Ensete religiosum (J. Dybowski, Rev. Hort. 72: 262 (1900) and E. A. J. De Wildeman, Ann. Mus. Col. Marseille ser. 2, 10: 352 (1912)) E. E. Cheesman, Kew Bulletin 2 (2): 103 (1947).
Accepted name none - type rejected as nomen nudum Synonyms 1. Musa religiosa J. Dybowski (Dybowsky), Rev. Hort. 72: 262 (1900) and E. A. J. De Wildeman, Ann. Mus. Col. Marseille ser. 2, 10: 352 (1912).
2. Musa gilletii E. A. J. De Wildeman, Rev. Cult. Colon. 8: 102 (1901).
3. Musa chevalieri F. Gagnepain, Bull. Soc. Bot. France 55, mém. 8: 87 (1908), and in A. Chevalier, Novitates florae africanae. Mémoires de la Société Botanique de France 8: pp. 87 - 88 (1908).
4. Musa dybowskii E. A. J. De Wildeman, err. cal. Ann. Mus. Col. Marseille ser. 2, 7: 245 (1909).
5. Musa schweinfurthii sensu Hutchinson & Dalziel in F.W.T.A. ed. 1, 2: 328 (1936) and not of K. M. Schumann & O. Warburg ex K. M. Schumann in A. Engler's Pflanzenreich 4, 45: 14 (1900), ex Hepper in F.W.T.A. ed. 2, 3: 69 (1968).
6. Ensete gilletii (E. A. J. De Wildeman) E. E. Cheesman, Kew Bulletin 2 (2): 103 (1947).
Authorities The authority for the name being rejected as nomen nudum is Baker & Simmonds 1953 notwithstanding Cheesman 1947a.
Synonyms are from:
1, 3 & 4 are from Cheesman 1947a.
2, 5 & 6 are from Hepper 1968 where 2 & 5 are cited as synonyms of Ensete gilletii.
However, the World Checklist of Monocotyledons gives Ensete religiosum Cheesman, Kew Bull. 2: 103 (1947 publ. 1948), nom. inval.) (synonym Musa religiosa Dyb., Rev. Hort. 72: 262 (1900)) as a synonym of Ensete livingstonianum (J.Kirk) Cheesman, Kew Bull. 2: 101 (1947 publ. 1948) which is given as the accepted name.
Distribution Congo (Brazzaville). Description See Musa religiosa for a description of the type. References Aluka, Baker & Simmonds 1953: 409, Cheesman 1947a: 103, Dybowski 1900 a, Dybowski 1900 b, Hepper 1968, Lock 1993, WCM. Comments Cheesman created Ensete religiosum as a new combination (number 12 out of 25) in a brief note in his 1947 paper reviving the genus Ensete. Cheesman revived one and created 24 Ensete species in that paper but acknowledged that field study might reveal synonymy. Baker & Simmonds consider instead that the name must be rejected because "there is no type and the species, based on plants grown in Paris from seed collected in the French Congo, was never properly described. Letters and specimens of seed in Herb. Brux. communicated by Dybowski to De Wildeman, however, make it clear that this is E. gilletii, over which E. religiosum would have had priority as a name if the type had been properly described". But it is not quite as simple as that because, in similar circumstances, the combination Ensete elephantorum typified in 1900 would also have had a claim to priority.
The author's name is J. Dybowski or Dybowsky properly abbreviated to "J. Dyb.". Some literature incorrectly gives the abbreviation as "Dyb." which actually refers to a different person, W. B. Dybowski.
There one external image of the type of Musa religiosa at the Aluka website http://www.aluka.org
last updated 10/01/2008