The taxonomy of Narcissus is complex, and still not fully resolved. Known to the ancients, the genus name appears in Graeco-Roman literature, although their interest was as much medicinal as botanical. It is unclear which species the ancients were familiar with. Although frequently mentioned in Mediaeval and Renaissance texts it was not formally described till the work of Linnaeus in 1753. By 1789 it had been grouped into a family (Narcissi) but shortly thereafter this was renamed Amaryllideae, from which comes the modern placement within Amaryllidaceae, although for a while it was considered part of Liliaceae.
Many of the species now considered to be Narcissus were in separate genera during the nineteenth century, and the situation was further confused by the inclusion of many cultivated varieties. By 1875 the current circumscription was relatively settled. By 2004 phylogenetic studies had allowed the place of Narcissus within its fairly large family to be established, nested within a series of subfamilies (Amaryllidoideae) and tribes (Narcisseae). It shares its position in the latter tribe with Sternbergia.
The infrageneric classification has been even more complex and many schemes of subgenera, sections, subsections and series have been proposed, although all had certain similarities. Most authorities now consider there to be 10 – 11 sections based on phylogenetic evidence. The problems have largely arisen from the diversity of the wild species, frequent natural hybridisation and extensive cultivation with escape and subsequent naturalisation. The number of species has varied anywhere from 16 to nearly 160, but is probably around 50 – 60.
The genus appeared some time in the Late Oligocene to Early Miocene eras, around 24 million years ago, in the Iberian Peninsula. While the exact origin of the word Narcissus is unknown it is frequently linked to its fragrance which was thought to be narcotic, and to the legend of the youth of that name who fell in love with his reflection. In the English language the common name Daffodil appears to be derived from the Asphodel with which it was commonly compared.
History
Early Narcissus was first described by Theophrastus (, c 371 - c 287 BC) in his Historia Plantarum () as , referring to N. poeticus, but comparing it to Asphodelus (). Theophrastus' description was frequently referred to at length by later authors writing in Latin such as Pliny the Elder (Gaius Plinius Secundus, 23 AD – 79 AD) from whom came the Latin form (see also Culture). Pliny's account is from his Natural History (). Like his contemporaries, his interests were as much therapeutic as botanical. Another much-cited Greek authority was Dioscorides (, 40 AD – 90 AD) in his De Materia Medica (). Both authors were to remain influential until at least the Renaissance, given that their descriptions went beyond the merely botanical, to the therapeutic (see also Antiquity).
An early European reference is found in the work of Albert Magnus (c. 1200 – 1280), who noted in his the similarity to the leek. William Turner in his A New Herball (1551) cites all three extensively in his description of the plant and its properties. It was to remain to Linnaeus in 1753 to formally describe and name Narcissus as a genus in his Species Plantarum, at which time there were six known species (N. poeticus, N. pseudonarcissus, N. bulbocodium, N. serotinus, N. jonquilla and N. tazetta). At that time, Linnaeus loosely grouped it together with 50 other genera into his Hexandria monogynia.
Modern It was de Jussieu in 1789 who first formally created a 'family' (Narcissi), as the seventh 'Ordo' (Order) of the third class (Stamina epigyna) of Monocots in which Narcissus and 15 other genera were placed. The use of the term Ordo at that time was closer to what we now understand as Family, rather than Order. The family has undergone much reorganisation since then, but in 1805 it was renamed after a different genus in the family, Amaryllis, as 'Amaryllideae' by Jaume St.-Hilaire and has retained that association since. Jaume St.-Hilaire divided the family into two unnamed sections and recognised five species of Narcissus, omitting N. serotinus.
De Candolle brought together Linnaeus' genera and Jussieau's families into a systematic taxonomy for the first time, but included Narcissus (together with Amaryllis) in the Liliaceae in his Flore française (1805–1815) rather than Amaryllidaceae, a family he had not yet recognised. Shortly thereafter he separated the 'Amaryllidées' from 'Liliacées' (1813), though attributing the term to Brown's 'Amaryllideae' in the latter's Prodromus (1810) rather than St.-Hilaire's 'Amaryllidées'. He also provided the text to the first four volumes of Redouté illustrations in the latter's Les liliacées between 1805 and 1808 (see illustration here of N. candidissimus).
Historically both wide and narrow interpretations of the genus have been proposed. In the nineteenth century genus splitting was common, favouring the narrow view. Haworth (1831) using a narrow view treated many species as separate genera, as did Salisbury (1866). These authors listed various species in related genera such as Queltia (hybrids), Ajax (=Pseudonarcissus) and Hermione (=Tazettae), sixteen in all in Haworth's classification. In contrast, Herbert (1837) took a very wide view reducing Harworth's sixteen genera to six. Herbert, treating the Amaryllidacea as an 'order' as was common then, considered the narcissi to be a suborder, the Narcisseae, the six genera being Corbularia, Ajax, Ganymedes, Queltia, Narcissus and Hermione and his relatively narrow circumscription of Narcissus having only three species. Later Spach (1846) took an even wider view bringing most of Harworth's genera into the genus Narcissus, but as separate subgenera. By the time that Baker (1875) wrote his monograph all of the genera with one exception were included as Narcissus. The exception was the monotypic group Tapeinanthus which various subsequent authors have chosen to either exclude (e.g. Cullen 1986) or include (e.g. Webb 1978, 1980). Today it is nearly always included.
The eventual position of Narcissus within the Amaryllidaceae family only became settled in the twenty-first century with the advent of phylogenetic analysis and the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group system. The genus Narcissus belongs to the Narcisseae tribe, one of 13 within the Amaryllidoideae subfamily of the Amaryllidaceae. It is one of two sister clades corresponding to genera in the Narcisseae, being distinguished from Sternbergia by the presence of a paraperigonium, and is monophyletic.
Subdivision + Table I: Comparison of Modern Classifications Schemes of NarcissusFernandes 1975 Webb 1978 Blanchard 1990 Mathew 2002 Zonneveld 2008 RHS 2013Subgenus Section SubsectionSection Subsection Section Subsection Subgenus Section SubsectionSeriesSubgenus SectionSection Hermione Serotini Serotini Serotini Hermione Hermione Serotini Hermione Serotini SerotiniHermione Angustifolii Tazettae AngustifoliaeTazettae AngustifoliaeAngustifoliaeTazettaeTazettaeHermioneTazettaeTazettaeHermioneHermioneAureliaAureliaAureliaAlbifloraeAurelia AureliaNarcissusApodanthi ApodanthaeNarcissusJonquillaeApodanthiNarcissusApodanthiApodanthiJonquillaJonquillaJonquillaeJonquillae JonquillaeJonquillaeJonquillaJonquillaJuncifoliiApodanthiChloranthiJuncifoliiTapeinanthusTapeinanthusTapeinanthusTapeinanthusTapeinanthusTapeinanthusGanymedesGanymedesGanymedesGanymedesGanymedesGanymedesBulbocodiumBulbocodiumBulbocodiumBulbocodiumBulbocodiumPseudonarcissusPseudonarcissiPseudonarcissi PseudonarcissusPseudonarcissusPseudonarcissusPseudonarcissusReflexiNevadensisNarcissusNarcissusNarcissusNarcissusNarcissusNarcissus Chloranthi(N. viridiflorus) Corbulariasyn. Bulbocodium
The infrageneric phylogeny of Narcissus still remains relatively unsettled. The taxonomy has proved very complex and difficult to resolve, particularly for the Pseudonarcissus group. This is due to a number of factors, including the diversity of the wild species, the ease with which natural hybridisation occurs, and extensive cultivation and breeding accompanied by escape and naturalisation.
De Candolle, in the first systematic taxonomy of Narcissus, arranged the species into named groups, and those names (Faux-Narcisse or Pseudonarcissus, Poétiques, Tazettes, Bulbocodiens, Jonquilles) have largely endured for the various subdivisions since and bear his name. The evolution of classification was confused by including many unknown or garden varieties, until Baker (1875) made the important distinction of excluding all specimens except the wild species from his system. He then grouped all of the earlier related genera as sections under one genus, Narcissus, the exception being the monotypic Tapeinanthus. Consequently, the number of accepted species has varied widely.
A common modern classification system has been that of Fernandes (1951, 1968, 1975) based on cytology, as modified by Blanchard (1990) and Mathew (2002), although in some countries such as Germany, the system of Meyer (1966) was preferred. Fernandes described two subgenera based on basal chromosome number, Hermione, n = 5 (11) and Narcissus, n = 7 (13). He further subdivided these into ten sections (Apodanthi, Aurelia, Bulbocodii, Ganymedes, Jonquillae, Narcissus, Pseudonarcissi, Serotini, Tapeinanthus, Tazettae), as did Blanchard later.
In contrast to Fernandes, Webb's treatment of the genus for the Flora Europaea (1978, 1980) prioritised morphology over genetics, and abandoned the subgenera ranks. He also restored De Candolle's original nomenclature, and made a number of changes to section Jonquilla, merging the existing subsections, reducing Apodanthi to a subsection of Jonquilla, and moving N. viridiflorus from Jonquilla to a new monotypic section of its own (Chloranthi). Finally, he divided Pseudonarcissus into two subsections. Blanchard (1990), whose Narcissus: a guide to wild daffodils has been very influential, adopted a simple approach, restoring Apodanthae, and based largely on ten sections alone.
The Royal Horticultural Society (RHS) currently lists ten sections, based on Fernandes (1968), three of which are monotypic (contain only one species), while two others only containing two species. Most species are placed in Pseudonarcissus While infrageneric groupings within Narcissus have been relatively constant, their status (genera, subgenera, sections, subsections, series, species) has not. Some authors treat some sections as being further subdivided into subsections, e.g. Tazettae (3 subsections). These subdivisions correspond roughly to the popular names for narcissi types, e.g. Trumpet Daffodils, Tazettas, Pheasant's Eyes, Hoop Petticoats, Jonquils.
While Webb had simply divided the genus into sections, Mathew found this unsatisfactory, implying every section had equal status. He adapted both Fernandes and Webb to devise a more hierarchical scheme he believed better reflected the interrelationships within the genus. Mathew's scheme consists of three subgenera (Narcissus, Hermione and Corbularia). The first two subgenera were then divided into five and two sections respectively. He then further subdivided two of the sections (subgenus Narcissus section Jonquillae, and subgenus Hermione section Hermione) into three subsections each. Finally, he divided section Hermione subsection Hermione further into two series, Hermione and Albiflorae. While lacking a phylogenetic basis, the system is still in use in horticulture. For instance the Pacific Bulb Society uses his numbering system (see Table II) for classifying species.