Re: HIST: PURPLE KING
- To: i*@egroups.com
- Subject: Re: HIST: PURPLE KING
- From: h*@aol.com
- Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 12:13:45 EDT
In a message dated 5/18/00 10:30:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
jcwalters@bridgernet.com writes:
<< The 1939 AIS Checklist considers all named forms of dark, purple
germanicas
to be synonymous with PURPLE KING (collected in Katmandu, Nepal by Wallich
in 1830). >>
Ms. Peckham, Wister, and their team applying the nomenclatural law of
primacy, I should think. Well and widely published plant, apparently,
presumptively starting with a work by Wallich, who was also an author. Note
that the name was illegitimately reused for a variety of other irises as
well: a DB, a JI, a SIB, and a bulb.
<>
Funny, I had it show up on a want list for a garden restoration just this
spring. The Beatrix Jones Farrand Association was working on a 1916 period
garden at the FDR site in Hyde Park. They were working from plant lists from
other Farrand Projects, not original documents, and PK showed up on their
iris list. The choice of which Purple King to recommend was determined by the
proposed use of the plant after the irises dating from later were eliminated
from the list.
<<Is PK still considered to be a valid name >>
Well, it apparently has a body of literature surrounding it, and inclusion in
the Check List pretty well legitimized it, at least for horticultural
purposes. Of course, from a botanical standpoint it is probably using another
name as well. All of which brings to mind other instances of selected clones
of species being listed in the Check List under a cultivar name. Per e.g.,
ROSE QUEEN, a clone of I. ensata, and PRINCESS BEATRICE, a clone of I.
pallida.
I note for instance that the BIS book offers the synonyms I. nepalensis
Wallich and Atropurpurea for "Nepalensis" as a "form of germanica proper."
The real problem is the nomenclature of the whole germanica complex is
screwed up bigtime reflecting a desire by some to confer an order upon a
rather diverse and variable group of probably hybrid plants presumed to
constitute some sort of botanical unit.
<<and are positively identifiable clones of PK known to be in existence?>>
Probably some germanica nepalensis about. Purple King doesn't show up in the
HIPs records, at least under that name, which does not mean it is not growing
all over the place keeping its name to itself; they do that. It got some
pretty wide commercial distribution in this country. Now Crimson King we can
give you, and Crimson King is what I gave the Farrand folks for a sub. Not to
suggest that the names are synonyms, which, as far as I am aware they are
not.
I'd say what needs to be done is to get hold of that early literature and see
just what it does say about the plant. Go right to the primary stuff. Should
be some pretty good formal descriptions there.I'd be interested to hear what
you find out. Might be a real nice article.
Anner Whitehead
Comercial Source Chairman
Historic Iris Preservation Society
HIPSource@aol.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remember four years of good friends, bad clothes, explosive chemistry
experiments.
http://click.egroups.com/1/4051/0/_/486170/_/958752846/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
