Floriography: Ten Flowers Four Victorian-Era Dictionaries Disagree On, and the Rules for Using Them
Floriography is the language of flowers. See who wrote its dictionaries, the rules for using them and ten flowers four dictionaries give different meanings.
In short
- Floriography is the language of flowers: each flower gets a meaning, so a bouquet can carry a message.
- Charlotte de la Tour’s 1819 Le langage des fleurs was the first popular book on it.
- Each of the ten flowers in our table carries more than one meaning across four 19th-century dictionaries.
- Checked against: RHS Libraries, Smithsonian Gardens, Cornell University Library.
Floriography is the language of flowers: the practice of giving each flower a fixed meaning so that a bouquet can carry a message. The CSUN University Library places the dictionary craze for it in the Victorian period in Britain and the United States. The Royal Horticultural Society names Charlotte de la Tour’s 1819 Le langage des fleurs as the first popular book on the subject. Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, Henry Phillips, Robert Tyas and Kate Greenaway all belong to its story. So does the tussie-mussie, the small posy that carried the message. This page covers the history, the rules for using the dictionaries, and ten flowers whose meanings change from one dictionary to the next.
It is part of our flower symbolism and meaning guide. Where sources disagree, the disagreement is shown rather than smoothed over.
What does floriography mean?
Floriography means “language of flowers”. CSUN describes the Victorian craze as “a rise in popularity for the codification of culturally-created floral meanings in dictionary form”. The RHS dates the fashion for sending encoded bouquets from the 1820s to the 1880s in Britain and America. The RHS adds that the language of flowers stayed popular until the turn of the twentieth century.
Get a free pre-planned flower bed (vase-worthy from June to frost)
Printable planting plans for a cut-flower bed and a cottage pollinator bed — plant list, spacing, and calendar included.
Each dictionary fixed its own list of meanings. A bouquet carried the intended message only if the sender and the recipient read the same list.
A timeline of floriography
The earliest Turkish list in this timeline dates to 1688 and the first popular French book to 1819. Phillips’s English book followed in 1825.
| Year | What happened | Source |
|---|---|---|
| 1688 | Du Vignau’s Le Secrétaire Turc describes a Turkish “greeting language” (selam) and lists 179 elements | Koç Keskin (2020) |
| 1718 | Lady Mary Wortley Montagu describes a Turkish love-letter of 17 objects in a letter from Pera dated 16 March (Old Style) | Koç Keskin (2020); Montagu, Letters |
| 1809 | Joseph von Hammer-Purgstall publishes a list of 106 examples from harem women; 42 more follow in 1811 | Koç Keskin (2020) |
| 1819 | Charlotte de la Tour publishes Le langage des fleurs in France | RHS; Cornell University Library |
| 1825 | Henry Phillips publishes Floral Emblems in London and names Madame de Latour in the preface | Phillips, title page and preface |
| 1836 | Robert Tyas’s The Sentiment of Flowers; or, Language of Flora appears | University of Maryland Extension |
| 1851 | Henrietta Dumont’s The Language of Flowers: The Floral Offering is published in Philadelphia | Dumont, title page |
| 1869 | John Ingram publishes Flora Symbolica, which gathers meanings from different sources; Routledge publishes the Tyas edition we read | RHS; Tyas, title page |
| 1870 | Flora’s Pocket Dictionary is published in Philadelphia | Internet Archive record |
| 1884 | Kate Greenaway’s Language of Flowers appears, and R. Worthington publishes a New York dictionary the same year | RHS; Worthington, title page |
The RHS calls Greenaway’s book “the last popular nineteenth century English book on the subject”. The RHS also says that by the time de la Tour’s book was translated into English it had already inspired several British and American writers. University of Maryland Extension says Louise Cortambert wrote Le langage des fleurs under the pseudonym Madame Charlotte de la Tour.
The Turkish selam: a rhyme game, not a flower dictionary
Lady Mary Wortley Montagu’s letter from Pera lists 17 objects, and each one stands for a line of Turkish verse.
17 objects make up the Turkish “love-letter” that Montagu describes, each paired with a line of verse.
The list starts with a pearl and runs through a clove, a jonquil, paper, a pear, soap, coal, a rose, straw, cloth, cinnamon, a match, gold thread, hair, a grape and gold wire, and a postscript adds pepper. Montagu translates the pearl, called Ingi, as “Fairest of the young”, and the Turkish line rhymes ingi with gingi. Montagu translates the jonquil, called Pul, as “Have pity on my passion!”, and the line rhymes pul with bul.
The Turkish scholar Neslihan Koç Keskin counts three flowers among the 17: the carnation or clove (karanfil), the jonquil (ful, spelled pul in Montagu’s letter) and the rose (gül). The other 14 objects are not flowers. Koç Keskin writes that in the earlier Turkish lists studied, from Du Vignau to the early 19th century, no metaphorical link joins a flower to its meaning, and only the rhyme steers the pairing (translated from the Turkish). In those lists the meaning follows the sound of the object’s name.
The dictionaries we read assign meanings differently. Dumont, Tyas and Phillips explain a meaning from the plant, from a myth or from a poet. Phillips’s 1825 preface quotes Montagu’s remark that in Turkey you may “quarrel, reproach, or send letters of passion, friendship, or civility, or even news, without ever inking your fingers”. Phillips calls the Turkish emblems “the remains of the ancient customs of the eastern nations”. The 1819 book’s full title, according to Koç Keskin quoting Goody, was Le Langage des Fleurs ou les Selams de l’Orient.
Modern sources do not agree on where the flower dictionary began. The RHS says the language of flowers “originated in France”. Cornell University Library says de la Tour cited Montagu’s letters to give the language a Turkish origin, and adds that modern scholarship holds a European origin to be more likely, in romantic bouquets in France. Cornell also notes that the Turkish system uses many objects besides flowers. On these sources the selam is an object code that European writers cited, and whether it was the source of the dictionaries is disputed.
Who wrote the flower dictionaries?
The four books compared on this page were published within 33 years of each other, between 1851 and 1884. Henrietta Dumont’s The Language of Flowers appeared in Philadelphia in 1851. Robert Tyas’s book is the 1869 Routledge edition, published in London and New York. Flora’s Pocket Dictionary appeared in Philadelphia in 1870. Kate Greenaway’s Language of Flowers was printed in colours by Edmund Evans for Routledge in London, and the RHS dates it to 1884.
Dumont’s book and Flora’s were published in Philadelphia, and all four fall within the Victorian era of 1837 to 1901 that Smithsonian Gardens uses. The 1884 Worthington dictionary from New York supplies some of the rules of use below.
Phillips’s 1825 preface sets out a rule for a plant with more than one meaning: choose “the emblem of the greatest antiquity, or the one most established by custom”, and in some instances note “their various interpretations”. Later authors did not all follow that rule. The RHS says each author laid out their own version of the language, drawing on different sources and preferences.
Greenaway’s 1884 book and Flora’s 1870 dictionary share exact wording in places. Both give the hydrangea as “A boaster. Heartlessness.” Both give the same four tulip entries: Fame, Declaration of love, Beautiful eyes and Hopeless love. This suggests copying or a shared source. We did not trace which.
Stop missing your zone's planting windows.
Select your US zone and month — get a complete checklist of what to plant, prune, feed, and protect right now.
→ View My Garden CalendarThe rules of use: how to read a bouquet
Reversing a flower
A flower given reversed means the opposite of its usual meaning. Tyas states this as “the first rule in the Language of Flowers”: a flower presented upright expresses a thought, and letting it hang down reversed expresses the opposite. Flora’s and the Worthington dictionary state the same rule. Tyas’s example is a rosebud with its thorns and leaves, which says “I fear, but I hope”, and the same bud reversed says “You must neither fear nor hope”.
Thorns and leaves: three books, three readings
Tyas, Flora’s and Worthington all explain the rosebud through its thorns and leaves, and they do not agree. Flora’s and Worthington say outright that the thorns stand for fear and the leaves for hope, and Tyas’s examples point the same way, but the sentence each book attaches to the same bud differs.
| State of the rosebud | Tyas (1869) | Flora’s (1870) | Worthington (1884) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Thorns removed, leaves kept | “There is everything to hope for” | “I fear, but I hope”; for a bud “already used”, “There is much to hope” | “I fear no longer; I hope” |
| Thorns and leaves both removed | Not given | “There may be neither hope nor fear”; for a bud “already used”, “There is everything to fear” | “There is nothing to hope or fear” |
| Leaves removed, thorns kept | “There is everything to fear” | Not given | Not given |
The takeaway is that a thornless bud with its leaves reads as “everything to hope for” in Tyas and “I fear, but I hope” in Flora’s. Flora’s also gives a second reading, “There is much to hope”, for a bud already used and deprived of its thorns.
Position on the body
The position of a flower on the wearer also changed its meaning, and all three books use the marigold as the example. Tyas says a marigold placed on the head signifies sorrows of the mind, placed above the heart it speaks of the pangs of love, and resting on the breast it expresses ennui. Flora’s says on the head it means distress of mind and on the bosom listlessness. The Worthington dictionary says on the head it means mental anguish and on the bosom indifference, and the RHS repeats that version.
University of Maryland Extension gives a different position rule for the tussie-mussie: pinned to the breast it meant the sender was only a friend, and pinned over the heart it was a declaration of love. We did not find that rule in the three books’ rule passages.
Left versus right: the tilt of the flower
In the three dictionaries that state a left and right rule, it concerns the tilt of the flower, not the hand that gives it. Tyas says the first person is indicated by inclining the flower to the right and the second person by inclining it to the left. Flora’s says the pronoun “I” is understood by changing the flower to the right and “thou” by inclining it to the left. The Worthington dictionary gives the same rule: “I” by bending the flower toward the right hand and “thou” by inclining it to the left.
The three passages contain no rule about which hand gives the flower. The RHS says that by the 1850s many books held that presentation affected meaning, so that the tilt of a ranunculus separated the compliment “You are radiant with charms” from an accidental accusation of being big-headed.
The Worthington dictionary adds three gestures. Touching the flower to the lips means “yes”. Pinching off a petal and casting it away means “no”. A laurel leaf twisted round the bouquet means “I am”.
The tussie-mussie: the posy that carried the message
A tussie-mussie is a small bouquet, also called a nosegay. Smithsonian Gardens says that during the Victorian era fashionable young ladies in Europe and America often carried tussie-mussies or nosegays at dinner parties, concerts and balls. To keep the flowers fresh, special holders called porte-bouquets or bouquetiers were used. Many holders had a ring attached to a delicate chain, which let the owner dangle the bouquet from a finger while dancing. The finest holders were made of gold and silver and set with semiprecious stones, and some had little mirrors.
Smithsonian Gardens adds that, under the strict moral codes of the time, flowers were one of the few gifts a gentleman could give a lady before they were engaged. The same page says these holders largely disappeared by World War I. University of Maryland Extension describes the tussie-mussie as herbs with a single flower in the center that a lady could pin to a dress or topcoat.
Ten flowers the dictionaries disagree on
Each of the ten flowers below carries more than one meaning across the four dictionaries. Each cell gives the words the book prints.
| Flower | Dumont (1851) | Tyas (1869) | Flora’s (1870) | Greenaway (1884) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yellow rose | Jealousy; “Infidelity” in its closing dictionary | Unfaithfulness | Jealousy. Decrease of love. Let us forget. Infidelity | Decrease of love. Jealousy |
| Marigold | Grief | Pain. Chagrin | Cruelty. Grief. Contempt | Grief |
| Peony | Anger | Shame | Shame. Bashfulness. Ostentation | Shame. Bashfulness |
| Daffodil and narcissus | Self-love (narcissus and daffodil together) | Egotism (poet’s narcissus); Disdain (yellow narcissus) | Daffodil: Regard. Uncertainty | Daffodil: Regard; narcissus: Egotism |
| Hyacinth | Constancy in its entry; “Game, play” in its closing dictionary | Game. Play | Sport; blue: Constancy; purple: Sorrow | Sport. Game. Play |
| Larkspur | Flights of fancy in its entry; “Lightness” in its closing dictionary | Swiftness | Lightness. Levity | Lightness. Levity |
| White lily | Majesty (entry titled “Lily”) | Majesty (Lilium candidum) | Purity and sweetness | Purity. Sweetness (imperial lily: Majesty) |
| Ivy | Constancy in its contents list; “Friendship” in its closing dictionary | Friendship | Friendship. Fidelity. Matrimony | Fidelity. Marriage |
| Pink (Dianthus) | Pure love | Lively and pure affection | Boldness; red double pink: Pure affection | Boldness; single pink: Pure love |
| Sunflower | False riches | False riches | Dwarf: Adoration; tall: Haughtiness. False riches | Dwarf: Adoration; tall: Haughtiness |
Dumont and Tyas agree with each other on the lily (Majesty) and the sunflower (False riches). Greenaway splits the sunflower into adoration for the dwarf and haughtiness for the tall, and gives the white lily purity. The hyacinth comes closest to agreement: all four books give a game, play or sport reading, and Dumont’s entry and Flora’s blue hyacinth add constancy. For the yellow rose the four books give jealousy, unfaithfulness, infidelity and a decrease of love, and none of them gives friendship.
University of Maryland Extension says the yellow rose symbolized friendship in Victorian England. That reading appears in none of the four books we searched.
Why one flower meant different things
The sources point to five reasons.
Each compiler reasoned from the plant. Dumont says the peony “is chosen as the emblem of Anger from its red and fiery hues”. Tyas gives the yellow narcissus disdain because disdainful persons “are for the most part exacting”, and the yellow narcissus is “the least beautiful, most devoid of fragrance, and yet it demands more care than the rest”. Tyas gives the yellow rose unfaithfulness because yellow is “the colour which we usually assign to faults of unfaithfulness”.
A single book can disagree with itself. Dumont gives the hyacinth constancy in its entry, based on the blue hyacinth, and “Game, play” in its closing Dictionary of Flowers. It gives the larkspur flights of fancy in the entry and lightness in the closing dictionary, and ivy constancy in the contents and friendship in the dictionary.
The same plant sits under different names. The RHS says later authors sometimes listed the same plants more than once, under English and American common names, with different meanings. Daffodil and narcissus show a similar split in our table, where Dumont joins them and Greenaway separates them.
Books share wording. Greenaway and Flora’s match word for word on the hydrangea and the tulip, which suggests that a meaning could pass from one book to another.
Later summaries drift from the dated books. The yellow rose as “friendship” appears in a 2023 extension article and in none of the four dictionaries. Check which book a modern one-word meaning comes from.
The RHS gives a modern example of the choice. The flowers for the wedding bouquet of Catherine, Princess of Wales, were chosen by the flower arranger Shane Conolly for their meanings and included ivy (fidelity) and hyacinths (constancy). Those two meanings match Greenaway’s ivy and the blue hyacinth in Flora’s and Dumont.
Using a flower dictionary today
If you want to send a message in flowers, name the dictionary on the card. That advice is ours, not a rule from any of the books. The ten flowers in the table show that two readers with two different books can read the same bouquet two ways.
The gardenia shows how modern lists differ from the books. Our gardenia meaning page covers the “I love you secretly” reading. Greenaway has no gardenia entry, and in Greenaway “Secret love” belongs to the yellow acacia. Flora’s index also gives “Secret love” to the yellow acacia, motherwort and toothwort, and it lists “Refinement” against the gardenia.
The forget-me-not is the rare case where the books agree closely, because the meaning is the name. Greenaway gives it as “True love. Forget me not.” and Flora’s as “Remembrance. True love. Forget me not.” Tyas titles the entry “Forget-me-not” and Dumont says “the name of this flower expresses clearly enough the meaning”. Our forget-me-not meaning page covers the legend. For the rose, which Greenaway lists simply as “Love”, our rose meaning guide works through the colours.
From meaning to growing: plants for a message bouquet
Most of the flowers in the dictionaries are ordinary garden plants, and a bouquet can be built from a bed. Our cottage garden flowers guide covers garden plants of this kind, and our cut flower guide covers growing them for the vase. The flower symbolism guide then lets you check each flower’s meaning, flower by flower.
Floriography FAQ
What is floriography?
Floriography is the language of flowers, the practice of giving each flower a meaning so a bouquet can carry a message. The RHS dates the fashion for encoded bouquets in Britain and America to the 1820s through the 1880s.
What does floriography mean?
Floriography means “language of flowers”. CSUN uses the word for the Victorian codification of flower meanings in dictionary form.
Who invented the language of flowers?
No single person invented it. The RHS names Charlotte de la Tour’s 1819 Le langage des fleurs as the first popular book, and Cornell University Library calls it the first book completely devoted to floriography, though not the first to cover the subject in Europe. Turkish lists of object meanings are older, and Hammer-Purgstall published one in 1809.
Is the Turkish selam the origin of floriography?
Sources disagree. De la Tour cited Montagu’s letters for a Turkish origin, and Cornell says a European origin is more likely. The Turkish lists link objects and meanings by rhyme, and the dictionaries link flowers and meanings by traits and tradition.
What is a tussie-mussie?
A tussie-mussie is a small bouquet, also called a nosegay. Smithsonian Gardens says Victorian ladies carried them at dinner parties, concerts and balls, often in a holder called a porte-bouquet or bouquetier.
What is the rule for the left and right hand in floriography?
In Tyas, Flora’s and the Worthington dictionary, left and right refer to the tilt of the flower: right for “I” and left for “thou”. The passages we read have no rule about giving a flower with the left or right hand.
Why do flower dictionaries disagree about meanings?
Compilers reasoned from different traits, shared wording between books, and listed plants under different names. A single book, Dumont’s, gives the hyacinth, the larkspur and ivy different meanings in its entries and its closing dictionary.
Which flower dictionary should I use?
Any one will do if the sender and the reader use the same one, so name the book on the card. Greenaway’s 1884 book is free to read in full at Project Gutenberg, and Tyas’s 1869 book is free at the Internet Archive.
Sources
- Royal Horticultural Society. The language of flowers: a lover’s code (adapted from Elliott, B. “The Victorian Language of Flowers”, RHS Lindley Library Occasional Papers, vol. 10). RHS Libraries
- Smithsonian Gardens. Floral Fashions: From Bouquets to Buttonholes (exhibition page, Wayback Machine snapshot of 22 June 2025)
- Cornell University Library. Written in Petals: The Language of Flowers in Victorian Europe, “Le Langage des Fleurs, by Charlotte de La Tour” (online exhibition)
- California State University, Northridge, University Library, Special Collections & Archives. Floriography: The Language of Flowers (3 March 2022)
- Ward, C. T. Floral Fancies. University of Maryland Extension, Frederick County Master Gardener article, February 2023
- Koç Keskin, N. Çiçeklerin Gizli Dili [Secret Language of Flowers]. Millî Folklor 127 (2020): 194–208
- Montagu, M. W. Letters of the Right Honourable Lady M—y W—y M—e, new edition, Thomas Martin, London, 1790 (Letter XL, “Pera, March 16, O. S.”). Project Gutenberg ebook 17520
- Phillips, H. Floral Emblems. Saunders and Otley, London, 1825. Internet Archive
- Dumont, H. The Language of Flowers: The Floral Offering. H. C. Peck and Theo. Bliss, Philadelphia, 1851. Project Gutenberg ebook 71779
- Tyas, R. The Language of Flowers: or, Floral Emblems of Thoughts, Feelings, and Sentiments. George Routledge and Sons, London, 1869. Internet Archive
- Flora’s Pocket Dictionary: A Lexicon of the Language and Sentiment of Flowers. Porter and Coates, Philadelphia, 1870. Internet Archive
- Greenaway, K. Language of Flowers. George Routledge and Sons, London (printed by Edmund Evans). Project Gutenberg ebook 31591
- The Language of Flowers, Including Floral Poetry. R. Worthington, New York, 1884. Internet Archive
