Galanthus: January 2008

[Gerard Oud]

Become a member!

[Martin Baxendale]

Returning to the subject of plant awards from RHS committees... there is often criticism there of too many plants being named ... but then, when a committee decides to make an award to a plant, invariably that award is made " subject to the application of a cultivar name"..... and so the circle widens!

But surely the committee has decided that the plant in question is distinct and has qualities that make it worthy of naming and widespread cultivation in gardens - that being the purpose of the award in the first place.  And it'd be impossible to actually give an award to something without a name - otherwise all awards would be something like "Award of Merit to that superb Narcissus triandrus X bulbocodium hybrid we looked at on January 29th 2007, the one with the large sulphur-yellow flower...."

[Maggi Young]

Well, sometimes what you say is the case, Martin but oftentimes it is just a good plant species which is not particulalry variable and so hardly warrants a new name     

[loes]

thanks for the help Gerard  

[Martin Baxendale]

Well, sometimes what you say is the case, Martin but oftentimes it is just a good plant species which is not particulalry variable and so hardly warrants a new name     

Yes, that's the one problematic case that did occur to me. I suppose awards committees are wary of giving an award to a species generally, because you may get different clones within that species which are better or poorer for garden culture and showing. So they want to award the actual plant shown, and make sure the award isn't applied to less desirable clones, which means the plant has to be given a cultivar name.

In that case, I see what you mean. But it sort of begs the question, why give an award to a clone of a species that isn't different enough or outstanding enough from the basic species. Surely if a species as a whole deserves an award, it should get the A.G.M.

Aren't P.C., A.M. and F.C.C awards given to plants for their merits as show plants, not neccessarily for their garden-worthiness? I thought that was why the RHS brought in the A.G.M., as an award separate to the show awards, to indicate garden-worthiness (either of a species generally or of a specific clone or cultivar).

In which case, a plant of the type you suggest (not particularly outstanding from the species generally) should perhaps be given some kind of separate award for the whole species as a show plant (like and S.P.C for Species Preliminary Commendation.. S.A.M. and S.F.C.C.) in which case a cultivar name then wouldn't be needed.

Ta-da!

[Martin Baxendale]

But then of course, the awards committee still have the problem that, although a species generally might be a good show plant, odd poor individuals might crop up that are not good show plants. It would have to be clearly stated and understood that an award to a species for its general show qualities as a species was just that - a general award that meant a species was (generally speaking) good for showing, but not neccessarily every individual.

Which sort of makes a nonsense of the award. So in this case I think I'd agree with you Maggie - probably best not to award a plant unless it is an superb clone that really stands out from the general variablility of the species.

[David Nicholson]

Just been reading an article about a Snowdrop grower named James Allen who gardened in Shepton Mallet in Somerset. James died in 1906 so he predates the Forum and most! of the members by the odd year or three!

The article says that of Allen's two favourite selections 'Charmer' and 'Galatea', only 'Galatea' has survived to this day. Does anyone know if this statement is still true and if it is does anyone have a picture of 'Galatea'? It goes on to say that one of his most famous selections, 'Magnet' had the seed parent G. nivalis 'Melvillei'. Further selections said to still exist are 'Anne of Geierstein' and 'Robin Hood'. I have a feeling we have had a picture of 'Magnet' posted before but it would be nice to see pictures of them all if they do exist?

[KentGardener]

'Charmer', 'Galatea',  'Magnet', 'Anne of Geierstein', 'Robin Hood'.  It would be nice to see pictures of them all if they do exist?

Hi David

interesting post.  I have Galatea, Magnet and Robin Hood growing in my garden and will post pictures if I manage to get any this year.  'Anne of Gerstein' is still around as I know a forum member has seen it in a garden in Norfolk - and I am sure I saw it for sale from one of the big boys this year.

Charmer - could well be gone forever 

kind regards

John

[snowdropman]

David - 'Galatea' has certainly survived and, in my garden, is just about a week away from opening its flowers (although there is considerable doubt whether this is the same clone that James Allen grew).

The other snowdrops that you mention still exist, and many people would have at least some of them on their Top 20 Lists.

I remain without camera, but I am sure that others will post pictures for you.

[snowdropman]

'Anne of Gerstein' is still around as I know a forum member has seen it in a garden in Norfolk - and I am sure I saw it for sale from one of the big boys this year.

Charmer - could well be gone forever 

John - 'Anne of Geierstein' is, as you say, very much still alive - it is the one with the brittle petals, so not recommended for trying to push back the outer petals to look at the marks on the inners - the outer petals are just as likely to fall off!

Said to be difficult to grow, but I suspect that it is more a question of finding the right growing conditions - whether by luck, or judgement, mine does okay, and has reproduced well, in an open position, but where it does not get direct sun. It was John Morley, of North Green Snowdrops, that you saw offering it this year (one bulb per customer at £25 per bulb).

'Charmer' is indeed believed to be totally extinct.

David - According to the 'Snowdrops' book, in 1886 James Allen claimed to be growing every variety of snowdrop then in cultivation. It says that he was probably the first person to deliberately raise snowdrop seedlings but that, sadly, a combination of botrytis & narcissus fly wiped out most of his selections.

'Robin Hood' is another one of Allen's snowdrops (like 'Galatea') where what is grown under that name today, is not what Allen originally grew under that name.

[Maggi Young]

Aren't P.C., A.M. and F.C.C awards given to plants for their merits as show plants, not neccessarily for their garden-worthiness? I thought that was why the RHS brought in the A.G.M., as an award separate to the show awards, to indicate garden-worthiness (either of a species generally or of a specific clone or cultivar).

Quite so, Martin, theey are awards for "plants for exhibition"

In which case, a plant of the type you suggest (not particularly outstanding from the species generally) should perhaps be given some kind of separate award for the whole species as a show plant (like and S.P.C for Species Preliminary Commendation.. S.A.M. and S.F.C.C.) in which case a cultivar name then wouldn't be needed

A good idea, Martin... perhaps you'd like to write to the RHS making the suggestion?

[David Nicholson]

Thanks Chris and John for your replies. If anyone else has pictures of these (alleged) old varieties I would love to see them.

[mark smyth]

Ask and you receive

[Lesley Cox]

'Robin Hood' is another one of Allen's snowdrops (like 'Galatea') where what is grown under that name today, is not what Allen originally grew under that name.

Which surely highlights the stupidity of this whole naming thing. In another 25 years what has been named in the last 25, will have been composted or around your gardens as something quite different anyway.

Why don't you face it? In 99 of 100 cases, naming a plant such as another Galanthus (or Tulip, or Narcissus, or Dahlia or bearded or Siberian Iris et al), is nothing more than someone's little ego trip. As Martin says "vive la difference" but dear God, let there BE a difference. 

[Martin Baxendale]

 

but dear God, let there BE a difference. 

Agreed.