The generic name Corymbium was employed by Linnaeus in Corollarium Generum Plantarum (Linnaeus 1737), Hortus Cliff ortianus (Linnaeus 1738), and Genera Plantarum ed. 2 (Linnaeus 1742) and ascribed to Gronovius (in Burman's Rariorum Africanarum Plantarum, 1738–39). With valid pub-lication in Species Plantarum (Linnaeus 1753) the offi cial name became Corymbium L. Linnaeus placed the genus in his Syngenesia Monogamia together with Jasione, Lobelia, Viola and Impatiens on account of the unusual capitular and fl oral morphology, but in his outlines of a natural system he placed the genus with the other members of Compositae. Thus in the Fragmenta Methodi Naturalis, which appeared as an appendix in the Paris edition of the Genera Plantarum (1743), he placed Corymbium in "XXI Ordo", comprising all genera that he would later refer to as Compositae. Cassini (1818, 1829) referred Corymbium without hesi-tation to Vernonieae, where it has since traditionally been placed (Lessing 1832; De Candolle 1836; Harvey 1865; Bentham 1873a, b; Hoff mann 1890–1894; Jones 1977; Weitz 1989, 1990), although the genus has never fi t com-fortably in that tribe. Bentham (1873b) noted that the pistil of Corymbium has a distinct ovary that is long, cylindrical, and densely hirsute, and very short style branches, while in typical Vernonieae the ovary is not densely hirsute and the style branches are long and slender (Jones 1977). Bolick (1978) also noted that Corymbium pollen diff ered from that of other Vernonieae. Based on signifi cant diff er-ences in sesquiterpene lactones and diterpenes, Bohlmann and his collaborators (Zdero and Bohlmann 1988; Bohl-mann and Jakupovic 1990) suggested Corymbium be re-moved from Vernonieae. Bremer (1994) in a cladistic analysis of Compositae found Corymbium morphologi-cally anomalous in Vernonieae and removed it from the tribe. In his treatment Corymbium was placed in subfamily Cichorioideae but without a tribal assignment. Similarly, Robinson (1996) excluded Corymbium from Vernonieae based on the chemistry and morphology, but proposed no other tribal placement. Molecular data (Panero and Funk 2002, 2008) refl ect the morphological, palynological and chemical disparities noted by earlier workers (described above). Sequence in-formation showed that Corymbium did not belong in any existing tribe or subfamily and so was placed in its own tribe, Corymbieae, and its own subfamily, Corymbioideae (Panero and Funk 2002) (see the metatree in Chapter 44). In addition, Corymbium was strongly supported as the sis-ter group to the entire subfamily Asteroideae which con-tains 65% of the genera within the family. The removal of Corymbium from Vernonieae has been accepted by the systematic community (Nordenstam 2007) and the re-cent molecular phylogeny of Vernonieae by Keeley et al. (2007) did not include this genus.