Hyacinthus orientalis var. albulus Roman Hyacinth

[Tony Willis]

Oron

I have seen both ssp in the wild and  I see minor differences explained by being within normal limits of variability. It is one where the splitters have been at work.

I think this is another one where we have to agree to disagree!

[Oron Peri]

Tony
I agree to disagree

Look at this one and tell me they look the same: color, length of lobes and width of leaves.

[Oron Peri]

Axel

Your pink form might be 'Rosalie', an old, early flowering, pink cultivar.

[Sinchets]

The Roman Hyacinths we have in the garden here are quite different from what I have grown as H.o.chionophyllus. They also look different to the one pictured in Philips and Rix. They really aren't much to look at and they lack the charm of the wild subspecies, but I suppose represent a selection that was all that was available before the large Dutch hybrids. Most gardens here have them because like Tulips and Madonna Lilies they were favourites of the Ottomans, in fact the Bulgarian word for Hyacinth (and indeed Crocus and Tulip) are Turkish loan words. I suppose they were brought here historically by the Ottomans and then cultivated by their subjects.

[Tony Willis]

Oron

we seem to have moved of the original subject but can you identify which ssp each of these is?

I agree yours looks different but then so do you and I.

[Oron Peri]

Tony

By the flowers [since the leaves of the second are missing], i would say the first is ssp. orientalis and the second ssp. chionophyllus.

I agree yours looks different but then so do you and I.

So according to this all Galanthus for example are one species too...

[Maggi Young]

So according to this all Galanthus for example are one species too...

 AT LAST! Someone is finally getting my message!! Hurrah! Tomorrow the world!!

[Michael J Campbell]

 

[Tony Willis]

Tony

By the flowers [since the leaves of the second are missing], i would say the first is ssp. orientalis and the second ssp. chionophyllus.

I agree yours looks different but then so do you and I.

So according to this all Galanthus for example are one species too...

Oron

I give in you win.

However we are not saying they are different species but dividing them into ssp on some minor botanical differences which if numerous specimens were examined would prove to be of no importance.I have no comments on galanthus but the numerous new crocus and narcissus species is another matter

[Rodger Whitlock]

So according to this all Galanthus for example are one species too...

 AT LAST! Someone is finally getting my message!! Hurrah! Tomorrow the world!!

The Taxonomic Orthodoxy Department of the Thought Police would like a word with you.

[Oron Peri]

Tony

I wish i could express my self better in English...

It is not a mater of winning,
I think it is because i see the differences and out of respect to the researchers who studied the plants in the field or in the herbarium.
I do not always agree with them but i find it positive to doubt things some times like we do now here.

I totally agree with you regarding many new species or forms that appear often and i do not give importance to names given to new forms just because they have curly leaves or a darker color, they do not have any botanical or scientific importance only as a new object for collectors.

The two ssp mentioned here are well documented based on large populations and not upon one or two plants that appeared occasionally.  

[Rodger Whitlock]

A question (and perhaps a complaint):

In this thread I've seen the word "wild" used when the correct term would seem to be "feral".

My understanding is that there is a wild form of H. orientalis. The so-called Roman hyacinths are selections from it, not very different, but nonetheless cultivated plants. The Roman hyacinths are now very scarce in cultivation, evidently entirely out of commerce in spite of their sweet scent. Some of us have an interest in old cultivated plants that have largely disappeared, so I would ask those contributing to this thread to distinguish between the true wild form and the ancient cultivated forms gone feral.

We have a similar situation here in Victoria: the landscape abounds with feral daffodils, many of which are ancient cultivars such as 'Conspicuus'. For sure, since the genus Narcissus is not native to North America, nearly all "wild" daffodils here are really cultivars gone feral. (There are a very few exceptions where imaginative gardeners have eased some of the smaller species such as N. bulbocodium and N. cyclamineus into cracks in rock outcrops where they survive and may even seed.)

Another similar situation appertains to certain "wild" tulips found in southern France. A number of these have been given botanical names, but they are probably descended from cultivated tulips and hence are properly feral, not wild.

[partisangardener]

Thank You very much Rodger your text should be highlighted with thunder. If I missuse it, only because I did not know the right expression, sorry. Educating forum.

[partisangardener]

My feral roman hyacinth is out again. Some blue ones are planted nearby. Nobody had the white ones, not even seen. Another year another chance.

[mark smyth]

Tony your blue flowered plant is very nice.

Axel maybe you have a new cultivar/selection