PHAL/ENOPSIS GRANDIFLORA LÌ,M AUREA //„/.
PlIAL.-lSOPSIS
pcxsticis cuncMo rhon.l
iialitcr silicato, antico -,
Ano RICUSI Al
l'IIA
. Lindi. : mdicibus Icrctiusciills tevibus, folils pallide, viridibii? siibconcoloribus, oblongi«. acuti-« labclii i>
partitionc mcdiaii.i haslato triaiifenila apice bicinhosa, Cillo inlet partilionc, laterales hastùto triangulo tK;r inodiu.i
Radi.
utrinque iinidcntito.
US, Rumpli. Amb. ri., 99, t, 43 I (figura imminuta) !
-.1 Spcc n. Cd., i., p. 953 ! Nr. 12! (111. liaroncm F, v. Milllcr scquor in cit.n
Bi. Bijdr., 294! H!. T.-ibclI,, 44! Bl, Rumpliia iv., 194, f. i., tób. iv., 19511 H<
•ORA, Lindi,, G.-ird. Cliron., .848, p, 39, r. i. (caìlus insolite ari.ailc aiigulatus,
Illxiviriduhf. Caulis bumilis. Foliapauca,oblongo.li(rulata, apice iniuquali sub.ieiii
"• ipcrtisint. Sépala cuneato oblonga
i cditionc Linnwi prima),
ri. Jav. viii.l Rchb. f. Xcnia II., p, j I
an sculptoris ciTore), Hook, J!t)l. Mag., 5184 I
l'odunculiis mulliilorm, dumns, nunc |>aiiicul:i-
Tcpala cunéalo clliplica oblusiuscula,
:tcmum lacinianim latcraJium et martiis,
Horibus hcl
Omnia nii-ca, in alabastro sépala cxtus flavo viíidula." Labellum d¿cr¡ptum aibuni'.'flaTO a"s|wré'u7n7iixir mai-¿jn¿i,.
gincm internum bascos laciniie mediana;, atropurpúreo scu fusco guttulatum ae striolauiin supra callum ae basin l
trígona apicc aculiuscula. Florcm ingentcm raisit dorn. Geo. Hcrlot, Cholmsiey l'ark, Highijate, tendon, Aiiril 1875,
C^ct ,1. insuHs Molueeis. 1752 ab O.boekio a<l Neu Upland Java; occidental is, unde in herbario Linnieano I 1798 a Mokeci» in boríum Calcuttenscm
"" Roxburgh I Nusa Kambangan Blume! Aniboyna Dolcscliall I Bum Molmcc. Kicdcl I (mis. el. amie, Oliver!}. Ex Horneo inlrod bcrlulani
ic fuscata, propc semper purpúrala in labolli b,is¡).
tabello inten.íc (lavo picto. Malacca Slraits.
ri., t. 7, lide T, Moore in Williams' Manual, sixth cd., p. 530!
(Bunioo variety s;
i
Figura analytica. L.-Lbcllum egrcgium floris Sanderi
THKim has lately liccn a great deal of controversy respecting the noinenciaturc of Orcliicis, both hy those tvlio arc versed
!n the matter as well as by those who are not. No one seems to have been siiccesfiil in fornuiiating a plan on the subject
worthy to be followed. Those who arc able to pcrceive the difference between garden and botanical nomenclature ^vill
doubtless arrive at the conclusion that it is not possible to bring both into harmony, for so long as the botanist has to
serve garden interests he will have to study the ideas as well as the tastes of amateurs. This was Lindley's view and it is
also mine. Of cour.sc, science ought not to stand still for the sake of amateurs ; on the other hand, tlie.se should not be
cxpected to follow every change in the views of scientific men, a.s these are often founded uj)on circumstances which, to
an amateur, are unfathomable. I have never endeavoured to thrust upon amateurs such undoubtedly nccessary changes
as the merging of the genus Cattleya Into Epidendrum, or La^lia and Schomburgkia into the genus DIetia,
The amateur is often thoroughly conservative in nomenclature, and many a busy man, to use Lindley's own
words, is satisfied when he has learned the oldest name of a plant; he is generally glad to dispense with the nicer
distinctions, in fact, the plant is often to him merely an object of sport. We have in the present plate a capital
example of this very point, Lindley knew Phalainopsis amabilis only from drawings by Runiph and Blume, and from
their description; he seems never to have e.xamined Linnde's specimen. When the first plant, introduced by Cuming
from the Philippine Islands, flowered with Messrs. Rollisson, of Tooting, in the year 1838, Lindley considered it to be
identical with Blume's species. Later on he saw the difference between Cuming's and Blume's plant, but, thoroughly
believing he knew P. amabilis, Blume, he named the new .species P. grandiflora. lie did not notice the .strong difi-erence
in the lip.
I stated the case fully in 1862, in the Hamburger Garieuzeiinng, p. 38, where I named I.indley's P. amabilis,
for botanical pur|x>ses, P. Aphrodite. Lindley.s P. grandifiora is Blume'-s P. amabilis. I do not, however intend to
Iircss my nomenclature into garden circles, and I think it impossible to ¡jersuade amateurs to accept new Draconian
laws, or to indticc them to rc-christen their favourites. ]-]_ Pchb f .
E\'cry traveller who visits that flower paradise, the islands of the Malay Archipelago, is impressed with the wealth
and variety of plant, insect, and bird life to be met with in their untrodden forests. The islands teem with Orchids, and
loveliest among them all are the Moth Orchids, as the Phatenopsids are popularly called. The lowland forests of Borneo
and Java are the particular homes of the Great Moth Orchid (P, grandiflora), but the traveller seldom catches a glimpse of
it, although so abundant. It is above, in the tree tops, in that "world of sunshine, light, and air," as Kingsley
describes it, where the flower, the insect, the bird, and the monkey reign supreme. Below is gloomy enough, and one
rarely sees an Orchid, and never a sun loving epiphyte such as the Phatenopsis. All along the wooded line skirting