THE EVOLUTION of the BEARDED IRIS Arthur J. Bliss

THE GARDEN

November 5th, 1921.

THE EVOLUTION of the BEARDED IRIS

The very considerable developments, during recent years, in the characteristics of this 

fascinating flower are but the harbingers of even more extensive developments in the not distant future.

IMPROVEMENT in our principal garden flowers is always going on. At times it may be slow or even seem to cease, then, perhaps, a new species may be introduced, or it may be simply that a freer imagination is applied to the task, and once more the flower sets forth on its onward course towards that ideal of perfection which will always be just beyond. When a flower is in its most active period of development one is tempted to try to forecast its future. Not too far ahead, for that can be little better than random guessing. But for the immediate future we can have every confidence, and even certainty within limits, in the light of the knowledge that Mendel's laws have given us, and especially if we have records of the ancestry of our present varieties. In fact, breeding will some day become an exact science, and when all the characters of a flower have been analysed and their factors and their interrelationship determined (as Miss Saunders and Miss Wheldale have already done for the colours of Stocks and Snapdragons), flowers will be made to order. The Iris is now in such an active period of development. Let us roughly analyse its characters and see wherein has been the improvement that has made the Iris of to-day so greatly superior to the earlier varieties. We may then see perhaps what further possibilities there are on these lines in varying combinations, and gather suggestions of improvement in other directions that appear to have been so far neglected or overlooked.

We deal chiefly with the individual flower. For those whose ideal in the garden is masses of harmonious and contrasting colour the florist's ideals of perfection of the individual flower are no doubt scarcely understandable, but it is in the flower—its size, form, colour and substance— that the progress has been made. These are the essential characters—habit, height and freedom of flowering, though by no means negligible, are of secondary importance in displaying the flower to best advantage.

In freedom of flowering the Flag Iris of to-day is, perhaps, no better than the earlier varieties, and there are, indeed, some with the highest qualities of size, form and colour that are all too shy, but on the whole the free-flowering qualities have been at least maintained, and this is a notable achievement, since increased size and quality is so often accompanied with fewer flowers. There is, then, every indication that the Iris of the future will not only be as free flowering as those in the past but will surpass them.
The introduction of Trojana has given us generally a taller and wider branching habit, well adapted for specimen plants. The type of the older varieties, however, was often equally freely branched, but with shorter and less spreading side stems, thus holding the flowers closer, and these are more suitable for massing. The two types, as they each have their use, will be maintained side by side in the future, but the tendency is towards the wider branching habit, as it displays best the larger and finer formed flowers of the newer Irises.
The general height of Irises has also been increased, so much so that except for special positions 2ft. is a minimum, and the average is between 2ft.6in, and 3ft, The introduction of Ricardi, Junonia and Mesopotamica has produced still taller plants with noble spikes 5ft. high, but as yet the flowers are poor in form and colour, and the constitution of these varieties is so weak and uncertain that they are of no use for general cultivation at present. There is no doubt, however, that these drawbacks will be overcome in time and that the average height of Irises will be between 3ft. and 4ft.

It is in the individual flower that the greatest and most remarkable advances have been made. We must try to see what it is that constitutes this general improvement. There can be no single or exclusive ideal of beauty for any flower; but that there are some principles which, applied in various ways, will give several or many different types of beauty, each ideal in its own way, no one could doubt if they compare the best of the newer Irises with the older varieties. And I think that the main principle is symmetry or balance. A f.lower may be small or large, and its form may vary within limits, and yet it may be beautiful if perfectly proportioned. Again, in colour, the ultimate criterion of excellence seems to be richness and purity—harmony and contrast being much more elusive and indefinite.

Let us then sum up the qualities in the flower of the modern Flag Iris. Already it is, on the average, larger—much larger—than the older varieties, and so long as the symmetry and balance of the flower and its substance and colour is maintained no limit can be set, and it may be that even larger flowers will be attained. There are, however, already in existence flowers so large in comparison with the species that have helped to produce them that the work of the immediate future will be in perfecting the form of these giants and producing them in the full range of Iris colours (the pure yellow standard variegata type is still comparatively small) than in any appreciable increase of size. These include such varieties (to mention only a few) as Lent A. Wiliamson (the finest and largest American variety), Vilmorin's Magnifica and Ambassadeur, Hort's Ann Page, Yeld's Asia and Prospero. Denis' Mdlle. Schwartz, and my Titan, Cardinal and Bruno. Nevertheless, the Iris will eventually be larger even than these. In substance likewise there has been a very great advance, of which Dominion was the first and is still the most remarkable example. Many of even these largest-sized Irises have great substance and stand firm through sunshine or rain to the last. It may be noted also that this increase of substance is always combined with, and is probably partly the cause of, the richer colouring of these flowers. The only one of the old standard varieties that has anything like such substance is pallida dalmatica Princess Beatrice.

When we compare the newest with the old varieties, the most obvious improvement in the form is in the broadening of the segments. And it is the most important In this the old florists were right, but when they laid it down that the circular outline was the one and only ideal form they fell into the error of pushing things to extremes. For though it is true that a circle is the logical conclusion of the principle of broadening a surface in proportion to its length, beauty is not based on logical conclusions. The Iris, like all flowers has a distinctive form of its own with three upright standards and three either hanging or spreading falls. In the perfect flower these two sets of petals must be balanced One of the effects of the introduction of Trojana has been to give us oblong unbalanced flowers. Not even the beauty of colouring of Isoline can compensate altogether for its lack of refinement of form. This defect is now being bred out by mating Trojana hybrids with broad-petalled varieties, and in the near future we shall have perfectly proportioned flowers with all the size of Trojana and Macrantha. Such, indeed, are already in existence, and they demonstrate beyond question that size is no bar to refinement of form.

Mr. Hort's ANN PAGE and Mr Yeld's  PROSPERO
'The Garden' 1921.

The form of the standards still needs much improvement. They are always of less substance than the falls, but they should have enough to stand up stiff and not flop in hot sunshine. They should curve outwards from their base, meeting again at their tips. At present few Irises do more than approximate to this ideal, and 1 do not see any special tendency yet to an improvement in this direction. But when such flowers, having finely arching standards, are compared with those having flatter or overlapping or open or erect standards and it is realised how essential this character is to the beauty of form, its selection will be more carefully attended to in the future.

The falls are more nearly approaching perfection, in smoothness and in outline. Their disposition gives scope for varying types—the flat hanging, the rounded drooping, and the spreading or "flaring" (to use the American term). The standards with revolute edges displaying the interior of the flower is often an effective and beautiful type, especially when the style arms are of a contrasting colour, and this form strengthens the standards though it gives a narrower appearance to the flower. Even the type with open cupped standards is sometimes pleasing when it is accompanied, as it usually is, with broad-hafted spreading falls. All these types are being developed, but not, I think, with any definite selection. It is in the colouring that the greatest general advance has been already made, and yet it is also in colour that we may expect the most important developments in the near future.

The richness of the colouring of the falls of the most recent varieties and seedlings already in existence far surpasses anything seen in all but a very few of the old varieties, such as Jaquesiana or Maori King, and this richness is accompanied by a velvety or satiny surface which seems very likely to be due to their extra substance. This will undoubtedly be a feature of all Irises in the future. In all the self flowers we have, now, purer and brighter colours, but there is still scope in this direction, especially in deeper coloured self-violet pallidas, and these may be expected very soon. The range of colour is also extending, and colours are now beginning to appear (as in many other florists' flowers since the adoption of Mendelian methods in breeding) of art blends, soft and delicate in the standards, contrasting harmoniously with warmer, richer tones in the falls Vilmorin's Isoline, Mount Penn, Wyomissing and others of Mr. Farr's seedlings, M. Denis' Troost and Deuil de Valery Mayet, and, in deeper tones, Vilmorin's Opera are examples, and are being added to and surpassed.

Among other new colour developments may be mentioned Miss Sturtevant's Shekinah, a luminous yellow self of pallida form and habit, and Citronella with soft yellow standards and crimson veined falls, also of pallida size and form and exceptionally free flowering. From these it is only a step to a true yellow-ground plicata in fact, a slightly different but similar series of crosses such as produced these should produce it, and it may be even now in existence. Plicatas are now appearing in giant size and more perfect form, and with a wide range of margin colour and often finely spotted. Flowers with yellow standards and white falls are likely to appear someday. Crusader and Blue Bird show that we may hope for a flower at least as near blue as the Monspur or the Sibirica sanguinea hybrids, and though the crimson Iris is still far off, we may at least hope for a substantial advance towards it in the near future.

All these forecasts are, in the light of the knowledge that Mendel's laws have given us, well within sight. There are other possibilities, hints of which have been given by chance seedlings— that may perhaps be mutations—which may be realised some day but in the more distant future. I will mention but one. The seedling I have named Samite, a self-cream white, is remarkable in several characters, and I hoped to get new types from it, but all the more obvious crosses that I made were failures. 
One chance cross, however, most unexpectedly produced a series of seedlings, all of which were more or less of the Tigridia type, with small weak open standards and very broad falls spreading almost horizontally, and some with abnormally broad hafts that, together, almost formed a cup, as in Tigridia. Furthermore, the hafts are covered with comparatively large and defined spots. The resemblance to a Tigridia is certainly far away, especially in colour, but it is suggestive. And it is from such suggestions that our flowers give us that new types come rather than from our unaided imagination. At any rate, it is safe to say that for all the great improvements already, obtained the Iris is yet only at the outset of its career, and there are still infinite possibilities of its development.

A. J. BLISS.

Reproduction in whole or in part of this post, its opinions or its images without the expressed written permission of Terry Johnson is strictly prohibited. 

Photo credit and copyright Terry Johnson and Heritage Irises ©.  

Read More

William Rickatson Dykes,THE BEARDED IRISES.

       THE GARDEN.
September 15, 1923

THE BEARDED IRISES
W. R. DYKES, M.A., L.-ès-L.

SOME weeks ago there appeared in these columns an article on Bearded Iris species, which summed up what was known of them about thirty years ago, at the time when Baker compiled his Handbook of the Irideæ The so-called species were described in the order in which they appeared in Baker's book, and in many cases the wording of the descriptions was identical.
Since 1892, however, much research work has been carried out, and our knowledge of the wild species of Iris and of natural and garden hybrids between them has grown very considerably. This growth has been made possible by the examination of the very numerous dried specimens of wild plants which are preserved in the various herbarium collections and by the cultivation of living plants from known localities. Thus we now know the difference between I. pumila and I. Chamæiris. The former has practically no stem and a long perianth tube between the ovary and the flower, while the latter has a stem which is at any rate always longer than the tube.

Colour alone is no guide to specific difference, and both these species may have either yellow or purple flowers. The curious thing is that in some localities there is apparently very little colour variation, while in others every plant seems to be different.
Thus I. Chamaeiris on Mount Coudon behind Toulon is all yellow or yellow flushed with brown, while at Roque-haute on the coast of Herault there is every variation. I. pumila in the Deliblat in Hungary is always purple, while on the Geissberg outside Vienna and on the Dalmatian coast near Zara and Sebenico there is infinite variety.

Many of the plants sold as pumila are in reality Chamæiris, but no one who has once seen the ripe seed-pods of I. pumila will ever again confuse the two species. The capsules are literally on the ground, broad at the base and tapering to a conical point to which is still attached the long, withered perianth tube and the remains of the flower. The ripe capsule splits open, not from the apex, as in I. Chamæiris, but below the apex, as in I. arenaria and in the species of the Regelia group.

I. Chamæiris is found only in South-Eastern France and in Northern Italy I. pumila in Austria and Hungary, Croatia, Greece and Southern Russia.

In Sicily there is a rather delicate species like a large I. Chamæiris, but with the long tube of I. pumila. It looks not unlike a natural hybrid between the two species, but it can hardly be so, because artificial hybrids between them are quite sterile and differ in some slight but well marked details. 
For some unknown reason Balkan Irises have sharply keeled spathes — the green or membranous sheaths in which the buds are contained. There are, in fact, quite a number of Balkan species with keeled spathes, which have counterparts in Western or Central Europe, in which the spathes are either shapeless or merely rounded. Thus I. spuria and I. graminea correspond to I. Sintenisii and I. Urumovii. In the same way the Balkan I. mellita and I. Reichenbachii correspond to I.pumila and I. Chamaeiris. Of both there are yellow and purple forms, which have been described as distinct species. Thus serbica and bosniaca are merely yellow forms of I. Reichenbachii, while balkana and Athoa are purple. I. mellita is dwarf like pumila, but has sharply keeled spathes and is the species of which one variety from Skutari, opposite Constantinople, is in cultivation under the name of rubromarginata. I. Reichenbachii has a stem from 3ins. to 9ins. in height and a comparatively short tube. I. mellita has a long tube and is nearly always stemless.

These four species, pumila and Chamæiris in the west and mellita and Reichenbachii in the Balkans, are never more than a foot in height, and the only other species which are certainly natives of Central Europe seem to be I. aphylla, I. variegata and I. pallida, of all of which there are many local varieties. All those who have grown them know how readily and persistently they all set seeds, while it is comparatively rare to see a pod on any so-called germanica, lurida, flavescens or sambucina, and rarer still to find more than one or two seeds in them.
I. aphylla, as its name implies, loses its leaves entirely in autumn ; so, too, do I. variegata and I. pallida to a very large extent. This is only what we should expect of plants which are natives of countries like Central Europe with a rigorous winter climate.
I. aphylla has a host of synonyms, such as biflora, bisflorens, bohemica, hungarica, furcata, etc., some alluding to its habit of flowering a second time in the early autumn, some to the branching habit of the stem, which forks characteristically below the centre, and others to the various localities in which it is found. It is characteristic, also, of I. aphylla to have spathes of thin membranous texture either wholly green or more or less flushed with purple. The colour of the flowers is usually a deep purple, though both yellow and almost white forms are not unknown.
I. variegata comes from Hungary, Croatia and the Balkans, and is the source of the yellow colour in our garden Bearded Irises. In the wild plant the standards are yellow and the falls more or less closely veined with some shade of brownish purple on a yellow or creamy ground. The spathes are green and remain persistently so, even when the flowers are fully developed.
In I. pallida, on the other hand, they are always wholly scarious or papery, even long before the buds emerge from them. It is interesting to remember that all such plants as sambucina, squalens, lurida and even germanica have spathes which are scarious in the upper part and green or herbaceous in the lower part, an indication that they are hybrids which owe their origin to a cross between a species with herbaceous spathes and a species with scarious spathes.
Another fact, which appears only to have come to light in the last ten or fifteen years, is that in the only two localities where I. variegata and I. pallida are both known to grow wild, namely, near Bozen in the Tyrol and on the Velebit Mountains above Carlopago on the Croatian coast, natural hybrids also occur identical with those to which such names as squalens and sambucina have been given. In such hybrids it is easy to see the struggle for mastery of the purple of pallida and the yellow of variegata. Moreover, it is quite easy to raise these hybrids in our gardens by crossing the two species.
I. germanica is frankly a puzzle. All we know for certain is that it has never been found undoubtedly wild anywhere. Moreover, it is extremely reluctant to set seed under any conditions, and it has a habit of making its new growth in the autumn, which would mean that its foliage would suffer in a continental winter and the plants remain flowerless, as they not uncommonly do even in this country in a season of late frosts and in exposed situations.
Again, there is not one germanica but several. The common form in this country is bluer than those we find in Southern France. The variety Kharput was sent to Foster from the town of that name in Northern Asia Minor and is naturalised near Srinagar in Kashmir, while atropurpurea grows in masses at Beaucaire, opposite Tarascon on the Rhone, and at many other places in the South. Moreover, it was found growing abundantly at Khatmandu in Nepal a hundred years ago! Three years ago I found an Iris growing high up on the rocks between the two arms of Lake Como, in a position where I felt sure it must be wild and not an escape from cultivation. When the plants, which I brought home, flowered they proved to be Kochii, but, unfortunately, they will not set seed, as we should expect them to do if Kochii were a wild species. No form of germanica has been known to reproduce itself from seed. The few seedlings that have been raised are all dwarf plants, resembling I. aphylla more than any other species.
Another puzzle about germanica is that each purple form seems to have a corresponding albino form. The so-called germanica alba is one, another even whiter was found growing by the roadside in Istria, while the well known florentina is another. This is the albino of a slender form of germanica which is used along with pallida in the manufacture of orris root near Florence. Streaks or patches of purple not infrequently occur in flowers of florentina and also in the other albino forms of germanica.
Florentina has nothing whatever to do with I. albicans, which is the albino of the Arabian I. Madonna. I. albicans and I. Madonna can easily be picked out of a collection in winter by their curiously twisted leaves and by the fact that the tips are always browned by the frost. Albicans has been transported all over the world as an ornament for Mohammedan graveyards, while Madonna was only discovered in, and introduced from, South-Eastern Arabia less than twenty years ago.
I. pallida has many local forms. Near Bozen it is a sturdy plant 3ft. high with a stiff stem and very glaucous leaves. In Dalmatia it is much more slender, with either green or glaucous leaves and flowers of every conceivable shade of purple, using that unsatisfactory word in its very widest sense. Ciengialti and Loppio are only two forms among a vast number to be found on the eastern coast of the Adriatic, and the so-called pallida dalmatica is almost certainly of hybrid garden origin and not a native of Dalmatia. It is much nearer to the Bozen form than to anything that grows in Dalmatia. Moreover, it very rarely sets seed and, when it does, gives a long series of variations.
Another old garden plant, flavescens, is similarly almost certainly of hybrid origin. It seldom sets seed and is quite distinct from I. imbricata, with which it has been confused. The latter is a plant from the south-western shores of the Caspian, and was once grown at Kew under the name of obtusifolia. The flowers are of a curious greenish yellow, sometimes streaked with purple, and the spathes are very large, green and inflated. In cultivation a purple-flowered form of it has appeared. Neither flavescens nor imbricata are found growing wild in the Balkans.
I. kashmiriana is a difficult plant to flower in this country. It wants a thorough roasting in summer, and has a purple counterpart, which seldom finds its way beyond the borders of Kashmir. The white form is used for decorative purposes by the natives, as is also albicans, and the purple form is as neglected as I. Madonna.
The so-called plicata can hardly be a wild species. It does not come true from seed, and it is not known to occur in the wild state anywhere. It seems rather to be a seedling or hybrid of I. pallida and is, in fact, a pallida in which there is some factor which prevents the purple colour from spreading all over the segments of the flower. The colour is confined to the veins and usually to the extremities of the veins near the circumference of the petals.
In Asia Minor and in the hill country to the north of Mesopotamia there are undoubtedly several little-known or unknown species of Bearded Iris. Specimens have occasionally been in cultivation, but never apparently for very long, nor has anyone tested their validity as species by raising them from seed. Moreover, the specimens seem always to have come from inhabited areas and not from regions in which it was obvious that they were wild plants. Probably, now that we are once more at peace with Turkey, it will be possible to obtain further specimens and to decide how many species there are.
At present the claims of I. trojana to specific rank seem undeniable. It has a tall branching stem, long, narrow pointed buds and comparatively narrow foliage. It is supposed to have reached the Vienna Botanic Garden from the neighbourhood of Troy, but it is obvious that a plant from such a locality might not necessarily have been a native of it if, as now seems probable, Irises were in cultivation as garden plants when Minos reigned at Cnossus in Crete about 1600 B.C. However, I. trojana seeds readily and reproduces itself with those slight variations in the tone of colour in the flower which we expect to find when raising a species from seed. It is probably to I. trojana that we owe the tall, branching habit of many of the newer hybrids. W.R.D.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Reproduction in whole or in part of this post, its opinions or its images without the expressed written permission of Terry Johnson is strictly prohibited.

Photo credit and copyright Terry Johnson and Heritage Irises ©. 

Read More

Historic Tall Bearded Iris CLEMATIS and the British controversy.

THE GARDEN
June 4th 1921

NOTES OF THE WEEK

A New Iris to which we take exception. — The Bearded Irises of June have an old-world charm, and so long as this is preserved we have no fault to find with the hybridists, but there is a tendency on the part of some hybridists to develop the size of the flowers at the expense of grace and form.
There is one new variety to which we take exception — it is named 'Clematis' — in which the standards of the flower open out like the falls or lower petals. The flowers appear like those of a large six-petal Clematis. All six segments of the flower reflex horizontally. But why turn half a flower inside out ? And why produce a beard on petals on which there should be no beard ?Does not the Iris owe much of its charm to its beautiful curves and natural outline of its flowers ?

THE GARDEN

June 18th 1921

NOTES OF THE WEEK

A Champion for Iris Clematis. — A recent note has provoked a vigorous champion to defend Iris Clematis and the hybridist. We hope others will enter the lists, and that they will not all be on one side! It is very remote from our wish to belittle the labours of the patient and painstaking workers to whom garden-lovers owe heavy debts ; but it must be conceded that they do not always realise their own ambitions, any more than they invariably please the taste of all and sundry even when they produce what is evidently satisfactory to themselves But where taste is concerned who shall be the final judge ?
Anyhow we think an interesting discussion should follow our correspondent' s valiant defence of the criticised Iris.

THE GARDEN

June 18th 1921

IRIS CLEMATIS: THE TENDENCY OF HYBRIDISATION

THE exception taken to the above Iris in The Garden of June 4 is at once interesting and illogical. Interesting because it opens up the question as to where the aims of the hybridist should cease ; whether, for instance, a change of form in any particular flower is as permissible as a variation of colour. Illogical because it concludes that such change is not permissible, and argues from this conclusion, and also a purely personal objection to the form taken by this particular flower, that there is in it a lack of beauty. More illogical still is the suggestion that the hybridist is responsible for this particular variation of form. The point to which " exception " is taken appears to be that " the standards of the flower open out like the falls, or lower petals."
Does the writer really think that this detracts one iota from the beauty of the flower ? If so, he rules out of the scope of his admiration other Irises, both species and varieties, that possess the same characteristics. All the six petalled Iris Kæmpferi would be excluded. Neither Iris tectorum nor gracilipes would have a place in his garden. Surely he would not " take exception " to these, among the most admired of the whole genus.
Returning to the effect of hybridising,the development of the peculiar characteristics of Clematis was the very natural result of a very natural process. There was no intention, or effort, on the part of the hybridist to " turn half the flower inside out." The only artificial act was in conveying the pollen from one flower to another. Neither of the two parents showed the tendency developed in the offspring. Even the act of the hybridist was unnecessary. A chance seed from a bursting pod, in a garden where the science of hybridisation was unknown, might conceivably have produced the same results, and had 'Clematis' been a natural hybrid, collected in some far distant comer of the world, should we still " take exception " to its shape. If Nature chooses to make the interior of the standards more beautiful than the exterior, and then, in her wonderful economy, rather than waste her effort makes the standards reflex to show that interior, for what shall we blame her ? If there is any blame it is on Nature and not the hybridist, for she alone is responsible.

But there is a deeper and more serious suggestion in the paragraph referred to. The writer is willing to find no "fault with the hybridists," providing they preserve that indefinite, unprogressive and elusive attribute called " old world charm." If this is to be the foundation of judgement, it will eliminate from cultivation 99 per cent, of all the Irises, Sweet Peas, Dahlias, Roses, Carnations, Carrots, Potatoes, Cauliflowers and every other product of the modern garden. Chelsea Shows would be no more, and that bright little periodical 'The Garden' would either become a botanical catalogue of known species, or die from lack of material to fill its columns. Horticulture might survive for a time by collecting and distributing the weeds of the world, and the garden would become a very dull place, for if the "charm" is " old world " enough it would resolve the modern garden into a collection of species.
 

Please do not misunderstand me. There is something absorbingly interesting in a collection of species, whether of Irises, Roses or anything else, but who would care to go back to a garden of types ? Some months ago I remember the " Notes of the Week " in The Garden opened with a quotation from the pen of Mr. Eden Phillpotts : "Man has availed himself of the great laws of evolution in mightier matters than the Iris : but in no theatre of his unsleeping efforts has he created purer beauty, or wakened for the flower lovers, truer joy than among the bearded Irises of June."
The bearded Irises of to-day are just as much departures from the original species, in one way or another, as 'Clematis' is from its first parents.
Is not the whole scientific effort of the day directed towards developing the best and eradicating.the worst characteristics in every genus? 
It is not a question of developing " size of the  flowers at the expense of grace and form." Man cannot of himself breed a new form. Nature may do so by taking a hand in his efforts, but even she is bound by her own laws. She only reproduces unequally the good or bad attributes from remote or near ancestors. 
No one knows better than the hybridist how accidental some of his best results appear to him to be, and this despite all the laws of Mendel. 
Twelve seeds from a single pod may produce as many variations, and of them one may be half the size and one twice the size of the parent, and one only, as in the case of 'Clematis', may choose to assert itself as a variation of form, and the hybridist is impotent. He cannot even be assured that the form will reproduce itself from seed. 
The probabilities are that it will if Nature has endowed the new characteristics with strength and individuality sufficient thereto. 
If we take exception to a form adopted by one Iris because it reproduces the form of another, or even if we object to the form of one flower because it resembles that of another species, where shall we stop ? Orchids resemble butterflies and bees. Shall we " take exception " to the Orchids, or the butterflies and bees ?
Some of the characteristics that have been bred into the newer Irises are just as pronounced as this reflexing of the standards horizontally in 'Clematis'. Standards have been strengthened and elongated. Falls have been broadened and rendered horizontal or drooping, as the case may be. Stems branch low down where once they bore their flowers rigidly, alternately on each side of an erect stem. Colours have been mingled, and new colour shades introduced that have added infinitely to the charm of the Iris as a garden flower. So much is this the case that we are all in the position of the little girl who, when asked to describe the colour in an Iris, said : " I really cannot tell you what colour it is, but it's every kind of fairy colour."
All this is tolerated, together with the wave, in Spencer Sweet Peas, and other modifications ; and yet because Nature chooses to adopt a form a little different from the standard set up by man as the ideal, " we take exception."

It may be argued that Nature sometimes produces monstrosities, which is true ; but it is not in violation, but in pursuance of her own laws. The stronger characteristics of one parent may be reproduced in unequal proportions to the best of the other. The scientist may make mistakes in endeavouring to assist Nature by trying to impose on one variety the desirable characteristics of another, which may be due to his ignorance of what has gone before. Nature never forgets what has gone before. Mere size has nothing to do with beauty, in flower or animal. It is proportion that counts. The hybridist cannot " develop the size of the flowers at the expense of grace and form" unless Nature retaliates for some precious violation of her laws by producing inequality, and thus lack of proportion. The little Iris gracilipes magnified to the size of the largest Iris Kæmpferi would be just as beautiful if all its characteristics were equally magnified, nor would it be less beautiful than the finest Kæmpferi. We may admire diminutiveness, but smallness does not in itself 
constitute beauty. It is the little thing that reproduces perfectly the characteristics of the larger that attracts us. Therefore mere increase in size does not necessarily mean loss of grace and form. Little things are valuable when they are seen quite near. The largest flowers become smaller to the eye when seen in the distance. Who would reduce Iris Lord of June to the size it appears to be 20 yards. away ? Would they not rather have gracilipes magnified so that its beauty is not lost to sight at that distance ?
There is a very apt quotation from a well known author in his attempt to define beauty which is appropriate here : " Beauty is the moment of transition, as if the form were just ready to flow  into other forms." 
GEORGE DILLISTONE. 

THE GARDEN
March 24th, 1923.

MOISTURE LOVING IRISES

........This characteristic they undoubtedly derive from Iris setosa. It is interesting to note that the Bearded Iris Clematis, which almost certainly represents, a cross between a June-flowering Bearded Iris and a Kæmpferi form, not only has six petals all in the horizontal plane, but that all the petals bear beards.

THE GARDEN
April 7th, 1923.

CORRESPONDENCE

MOISTURE LOVING IRISES

...............How the Japanese have evolved their hybrids from the single- flowered wild form of I. Kæmpferi is not known ; but probably, as in many other garden plants, these double forms have merely arisen in cultivation without any admixture from another species. The same explanation applies without a doubt to the Bearded Iris Clematis. Seedlings of I. pallida not infrequently appear with some or all of the " standards " changed in form, and there is even extant a paper by a learned Professor of Innsbruck who seeks to prove that this flat form of flower is the archetype of all Irises. His whole argument is based on an I. pallida identical in shape with the variety I. Clematis. Mr. Bliss was the raiser of Clematis, and he will probably support the statement that I. Kæmpferi was in no way responsible for its shape. There is in fact, no authenticated hybrid between a bearded and a beardless species of Iris. — W. R. Dykes.

THE GARDEN
April 28th 1923

CLEMATIS- FLOWERED IRIS.

MR. DYKES in his notes on moisture-loving Irises, in your issue of April 7, refers to the origin of Irises of the type of the Bearded Iris Clematis in which all six petals reflex. So far as Bearded Irises are concerned, I. Kæmpferi has certainly nothing to do with the appearance of this type. The parentage of Clematis is Cordelia x Princess Beatrice. It was the only one of the batch of seedlings of the cross which displayed this form. Clematis is the most perfect example of this type that I have raised, but the form in varying degree of perfectness has appeared casually from many other crosses of Bearded varieties. It is probably a teratological form — a freak. I should not be inclined to agree with the learned Professor of Innsbruck that this flat form of flower is the archetype of all Irises, since it is the standards that are modified from the normal form, and in assuming the position of the falls they not only take up the special colouring of the falls but also develop (more or less perfectly) a beard. That is, the transformation is from a simpler form of petal to a more highly specialised. If it was a reversion towards an ancient type, one would expect that the transformation would be, on the contrary, from a more specialised to a simpler form. Therefore it is much more likely that the Crocus or Sparaxis form of flower was the original and most primitive form of the first Iris. But these Clematis forms, furthermore, raise interesting questions in heredity, since they do not appear to transmit according to Mendelian laws and, indeed, are not constant, flowers of quite normal form often appearing on the same plant, and even on the same spike as the Clematis forms. — A. J.Bliss.

As always clicking on the above image will take you to the larger, higher resolution version.
For more on Arthur Bliss Irises be sure to visit Anne Milner's National Collection of Arthur Bliss Irises web site. Listed in the above 'International Iris Links tab.

Reproduction in whole or in part of this post, its opinions or its images without the expressed written permission of Terry Johnson is strictly prohibited. Copyright Terry Johnson and Heritage Irises ©

Read More

A GROUP OF BEARDLESS IRISES, Sir Michael Foster.

[For the specimens from which our plate was prepared 
we are indebted to Messrs. Barr & Sugden, who possess
 one of the most complete collections of Irises known.] 
Drawn by CONSTANCE PIERREPONT.

THE GARDEN

December 20, 1879.

THE GARDEN FLORA.
PLATE CCXL

A GROUP OF BEARDLESS IRISES.

Everyone knows and, knowing, admires the bearded Irises ; but it is not everyone who is aware of the beauty and the delight which may be found in the beardless Irises, a group of which is represented in the plate issued with the present number. In this, as in so many other instances, the popular judgment is founded on reason. Taking them all through, no beardless Iris, not even the Kæmpferi (the one beardless Iris which has been honoured with the title of a " florist's flower," and which was described and illustrated in No. 406, p. 198) possesses that union of grace of outline with delicacy of colouring, which is the charm of such a bearded Iris, for instance, as I. pallida. Yet many of the beardless Irises are handsome and indeed lovely, and they are all worthy the attention of those who love flowers as flowers, and who do not regard plants merely as material for constructing the gaudy or the grotesque patchworks sometimes spoken of as gardens. To the gardener who is also a botanist they have an especial interest, because they are not only much more widely spread than the bearded forms, but in all probability older, that is, earlier in origin.[Ref i] 
Not only are the recognised species belonging to the beardless division more numerous than those of the bearded, but the differences between the several kinds are much more marked and distinct. The bearded Irises are very much alike, and, in giving them separate names, stress has often to be laid on such variable characters as colour and size. The beardless Irises, on the other hand, present a large number of tangible unlikenesses, enabling the very beginner to recognise the differences between the several species. Numerous, however, as are the various kinds, a very little study shows that they may be arranged with more or less completeness into a number of groups, each consisting of central or typical and outlying members.
One group, of which the beautiful unguicularis (or stylosa) may be taken as the type, is not represented in the plate, for the very good reason that the members of this group flower in winter or quite early spring, whereas most of the beardless Irises and all those pictured in the plate flower in mid or late summer. I regret this unavoidable omission, because unguicularis is, perhaps, the most lovely of all the beardless forms. Possibly its beauty appears all the more striking, at all events we appreciate it the more, just because it comes to us in the winter. It is an excellent, easily-managed pot plant, flowering readily under glass (in the open it is apt to be cut by the frost), and I would strongly advise those who are the happy possessors of a little greenhouse to obtain from Messrs. Barr & Sugden, or from Mr. Ware, or from some other of the nurserymen who make a speciality of Irises, good, strong, sturdy specimens of this delightful plant, taking care to choose those with the pots crammed full of roots. I think they will not be disappointed. The flowers are not very numerous at a time, but they come in succession ; I had last winter a plant which went on flowering from the beginning of December to the end of February, right through that memorable dreary season. Its large and elegant lavender coloured flowers, which, whenever they felt the influence of a little warmth and sunlight, sent forth a delicate and delightful fragrance, brought me consolation on many a dark and dismal day. I well remember that before the Iris flowered my little greenhouse was nearly filled with Chrysanthemums, of whose bloom I, and especially my gardener, were not a little proud ; but as soon as my first unguicularis bloom had opened I was impatient until my Chrysanthemums had been cast out : its delicate and sweet beauty made me intolerant of the showy, but, compared with it, garish florists' flowers. A very distinct group is formed by I. spuria and its allies. These are, for the most part, tall plants, blooming somewhat late in summer, with erect, rather narrow leaves and close set flowers, and their ripe capsules are strongly ribbed. One of the handsomest of these is I. ochroleuca. No. 6 in the plate. The opaque waxen whiteness of its large petaloid stigmas, [Ref ii] closely bent down, as in all the members of this group, over the falls, gives a peculiar charm to the flowers, contrasting as it does with the rich yellow of the falls themselves. The origin of ochroleuca is unknown ; it exists, as far as is known at present, in gardens only. A variety with the name gigantea is highly spoken of. One disadvantage in this group is that the flowers are so close set on the stalk that they have not room to expand, and, as shown in the figure, are tilted up on one side. A gathered cluster makes, however, a very handsome centre in a nosegay ; and, as is the case with almost all Irises, the buds expand readily in water. Next to ochroleuca, perhaps even surpassing it, comes the allied I. Monnieri, a very tall plant coming from Crete, with abundant large flowers of a rich yellow colour. It is one of the latest flowerers, showing a full bloom even when Kæmpferi has passed away, and has the further merit of being fragrant. The odour is not very powerful but very pleasing. Very closely allied to these is the Himalayan form, I. aurea, No. 8 in the plate. This is a very handsome plant, with which I hope soon to become better acquainted than I am at present. I. spuria itself, with its many varieties, does not recommend itself to me very greatly. In some of the forms, as in the so-called spuria major, and also in the Algerian variety known as Reichenbachii, the colouring is bright, and some people might think them handsome, especially when seen in masses ; but the mixture which they offer of blue or purple and yellow is to my mind too coarse to be pleasing ; besides, there is a certain stiffness and want of elegance in their outlines. I prefer the smaller flowers of such varieties as that known as desertorum, with its paler flowers, narrow falls, and, in some cases, marked fragrance, or even the white Gûldenstadtii, which, however, is very inferior to ochroleuca. Some of the spuria group are absolutely worthless from a gardening point of view. When you have devoted the best nook in your garden, and unwearied attention to a plant which, in the end, bears, amidst a dense mass of tall, strong leaves, a number of insignificant dirty-coloured flowers, you begin to understand the meaning of the phrase "of botanical interest only." As an outlying member of the spuria group, I may refer to the little I. graminea, though this is by some authors associated with quite different kinds. [Ref iii]  
This is of no great value as a border plant, the flowers are too much hidden by the over-topping leaves, and the flowers themselves are singly of no great beauty. Nevertheless their mixed blue and purple tints will be found to render them of value as cut blooms ; they can then be made to harmonise most effectually with other flowers.
Next to I. Kæmpferi, with which the present paper does not propose to deal at all, the mo5t popular, and, on the whole, the most beautiful of the beardless division, are the members of the sibirica group. In the typical form, I. sibirica, the flowers are, it is true, small, but they are produced in unstinted profusion, and their colouring and marking fully atone for the want of size. Many seedling varieties of sibirica of divers colours and tints are to be met with in the nurserymen's lists, all of them beautiful, some of them exceedingly so. The great feature in all of them is the delicate veining and marbling of the falls, as indicated in the white variety represented as No. 5 in the plate ; but it is impossible in any lithograph to reproduce the tints and gradations which make up the charm of the living flowers. 
All these kinds are worthy of cultivation; the only one to be avoided is I. sibirica fl. -pi.[Ref iv] 
Besides the garden varieties, there are many kinds of natural occurrence, such as the form known as acuta, with comparatively short flower-stems, and flexuosa with white flowers : and stretching away from the type are forms which may be recognised as distinct species, Messrs. Barr & Sugden are distributing a charming plant of this group, with pale and with also deeper purple flowers, under the provisional name of trigonocarpa ; and Haage & Schmidt have a kind which they call tenuifolia,[Ref v]    possessing the desirable feature that the flowers emit a perfume like that of cloves. But the one kind which "no garden should be without" is the form known as orientalis, No. 4 in the plate, the flowers of which are larger.the falls broader and bigger, and the colouring more intense and deeper than in I. sibirica. The red sheath or spathe, moreover, gives the plant a beauty while it is still in bud ; few sights are, indeed, more charming than a well-grown plant of orientalis, with its flowers partly expanded and partly ensheathed as buds.[Ref vi] 

I have not yet had an opportunity of studying as closely as I could wish I. tenax, a North American form (No. 2 in the plate), but it is obviously a close neighbour of sibirica, and is a very desirable plant ; it is now being carefully cultivated and may be obtained from the leading firms.
Allied to tenax, on the one hand, and, in many of its features, to orientalis on the other, and yet forming the centre of a group of its own, is the Californian form I. longipetala.
This, the various cultivated specimens of which appear to vary not a little, is a showy plant ; but its rather long and straggling falls, in spite of their charming light violet or lavender colour, and their graceful markings, give it a more or less unfinished look.[Ref vii]  Closely resembling longipetala in its foliage and habits, is the form which Regel has introduced under the name of I.spectabilis. It was gathered by his son, Albert Regel, in Central Asia, and, to judge by its name, ought to be handsome. My plants of it have not yet flowered, and I can say nothing more about it, but Regel promises an early description of it.

As the centre of another group we may take the common American I. virginica. This is a vigorous floriferous plant, spreading very rapidly when grown in a somewhat moist rich soil. The flowers vary very considerably in tint, and some of the more deeply-coloured forms are not unhandsome. There is, however, a certain stiffness and formality about the blooms which, to my mind, prevents it being considered as a really attractive kind. More highly coloured, frequently very striking from the juxtaposition of a pure white and a deep rose tint, is the very closely allied I. versicolor ; but this, too, lacks a certain elegance, so that one is, in looking at it, led to wonder why a flower so beautifully coloured gives one so little pleasure. Many seedlings, both of virginica and versicolor, are in cultivation ; and, though what may be perhaps considered as the typical forms of each are very distinct, almost every intermediate stage between the two may be seen.

One feature of the virginica group is the small development of the standards, and we thus pass to the very handsome I. tridentata (No. 1 in the plate). This, which is also a North American form, can hardly be said to possess any standards at all ; they are reduced to insignificant little peaks, which have to be looked for to be seen. In return the falls are largely developed, highly coloured, and manifest real beauty in their form and markings. It is an abundant bloomer, a strong grower, spreading very rapidly, and in every way a desirable plant. I. tridentata is an American form, occurring in the Northern States ;[Ref viii]  The form of the flowers, especially the stigna firmly reflexed over the fiddle-shaped fall, the ribbed capsule, the characters of the roots, and other features are most distinctly those of the spuria group, in spite of its leaves being, especially in the narrow-leaved form, narrower than the other members of the group.
Asia a closely allied, or at least a strictly analogous form, I. setosa. No. 3 in the plate, which, however, is a far less beautiful plant than its American ally. No one who compares tridentata with virginica can doubt that the two are closely allied, and yet tridentata has quite other affinities. In spite of its comparatively broad leaves, many of its features point to the narrow-leaved sibirica group, especially to orientalis. On the other hand, it is, I think, impossible to overlook its affinities with the Kæmpferi group ; and its beauty seems to be due to the fact that some of the characters of these two groups are added to those of the plainer virginica.
Resembling tridentata and setosa in one feature, viz., in the smallness of its standards, but in reality quite widely separated from them, is the common yellow Flag, I. Pseudacorus, a variety of which is seen in No. 7 of the plate. Common as is Pseudacorus, everyone who has grown it fairly, will, I think, be ready to admit its beauty. Whoever has in his garden a pond or a ditch, or even a thoroughly damp spot, ought to plant this Iris largely. Few things, indeed, are more beautiful than a great clump of this yellow Flag, with the tall leaves starting up from the side of a pool, and the golden clusters of flowers gleaming bright in a midsummer sun.
Three things it loves — a rich soil, plenty of water, and abundance of sunlight. It is cruel to place it, as I have seen it placed, in some dank dark hole, where the sun's beams never reach it ; it is disappointing to plant it, as I have seen it planted, in a dry and stony spot, where summer is to it one long continued thirst. But put it where its roots can run at will in rich black mud, and yet its head raise itself to the full light of a summer sky, and it will be a golden glory throughout the long days of June. Such are some of the more conspicuous and common beardless Irises, but I have far from exhausted the list. I have said nothing of the wide-spread Iris fœtidissinia, worth growing, not for its flowers, which are almost absolutely ugly, but for the bright orange berries of its gaping winter fruit, and still more for its glossy dark green leaves. I have said nothing of the bulbous Irises, which are all beardless forms, and which, save for fear of tlie anger of the botanists, I would say seem to me even more closely allied to various non-bulbous forms than they are to each other. But I should
weary the reader if I said more. Interesting, too, as is the story of their geographical distribution, I must pass that over, and end by saying a few words about their culture.
 In nearly all the forms, the one golden rule is that inculcating "wholesome neglect." Let them alone as long as they are doing well, and, above all, do not dig and scratch about their roots. Almost without exception all of them hate to be disturbed, and resent interference by refusing to flower. All of them like the sun. If you care for Irises do not plant them, as they are often planted, right in shade of trees or big shrubs, though some of them, more especially fœtidissima, will do fairly well there. If you feel that that you are bound to obey the injunctions of the vade mecum of gardening by which you swear, and which tells you that Irises are the things for "woodland walks " and "shrubbery borders," choose some open glade into which the sun can pour, and not the dark recesses of some leafy cavern. To put the best and handsomest forms, however, in any other position than in the warmest and sunniest spots of the open border is, to my mind, downright wickedness.
They all of them like rich soil, full of decomposed vegetable matter. The coarser and stronger forms will feed on even rank manure, but to the more delicate ones this is almost poison ; and all of them, indeed, thrive all the better if their food is given to them in a well-digested form. If it is thus well digested they can hardly have too much of it.
As regards moisture, they vary a good deal. I have already insisted on the necessity of water for Pseudacorus, and many of the spuria group thrive best in the damp. Others again, as Monnieri, hate the damp, at least, in winter, and will stand very considerable drought in summer. The conditions which would suit the majority would, I think, be comparative dryness in winter and an abundant supply of water in summer.
Unfortunately, this is the very reverse of what they generally meet with.

They also vary a good deal as to the nature of the soil they like best. Some, such as the spuria group and the longipetala group, like a deep, somewhat stiff, but rich loam, and their long, thong-like roots reach down for an amazing distance. The sibirica group, as also the virginica group and tridentata, have finer, fibrous, matted roots, and are partial to a lighter, looser soil, which, however, must be proportionately richer in vegetable matter. Hence many of these are grateful for the gift of peat.
Let me end by speaking of one great drawback to these beardless Irises. By far the greater part of them die down completely in winter ; and wise are they to do so. Who in the November weather, which has come upon us, does not envy them I Who would not gladly now go into winter quarters, if he could be sure that he would awake strengthened and refreshed as soon as the bitter half of May were over? But their brown withered leaves makes them in the late fall and early winter an eyesore to those who like to have a garden, but who do not love flowers. I mean the people who insist on having a good " blaze of colour," and do not care how the colour is obtained ; who, but for the fashion of the thing, would, if they dare speak the truth, be found to be equally content whether the colours were made up of delicately-wrought flowers and leaves, or machine-made "dummies" of rag and paper. Such people are generally governed by a demon called "tidiness," who arms them with instruments of mischief called "shears" and " rakes," and sends them, when the winter days come on, into the border to "tidy it up." Such people ruthlessly cut down the ripening foliage, just when the loss of the green summer tint shows that the goodness of the leaf is passing into the root ; they tear away the dead leaves, and rob the plant of that wrapping with which Nature strives to shelter next year's shoots and buds from the winter blasts ; they scarify and scratch the soil, lacerating the tender fibres, of which the plant stands so much in need ; they make the surface smooth, carefully removing every scrap of loose nourishment that is lying about, and leave the ground so that the early winter rains may flatten it into an almost polished surface well-nigh proof against all mellowing influences ; and having wrought all this wreck, call it order. Whoever wishes to cultivate Irises, or, indeed, any other flowers for the sake of the flowers themselves, must early recognise that Nature is untidy — that dead leaves and a rough soil are the winter forerunners of the summer's bright foliage and abundant bloom. Whoever is unwilling to leave the foliage of the past summer untouched, so that when it has served its purpose the worms may carry it below to enrich and lighten the soil ; whoever is unwilling to let his border soil remain rough and open, so that the rain may pass through it, and the gases of the atmosphere be absorbed by it, and the crumbling hand of frost loosen it ; whoever is not ready, when occasions demand, to see his border covered all the winter with " untidy " mulching of rich but inelegant " muck," should not take up the culture of Irises. They, like other plants, are meek and unresenting ; they will strive to bloom in spite of all his bad treatment ; but he will never enjoy the profuse beauty which is the reward of proper treatment.  F.

[Ref i]  I must not enter into this point here, but there are many reasons for thinking that the curious tuft of hairs on each of the three outer petals or " falls," which we call the "beard," is a comparatively late introduction, the first Irises which came into existence being, in all probability, plain beardless ones.

[Ref ii]  It may, perhaps, be worth while to remind the reader that the flowers of the Iris consists of the following parts : On the outside are the three outer petals or divisions of the perianth, which, since they generally hang or are bent down, are called " falls." Within these, and alternating; with them, come the three inner perianth divisions, which, since they are generally erect, are called "standards." In the centre of the flower the style splits up into three stigmas, each of which, broad, highly-coloured, and petal-like, spreads out and hangs over, or sometimes is closely bent down upon the fall opposite to which it is placed. Each stigma terminates in two triangular, often-toothed, sometimes large, sometimes small, flaps, the so-called crests, well shown in many of the ligures of the plate. The stigma, in overhanging the fall, gives rise to a sort of tunnel, sometimes with a wide, sometimes with a narrow, mouth, and on the outside of the stigma, at the base of the crests, just at the mouth of the tunnel, is a narrow ledge. It is on this ledge that the pollen must fall to fertilise the plant. Inside the tunnel, lying underneath each arching stigma, sometimes readily visible, sometimes almost entirely hidden, is an anther. All Irises have markings on the fall just at the mouth of the tunnel, for the purpose, apparently, of attracting insects ; and the insect, a bee for instance, in entering the tunnel for the purpose of sucking the nectar at the bottom of the stigma and fall, brushes against the ledge of the stigma, and deposits on it the pollen which he has gathered from another plant. The beard of the fall, which leads from the surface of the fall right into the tunnel, seems to be a device for compelling the insect to brush against the ledge.

[Ref iii] The form of the flowers, especially the stigna firmly reflexed over the fiddle-shaped fall, the ribbed capsule, the characters of the roots, and other features are most distinctly those of the spuria group, in spite of its leaves being, especially in the narrow-leaved form, narrower than the other members of the group.

[Ref iv]  If any " double-minded " florist wishes to have brought home to him the evil he is doing by his efforts to " double " flowers which Nature intended to be single, let him look at this vile ami ugly parody on a beautiful original.

[Ref v] The real I. tenuifolia, of Pallas, is something quite different.

[Ref vi] Orientalis is by many regarded as identical with Fischer's hæmatophylla. It is obvious, however, from Sweet's description that the latter is quite a different plant from the former. It is much shorter, smaller, and flowers much earlier. I have not yet come across what has satisfied me as Fischer's hæmotophylla, though I am anxious to do so. The feature which led Fischer to give it" the name he did— the red colour of the young leaves and shoots— cannot be relied on for diagonistic purposes ; very many forms have the young leaves and first shoots more or less red.

[Ref vii] Curiously enough, longipetala has an imperfectly developed rudimentary, but still very distinct, crest on the falls ; it seems to be a link between the beardless and the crested divisions.

[Ref viii] Curiously enough, longipetala has an imperfectly developed rudimentary, but still very distinct, crest on the falls ; it seems to be a link between the beardless and the crested divisions. In the Southern States there grows another form, which in Baker's list is called tripetala, and which, from Sweet's description, seems to be a delightful plant. It is more delicate than tridentata ; its leaves are narrow and linear, not as in tridentata, somewhat broad and ensiform. It is found in Florida, and, as far as I know, is not in cultivation in England at the present time. Its re-introduction is a desideratum.

Once again its a great privilege to feature Michael Foster with some of his earliest published thoughts on Irises. He is still a consummate authority on Irises and his writings open many doors to Irises of the past with his beautiful and unique descriptions.

A major hat tip to Phil Edinger for his succinct observations, and discussions which are always appreciated.

Clicking on the above images will take you to the larger, higher resolution version.

Reproduction in whole or in part of this post, its opinions or its images without the expressed written permission of Terry Johnson is strictly prohibited.

Read More

HANDSOME IRISES, D Thomson.

THE GARDEN 

May 27 ,1876.

HANDSOME IRISES

Among hardy perennial plants there are certain kinds which, on account of their showy character in general, or of their striking forms and habits, rank among the aristocracy of flowers, rendering them well worthy of very special and general culture. Among such are, for instance, the Phlox, the Peony, the Larkspur, and most decidedly the many most strikingly interesting varieties of Iris, which, to be more appreciated, only require to be more generally known. Their sword-like leaves, and large beautifully formed flowers, produced in great profusion, embracing such a variety of colour and rich pencillings, give them very much the same position among hardy perennials that Orchids occupy among indoor tender plants. Besides, they are of the easiest culture, thriving in almost any soil, and equally at home in comparatively swampy grounds by the lake or pond side, and in the ordinary mixed border. Small portions of their fleshy prostrate rhizomes, if once planted and left to take care of themselves in a great measure, soon increase into large stools, yielding hundreds of interesting blossoms. They are, more, over, so perfectly hardy, that the severest weather of this country does not injure them. Naturally, they do best in a rather heavy moist soil, but they also succeed in any soil well worked and manured when planted.

There is now an almost endless variety of Irises, and for the information of these persons who may desire to form a select collection of them, the following list may be found useful : —

 amabilia, pale blue, lower petals velvety. purple, reticulated with white— very abundant bloomer ;

Antiope, metallic blue, lower petals violet, pencilled with pale straw;

Arlequin Maliarias, white, feathered and edged with violet, lower petals purple, reticulated with white;

Arnols, violet, suffused with bronze, lower petals rich velvety-purple, reticulated with orange and white;

Augustus, azure, blue, lower petals pure violet, reticulated with white ;

aurea, chrome yellow, lower petals paler yellow, reticulated with sulphur ;

Bocage, pale lavender, lower petals purple, feathered with white ;

Bridesmaid, white, suffused with lavender, lower petals pencilled with reddish lilac ;

Chameleon, indigo blue, flaked with purple, lower petals pale violet, reticulated with white ;

Comte de St. Clair, pure white, tipped with violet, lower petals beautiful purple, reticulated with white;

Cordelia, rosy lilac, lower petals rich rosy purple, margined with white ;

Cytheree, lavender blue, lower petals light purple, veined with white;

Darius, chrome yellow, lower petals purplish-lilac, reticulated with white ;

Dr. Berenice, coppery-brown, lower petals ruby. purple, reticulated with orange and white ;

Exquisite, bronzy-sulphur, lower petals rich purple, veined and margined with sulphur, bearded with golden yellow ;

Fairy Queen, white, feathered and grained with purple;

Gideon, yellow, lower petals crimson. purple, heavily veined, and reticulated with sulphur and white ;

Hericart de Thury, chrome yellow, lower petals brownish-crimson, veined and reticulated with sulphur and white;

Imogene, bright lavender, lower petals soft azuro blue, centre white ;

Jacquesiana, reddish-bronze, lower petals crimson, reticulated with yellow and white ;

La Fristosse, primrose, lower petals crimson, heavily reticulated with yellow and white ;

Leopoldine, yellow, lower petals purple, margined with sulphur yellow, heavily striped with white ;

Madame Chereau, white, all the petals beautifully edged and barred with violet;

Pacquit, purple, with light centre, lower petals reticulated with while;

Poiteau, white, suffused with lavender, lower petals rich purple, reticulated with white ;

Racine, primrose, suffused with lilac, lower petals rosy-purple, reticulated with orange and white ;

spectabilis,velvety-purple, shaded with black ;

Unique, white, lower petals purple, heavily veined and margined with white ;

Victorine, satiny, white, blotched with purple, lower petals violet, purple-veined, and reticulated with white;

Walner, azure.blue, lower petals light purple, veined with white;

The thirty kinds named above are really splendid varieties; and, being hardy plants that can be purchased for about 18 shillings per dozen, any one who adds them to his mixed borders of hardy plants cannot fail to derive much pleasure and interest from them.

D. THOMSON, in "The Gardener." 

Reproduction in whole or in part of this post, its opinions or its images without the expressed written permission of Terry Johnson is strictly prohibited, no exceptions. 

Photo credit and copyright Terry Johnson and Heritage Irises ©. 

Read More