Galanthus naming- digression from Gala 2012 thread

[mark smyth]

This post modified to create a new thread, a digression from the Gala 2012 thread

Since the absence of a sales list from Joe Sharman was remarked upon earlier in this thread, I thought I should mention that mine arrived in the post today.  Since "orders received after 7th February will not be accepted" there is a tight deadline should you wish to order something. 

No list arrived here. Wait till I get my hands on him

[Thomas Seiler]

Mine arrived here today and the order is made ... 

[snowdropman]

No list arrived here. Wait till I get my hands on him

When you do lay hands on him  can you see if you can find out why he has named one of his new snowdrops 'Ruby Baker' when this name has already been taken (p. 270 'Snowdrops')

G. 'Ruby Baker' was only sold under this name by Ronald Mackenzie in his 2011 catalogue.

Yet more confusion

[mark smyth]

Cant it be the same plant?

[snowdropman]

Cant it be the same plant?

No - the 'Ruby Baker' named by Robin Hall is a Hybrid - the 'Ruby Baker' named by JS is on his list as a G. reginae-olgae subsp. reginae-olgae and described as "the best green-tipped RO so far"

[daveyp1970]

No list arrived here. Wait till I get my hands on him

When you do lay hands on him  can you see if you can find out why he has named one of his new snowdrops 'Ruby Baker' when this name has already been taken (p. 270 'Snowdrops')

G. 'Ruby Baker' was only sold under this name by Ronald Mackenzie in his 2011 catalogue.

Yet more confusion

At the last talk Joe did he explained about this,he said his snowdrop was more like what Ruby would have wanted for a snowdrop named after her and sod it he was still keeping the name(in my opinion that's how it came across,i might be wrong),I think Brian could explain it better.

[johnw]

It is -5c and the power has been off since 10:30. Just warming up.

Here is a shot of Ruby Baker at Primrose Hill.  How can Joe possibly name another snowdrop using that name, unless of course it has not been formally registered by Robin (it's in the book so the name stands)?

In recognition of her many contributions I agree a 'Ruby Baker' should have been an extraordinary snowdrop that stops people in their tracks.

johnw

[mark smyth]

Ruby Baker in Robin's garden is pure elwesii, as far as I can tell, as seen in the photo above

[johnw]

Ruby Baker in Robin's garden is pure elwesii, as far as I can tell, as seen in the photo above

Mark -  That's what I thought.  In that area of the garden there were several good patches of named snowdrops without labels.  So whilst photographing I was particularly careful to note the names on paper as Robin stood by and sang them out.  It was a confusing area as we had Cicely Hall, Cicely Hall Improved, The Whopper and Ruby Baker, several clumps of each and all repeated in random order.

johnw

[chasw]

So if my list arrives on Monday the 6th I have no chance of ordering then?

[Brian Ellis]

I think Brian could explain it better.

No that was perfect Davey.  He had tried to think of using Ruby's middle name, maiden name etc etc etc before coming to that conclusion.  It is a Galanthus reginæ-olgæ so shouldn't appear at the same time as the other......

[snowdropman]

How can Joe possibly name another snowdrop using that name, unless of course it has not been formally registered by Robin?

In recognition of her many contributions I agree a 'Ruby Baker' should have been an extraordinary snowdrop that stops people in their tracks.

johnw

My understanding is that, under the nomenclature rules, once a name is formally published, with a description, and. G. 'Ruby Baker' has already so been formally published with a detailed description, on p.270 of 'Snowdrops', then that name cannot be used again for the same genus.

I agree entirely with John's sentiment - it is well known that Ruby Baker has a particular liking for green-tipped snowdrops, indeed many of her finds have been green-tips, and it would have been entirely appropriate if the snowdrop named for her fell into this category, but that is not a justification for both flouting the nomenclature rules or, as a consequence, for adding to the naming confusion.

Our Forumist Hagen Engelmann was faced with exactly this dilemna a few years ago when he found a very nice green-tipped peshmenii which he wanted to name in honour of Ruby Baker - his solution was to name it 'Ruby's Geburtstagsblumen' (which translates as Ruby's Birthday Flowers) - with a bit of imagination , I am sure that JS could have come up with a similar solution.

Now it will be left to Matt Bishop to sort this out in 'Snowdrops2' - he will not, indeed he cannot, publish the JS snowdrop as 'Ruby Baker', but he will instead have to insist on another name being chosen - but in the meanwhile snowdrops bearing this invalis name will be circulating.

[snowdropman]

He had tried to think of using Ruby's middle name, maiden name etc etc etc before coming to that conclusion.  It is a Galanthus reginæ-olgæ so shouldn't appear at the same time as the other......

Whilst, as per previous my post, I am very sympathetic to the dilemna, I am afraid that timing of flowering etc is irrelevant - you just cannot have two plants of the same genus, with the same name

[johnw]

Chris - I have edited my previous posting.  Somehow I thought John Grimshaw had written in an article that Robin would be naming the plant for Ruby Baker and now realize that it is indeed in the book so case closed. Pity the flower wasn't opened the day we saw it.  John does not mention a quality concern though he does with other snowdrops named after famous people so let's hope it's up to its expected snuff.

Back to its hybridity (it's under hybrids in the book), if you look at the photo closely seems there are some strays in the clump.

johnw

[Martin Baxendale]

While I understand the belt and braces approach of the rules on nomenclature, I've always thought that occasionally using the same personal name more than once shouldn't cause serious problems within the genus galanthus if it's applied to different species which are very easily distinguished by their leaves, such as (in this case) elwesii (or elwesii x gracilis) and reginae olgae. I imagine that's why Joe thinks it shouldn't cause major headaches and is persisting. I sympathise, especially given the circumstances. It would be nice if there was an exception in the rules for this kind of situation, especially where the use of the name honours someone like Ruby Baker who has been so important in the cultural history of the genus involved.