Scottish Rock Garden Club Forum
Bulbs => Galanthus => Topic started by: mark smyth on February 04, 2012, 04:54:00 PM
-
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
-
Mine arrived here today and the order is made ... :)
-
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') :o
G. 'Ruby Baker' was only sold under this name by Ronald Mackenzie in his 2011 catalogue.
Yet more confusion ::)
-
Cant it be the same plant?
-
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"
-
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') :o
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.
-
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
-
Ruby Baker in Robin's garden is pure elwesii, as far as I can tell, as seen in the photo above
-
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
-
So if my list arrives on Monday the 6th I have no chance of ordering then?
-
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......
-
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.
-
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
-
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
-
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.
-
While a person such as Ruby Baker certainly deserves to have a fine flower named for her, it is surely not sensible to muddy the waters of an already rather grubby pond by naming another plant in the same genus?
The "average" gardener has enough trouble telling any snowdrop apart, let alone be able to distinguish between different species.
Add to that the problems when a 'late' drop flowers early , or vice versa, and the level of confusion likely to arise is laughable, or would be, if it were not so ridiculous.
-
While a person such as Ruby Baker certainly deserves to have a fine flower named for her, it is surely not sensible to muddy the waters of an already rather grubby pond by naming another plant in the same genus?
The "average" gardener has enough trouble telling any snowdrop apart, let alone be able to distinguish between different species.
Add to that the problems when a 'late' drop flowers early , or vice versa, and the level of confusion likely to arise is laughable, or would be, if it were not so ridiculous.
Perhaps Dame Ruby Baker! You'll have to get onto that Maggi then Joe will have a name.
johnw
-
I don't think that would work either......( supposing someone has the power to arrange that particular honour).....think of the confusions that arise with G.P. Baker and George Baker in the Corydalis naming... such confusions are legion. Cassiope George Taylor/Sir George Taylor..... these are single plants going under differing names. That's bad enough without having to cope with diferent plants under names that refer to the same person.
-
I wasn't suggesting wholesale multiple-naming within the genus. It's just that the nomenclature rules were obviously drawn up as a very broad-brush approach to cover a great many genera, including many where there are lots of cultivars (often hybrids) normally only identified by genus and cultivar name, and in those circumstances it obviously makes sense not to duplicate cultivar names. All I was thinking was that the problem is likely to be lessened a bit in the case of two galanthus species cultivars which are both visually distinct and pretty much always identified in books and catalogues (and conversation) by genus, species and cultivar name. In any case, the argument is moot since Joe will probably do whatever he decides to do and no-one can actually force him to change his mind. In which case Matt will have to find some way of writing about Joe's reginae-olgae in some way that reflects the nomenclatural situation or leave it out of the book (which would be a bit silly). Not trying to start any rows here, just think it's an interesting discussion to have.
-
.........under the nomenclature rules, once a name is formally published, with a description, .....then that name cannot be used again for the same genus .........not a justification for both flouting the nomenclature rules...........Now it will be left to Matt Bishop to sort this out......... he will instead have to insist on another name being chosen - but in the meanwhile snowdrops bearing this invalis name will be circulating.
[/quote]
This all feels a bit heavy. And a touch authoritarian. The power to decree what is or isn't permissible for the whole of the genus Galanthus rests with one person? I mean, COME ON!! It's little white flowers, not membership of the MCC.
-
..and after seeing Joe Sharman and other worthies standing about in the perishing cold today to give us a chance to buy our hearts' desires, maybe this is an opportune moment to comment how much we owe not just to BDG but to the Sharmans/Streets/Mackenzies/Morleys/Broadhursts etc of this world who do their stuff in the coldest wettest months to give us a service and a choice. Gentlemen (and some ladies), some of whom I haven't cited above, take a bow.
-
( supposing someone has the power to arrange that particular honour)
I thought you might arrange that, surely you have Her email address.
Lesson to be learned on possible premature naming, let's hope that not the case in this particular instance and the flower of RB is a super one.
johnw
-
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.
Got my list today and didn't notice the order deadline - didn't even think to look for one, assuming the list would be current for at least a fortnight or so. If I'd known, I'd have got my order in the post today. Now I'll have to mail it first thing Monday and hope it gets there the next day. A bit annoying, especially since the weather may well hold up the mail at the start of the week.
-
8 pages about the Gala has been viewed 3636 times!
-
8 pages about the Gala has been viewed 3636 times!
Quite! THAT is why it is important that the names are distinct.... even if the blasted flowers are not :(
-
636 of those were me. ;D
-
8 pages about the Gala has been viewed 3636 times!
Quite! THAT is why it is important that the names are distinct.... even if the blasted flowers are not :(
Point taken, Maggi :-*
-
It does make you wonder if Galanthus fever is reaching fever pitch! There is a sort of 'Botanical Correctness' and there is 'Gardening' and the two sometimes don't intermesh so happily. I agree with Steve's comments, having done quite a bit of standing out in the cold and rain selling plants, and gardening too. On the other hand I love the Snowdrop Book and the stories that go with the plants. I wonder if you can be a 'semi- galanthophile?' I suspect not because I am already wondering how it is possible to have an improved 'Cicely Hall'!
-
Tim
Agreed. If I start to place the enjoyment of plants second to grim pedantry and a gradgrindianhttp://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=definition%20of%20gradgrindian&source=web&cd=3&sqi=2&ved=0CC0QFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wordnik.com%2Fwords%2FGradgrindian&ei=PrYtT_PjK6Ou0QXkr62tCA&usg=AFQjCNHHIums3NNH9f8t87vmdH6wSV6Bhw approach you have my permission to take me out and shoot me.
Steve
-
whoops! pasting that link bombed! back of class Owen :'(
-
whoops! pasting that link bombed! back of class Owen :'(
Also the pasting could have been pasted better. ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Dear me, Steve, for a man who has a national collection I would have thought that you would have understood the importance of clarity and lack of ambiguity in naming.
For those of us who truly delight in the glory of the flowers, there is more of the Gradgrind in the obsessive naming and and collecting than in a simple desire to wish that a name means something tangible.
I fear you are missing my point.
There was no intention by Maggi Young to cast aspersions on the important work that Steve Owen does in holding a National Collection. Indeed Maggi has the deepest respect for all the holders of national collections who, like Members of the SRGC volunteer their time in the cause of the plants.
-
Perhaps we should all take a deep breath and let this one go before it creates bad feelings. I fear I may have stirred up a nomenclatural hornets' nest, for which I apologise.
-
I suspect not because I am already wondering how it is possible to have an improved 'Cicely Hall'!
Tim - I thought the same thing standing right in front of it with 'Cicely Hall' off to my left. If CHI performs better at Primrose Hill then maybe so, the clump was quite substantial compared to that of Cicely Hall, flowers maybe 10% bigger but then again RH has probably been propagting from his CH clump. I'd have humbly offered to try it here but...
Have to say Robin knows his bananas.
johnw
-
Steve,
The naming of plants is, indeed, quite pedantic but, perhaps unfortunately at times, perfectly necessary. Having two snowdrops with the same name makes no sense at all.
Paddy
-
..and after seeing Joe Sharman and other worthies standing about in the perishing cold today to give us a chance to buy our hearts' desires, maybe this is an opportune moment to comment how much we owe not just to BDG but to the Sharmans/Streets/Mackenzies/Morleys/Broadhursts etc of this world who do their stuff in the coldest wettest months to give us a service and a choice. Gentlemen (and some ladies), some of whom I haven't cited above, take a bow.
The fact that they make a few quid out of it might have a bearing :P
-
Trust a Yorkshireman! But I think you are wrong David - snowdrops have that same fascination that alpines have; it is that sense of detail and origins, but in this case to do with places and gardeners, more than the mountains. They tend to creep up on you because people give them to you to start with, and then what can you do but keep on buying lots more!! (Actually I have not bought any for a year or two because the prices have got a little silly, so I am becoming an honorary northerner!).
-
..and after seeing Joe Sharman and other worthies standing about in the perishing cold today to give us a chance to buy our hearts' desires, maybe this is an opportune moment to comment how much we owe not just to BDG but to the Sharmans/Streets/Mackenzies/Morleys/Broadhursts etc of this world who do their stuff in the coldest wettest months to give us a service and a choice. Gentlemen (and some ladies), some of whom I haven't cited above, take a bow.
The fact that they make a few quid out of it might have a bearing :P
I expect, David, that a snowdrop with a good name is more saleable. The fact that another snowdrop already bears that name is simply a minor inconvenience to be ignored.
Paddy
-
Joe could always name it Roo Be Baker ;D ;D ;D
-
What about Break Bury ? its an anagram of Ruby Baker :)
-
or 'corundum cook '
-
or 'corundum cook '
Emma 'genius' ;D ;D ;D we could start a naming the snowdrop competition. ;D ;D Lets see if Joe will donate sed snowdrop as a prize. ;D ;D ;D
-
;D i thought it was quite good lol
-
;D i thought it was quite good lol
It is!!! :D :D :D
-
Better than Rubber Yak :-\
-
I suspect Martin has 'Baxendale's Late' in mind when he is talking about snowdrops being named after people who probably wouldn't have chosen that flower for their namesake.
-
I suspect Martin has 'Baxendale's Late' in mind when he is talking about snowdrops being named after people who probably wouldn't have chosen that flower for their namesake.
A good example, Anne. Not the greatest snowdrop in the world. Named by Phillip Ballard without so much as a "do you mind" to my dad who gave it to him but never rated it as anything special apart from its comparative lateness. Though I imagine I could still name a snowdrop 'Leo Baxendale' and be within the rules.
-
We had the discussion about naming snowdrops last year too, and naming a snowdrop is free for everyone, just put the name on your website or forum ready done.
But the only way to have it registrated is to send some real good photos with some names you would like to use to;
Weeresteinstraat 10a
2181 GA Hillegom
Postbus 175
2180 AD Hillegom
telefoon: 0252-536950
fax: 0252-536951
mail: kavb@kavb.nl
TAV Johan van Scheepen/ Saskia van Bodegem
For you boys and girls outside the Netherlands its free of any charge! It does only cost you the postage and some good photos. When judged correctly being outstanding and significant different from excisting/registrated snowdrops you have it officially registrated with a official document by the Dutch KAVB, the official authority for naming snowdrops.
good luck!
-
I remember the discussion well.
-
So do I Martin.
If you do have anything to registrate and need help do send a email!
-
Touché
-
Avec plaisir!
-
Sacre Bleu we have to post in French now?
-
Maggi does her posts in English on the Flemmish Forum :) I have asked her to try it in dutch! Looking forward to that :D
-
Maggi does her posts in English on the Flemmish Forum :) I have asked her to try it in dutch! Looking forward to that :D
je te laat bent, Gerard .... Ik ben al begonnen......... ;)
-
Nice ;D
-
Nice ;D
merci, peut-être c'est assez bien..... :)
-
;D ;D ;D
Wer ko der ko !
Hans ;)
-
Hi everyone I can only reply in the native toung Maggie, weel done cutty sark, cheers Ian the Christie Kind
-
Dear me, Steve, for a man who has a national collection I would have thought that you would have understood the importance of clarity and lack of ambiguity in naming.
For those of us who truly delight in the glory of the flowers, there is more of the Gradgrind in the obsessive naming and and collecting than in a simple desire to wish that a name means something tangible.
I fear you are missing my point.
Maggie
I do feel that sometimes you stray from fair comment into personal criticism. Surely if you want to be really critical, a PM is the best first step - even if you are the Site Moderator? However if public criticism is in order, no doubt you won't object to this publicly-posted reply. In regret -
Steve
There was no intention by Maggi Young to cast aspersions on the important work that Steve Owen does in holding a National Collection. Indeed Maggi has the deepest respect for all the holders of national collections who, like Members of the SRGC volunteer their time in the cause of the plants.
-
.........under the nomenclature rules, once a name is formally published, with a description, .....then that name cannot be used again for the same genus .........not a justification for both flouting the nomenclature rules...........Now it will be left to Matt Bishop to sort this out......... he will instead have to insist on another name being chosen - but in the meanwhile snowdrops bearing this invalis name will be circulating.
This all feels a bit heavy. And a touch authoritarian. The power to decree what is or isn't permissible for the whole of the genus Galanthus rests with one person? I mean, COME ON!! It's little white flowers, not membership of the MCC.
[/quote]
Steve, your post, above, might be considered "personal criticism" when, in fact, the original poster was simply quoting/paraphrasing of the guidelines on naming plants.
I agree with Maggie's comments on the naming of plants.
I do not wish you any disrespect, criticism or unhappiness while making these remarks.
Paddy
-
By the way, dare I suggest that the magic of moderation be used to split off the, err, 'debate' on nomenclature into its own thread as it seems to have lost any relationship to the Gala?
-
Thank you for the suggestion, Alan.
The posts referring to the possibilities of naming two plants as 'Ruby Baker' are spread throughout the pages and many contain other points referring to the Gala itself. It would be rather confusing to try to sort out one from another, I fear and lead to further misunderstanding of points being made.
Edit by maggi 12/02/12
I have split the thread as suggested.
-
Maggi - thank you so much for splitting all these separate posts off from the Gala thread. It has been interesting to read them all back to back - I must have missed some of them in the Gala thread (as I wasn't going to the Gala I didn't concentrate too hard on that thread).
Having moderated on 2 different plant forums myself I know exactly how much work was involved in splitting 62 posts out! Well done for your patience.
Johnx :-*
-
Matt told me Joe will have to change his named r-o. Maybe simply 'Ruby'?
oops that was me posting - Mark
-
.........under the nomenclature rules.......Now it will be left to Matt Bishop to sort this out......... he will instead have to insist on another name being chosen........
This all feels a bit heavy. And a touch authoritarian. The power to decree what is or isn't permissible for the whole of the genus Galanthus rests with one person?
Steve, your post, above, might be considered "personal criticism" when, in fact, the original poster was simply quoting/paraphrasing of the guidelines on naming plants.
Paddy
[/quote]
Paddy
What rules or guidelines contain the stipulation that one single named person (and the post to which I replied did identify this person, remember) has unchallengeable right to act alone in the matter of naming plants? For that is the nub of my point above (I have edited out other material to aid focus on this point). If you or anyone else can quote a clear unambiguous reference to written official rules that allocate such power to a single named person, do please point me to them.
Steve
-
Steve,
It seems clear to me that the guidelines for naming plants were not followed in this instance - the name "Ruby Baker" was applied to a snowdrop when another snowdrop had previously been given this name. The snowdrop first named has precedence and the second would have to be renamed. However, it seems that there is a reluctance to rename the second snowdrop in this instance and so there is a danger of confusion.
Matt Bishop and others will soon publish a new edition of "Snowdrops" and, in their listing of snowdrops, will have to examine the situation regarding these two snowdrops and make a decision on which has precedence for use of the name. It is in this situation that the decision of this naming will fall into the lap of Matt Bishop and his co-authors. "Snowdrops" has, I believe, general acceptance as the standard book on the genus galanthus and as long as the authors deal with issues such as that above with fairness and in line with established guidelines then their authority will have general acceptance. It is not a case of being authoritarian or heavy but of examining a situation and applying the guidelines fairly.
Paddy
-
Dear me, Steve, for a man who has a national collection I would have thought that you would have understood the importance of clarity and lack of ambiguity in naming.
For those of us who truly delight in the glory of the flowers, there is more of the Gradgrind in the obsessive naming and and collecting than in a simple desire to wish that a name means something tangible.
I fear you are missing my point.
Maggie
I do feel that sometimes you stray from fair comment into personal criticism. Surely if you want to be really critical, a PM is the best first step - even if you are the Site Moderator? However if public criticism is in order, no doubt you won't object to this publicly-posted reply. In regret -
Steve
There was no intention by Maggi Young to cast aspersions on the important work that Steve Owen does in holding a National Collection. Indeed Maggi has the deepest respect for all the holders of national collections who, like Members of the SRGC volunteer their time in the cause of the plants.
Thanks Ian. There is also much appreciation for the time and commitment Maggie (and you and others) give to organising and sustaining SRGC.
Steve
-
Matt told me Joe will have to change his named r-o. Maybe simply 'Ruby'?
oops that was me posting - Mark
Not sure how exactly anyone can make Joe change the name unless he agrees to, but it'll be interesting to see what the outcome of all this is.