunity of examining numerous individuals in a state of cultivation, I am compelled
to say that I do not think any of the characters just given are so constant as to afford any thing like specific
differences. I hoped to have had my opinion confirmed or refuted by a reference to the last edition of the Hor-
tus Kcwensis ; but the learned author has neither mentioned the Ch. Cheiri as a native of Britain, nor in any
way noticed the Ch. fruticulosus.
De Candolle in the second volume of his Regni Veget. Syst. Naturale, makes the Ch. fruticulosus of Smith
his 12th var. (u) of Ch. Cheiri; yet observing that it is probably the truly wild plant: whilst of his a, or our
garden sort, he says, that although it is found in wild situations it has nevertheless probably escaped from gardens.
I t appears to me, therefore, that our plant here figured has as just a right to be considered the type o f the species
as the garden plant; and it would seem that Linnasus so intended in his Sp. Plant.; for he makes the larger-flowered
plants the varieties of his- Cheiri.
The flowers of Ch. Cheiri appear in the early part of the summer, and are succeeded by a profusion of seeds.
* Willdenow, relying on the above characters, constitutes two species, and makes them both natives of England.