Bicolors with white perianth and corona in a shade of yellow Division abilis divisions a.Yellow shades with or without red colouring in the corona. b.Bicolors with white perianths and yellow,red-stained or red coronas Division 3- Barrii (incorporating Burbidgei) heaaysessthan the lngth of the perianth segments There were to subivisor aisadelowrcd-stain the corona ned or red coronas Division 4-Leedsi Flowers in this division hav e white rianth nts and white daffodils may have the dimensions of both Division 2 and Division3flowers cream or citron coronas.The Leedsii Division 5-Triandrus hybrids This division contained all varieties obviously containing N.triandrusblood',examples beingCountess Grey'and'Moonstone' Division 6- heus hybrids Division brid ion had to possess the cha racteristics of N.cyclamineus The hybrids of Division 7 were all v of N jonquilla pa ntage,an example being'Buttercup Division 8-Tazetta hybrids The possession of the characteristics of N.tazetta was essential to the hybrids of this division. Division 9-Poeticus hybrids With these hybrids.the poss sion of th e sparkling white perianth,the typical scent and the red corona colour of poe us were all essential attributes Division he double at that time,but also the doublefo of which the 0 ith the ion of Nn was placed in Divisio 10.Similarly N Division Ibut the double N was in Division 1o Division 11-Various era of the specie and b id divi d in Di ng N A above.however,N.poericus and N This classification is interesting in that it pre-dates by several decades the reverse bicolor cultivars and also the split corona daffodils which now have their own Division 11.It does recognise,however,the increasing numbers of species hybrids(Divisions 5-9)present in 1910.It gives an indication of the scarcity of double daffodils for they were included almost as an after-thought as Division 10,while today the occupy the much nent Division I hen there wa r group,the Leedsi on 4),w h ac ally spanned in the amcly th specifically,the pale forms tha This classification system remained essentially unaltered between 1910 and 1947 when on 18 march 1947 the narcissus and tulin committee of the roval Horticultural society after consultation with the bulb growers Society of Haarlem,decided to implement changes.These were to come into force on I January 1950 but in fact e new system appeared in the Classified List of Daffodil Names(1948).The major changes adopted were as eLeedsi Division disappeared.its former contents being absorbed into Divisions2 39
39 c. Bicolors with white perianth and corona in a shade of yellow. Division 2 – Incomparabilis Corona not less than 1/3 but less than equal to the length of the perianth segments. There were two subdivisions: a. Yellow shades with or without red colouring in the corona. b. Bicolors with white perianths and yellow, red-stained or red coronas. Division 3 – Barrii (incorporating Burbidgei) The corona is always less than 1/3 the length of the perianth segments. There were two sub-divisions: a. Yellow shades with or without red colouring in the corona. b. Bicolor varieties with white perianths and yellow, red-stained or red coronas. Division 4 – Leedsii Flowers in this division have white perianth segments and white, cream or citron coronas. The Leedsii daffodils may have the dimensions of both Division 2 and Division 3 flowers. Division 5 – Triandrus hybrids This division contained all varieties obviously containing N. triandrus ‘blood’, examples being ‘Countess Grey’ and ‘Moonstone’. Division 6 – Cyclamineus hybrids Daffodils in this division had to possess the characteristics of N. cyclamineus. Division 7 – Jonquilla hybrids The hybrids of Division 7 were all varieties of N. jonquilla parentage, an example being ‘Buttercup’. Division 8 – Tazetta hybrids The possession of the characteristics of N. tazetta was essential to the hybrids of this division. Division 9 – Poeticus hybrids With these hybrids, the possession of the sparkling white perianth, the typical scent and the red corona colour of N. poeticus were all essential attributes. Division 10 – Double varieties This division included not only the double cultivars, of which there were precious few at that time, but also the double forms of the species. Thus, we find all of the N. poeticus listed as being in Division 9, with the exception of N. poeticus ‘Flore Pleno’ that was placed in Division 10. Similarly N. pseudonarcissus appeared in Division 1 but the double N. pseudonarcissus ‘Plenus’ was in Division 10. Division 11 – Various This division contained many of the species including N. bulbocodium, N. assoanus and N. viridiflorus. Several other species, which had their own hybrid divisions, were also included in Division 11, these being N. cyclamineus, N. triandrus, N. jonquilla and N. tazetta. As mentioned above, however, N. poeticus and N. pseudonarcissus were included elsewhere. This classification is interesting in that it pre-dates by several decades the reverse bicolor cultivars and also the split corona daffodils which now have their own Division 11. It does recognise, however, the increasing numbers of species hybrids (Divisions 5-9) present in 1910. It gives an indication of the scarcity of double daffodils for they were included almost as an after-thought as Division 10, while today they occupy the much more prominent Division 4. Then there was a peculiar group, the Leedsiis (Division 4), which actually spanned two other divisions, namely the Incomparabilis and Barrii or, more specifically, the pale coloured forms that occurred within these divisions. This classification system remained essentially unaltered between 1910 and 1947 when on 18 March 1947 the Narcissus and Tulip Committee of the Royal Horticultural Society, after consultation with the Bulb Growers Society of Haarlem, decided to implement changes. These were to come into force on 1 January 1950 but in fact the new system appeared in the Classified List of Daffodil Names (1948)(11). The major changes adopted were as follows: a. The Leedsii Division disappeared, its former contents being absorbed into Divisions 2 and 3
carded.A sub-division'c'was c.A sub- n ded t n colour combinations not covered by the istin b-dvas d.Change n the colo ions 'a'and 'c'of Divisions 1.2 and 3 were made to accommodate existing nink cunped cultivars and those with red trumpets that were predicted e.Division 4,vacated by the demise of the Leedsiis,was filled by the now important and numerous doubles. f.Species and wild forms such as,for example,those of N.poeticus were all included in a species division.This By 199.split ome time.the much n mor u in th divisions was detailed in the Roval Horticultural Societys Classifted List and International Register of Daffodil Names (199)The maior drawback to the RHS scheme was the ambiguity of the coding system.A 3b daffodil for example,had a white perianth but all its code signified about the corona was that it was coloured,giving no indication as to the precise colour or colours.The idea of a new classification system was c liscussed in the American Daffodil S in an article by D and a s acc ts aim was ew colo ing was or eve ac entrala a and a rim As the the earlier RHS ystem this was not altered the anp propriate colours simply being appended,starting with the eye region. Thus 2bRRY referred to a large-cupped daffodil with a white perianth and a predominantly red corona with a yellow rim. In1977.however,a further modification was dhnohe aple 2bRRY becoming 2W-RRY (Plate 4.1).The ADS colour code system uses six letters corresponding to the six predominant colours: -white or whitish ange R-red 4Y-/0 The From the time of the'official'start of the 19th century daffodil revival in 1884.marked by the calling of the first Daffodil Conference and Peter Barr's additions to Baker's classification,the number of cultivars has increased dramatically.The term cultivar simply means what most gardeners would refer to as a variety.It is in fact a garden variety or a plant that has arisen in cultivation.In order that each may be clearly 40
40 b. Divisions 2 and 3 were re-named, the terms Incomparabilis and Barrii being discarded. A sub-division ‘c’ was added to both for the white or whitish cultivars formerly in the Leedsii Division. c. A sub-division ‘d’ was added to Divisions 1, 2 and 3 for flowers with colour combinations not covered by the existing sub-divisions ‘a’, ‘b’ or ‘c’ such as the reverse bicolors. d. Changes in the colour specification in sub-divisions ‘a’ and ‘c’ of Divisions 1, 2 and 3 were made to accommodate existing pink cupped cultivars and those with red trumpets that were predicted. e. Division 4, vacated by the demise of the Leedsiis, was filled by the now important and numerous doubles. f. Species and wild forms such as, for example, those of N. poeticus were all included in a species division. This was Division 10 formerly occupied by the double daffodils. g. Miscellaneous daffodils were included within a new Division 11. By 1969, split corona daffodils had become much more common and were allocated Division 11 at that time, the species daffodils formerly in this division being moved to a new Division 12. This scheme of twelve divisions was detailed in the Royal Horticultural Society’s Classified List and International Register of Daffodil Names (1969)(12). The major drawback to the RHS scheme was the ambiguity of the coding system. A 3b daffodil, for example, had a white perianth but all its code signified about the corona was that it was coloured, giving no indication as to the precise colour or colours. The idea of a new classification system was discussed in the American Daffodil Society Journal in an article by D.T. Throckmorton entitled ‘A proposal of marriage’(13) and a modification to the 1969 classification proposed by the ADS was accepted by the RHS in 1975. Its aim was simplification together with a more realistic interpretation of flower colour. Initially the new colour coding was restricted to the coronas of daffodils in Divisions 1 to 3. The corona was divided into three zones, an inner region or eye, a central area and a rim. As the perianth colour was already clearly indicated under the earlier RHS system, this was not altered, the appropriate colours simply being appended, starting with the eye region. Thus 2bRRY referred to a large-cupped daffodil with a white perianth and a predominantly red corona with a yellow rim. In 1977, however, a further modification was made which dispensed with the old subdivision letter, the earlier example 2bRRY becoming 2W-RRY (Plate 4.1). The ADS colour code system uses six letters corresponding to the six predominant colours: W – white or whitish G – green Y – yellow P – pink O – orange R – red Plate 4.1. The great diversity of the cultivar divisions. From the time of the ‘official’ start of the 19th century daffodil revival in 1884, marked by the calling of the first Daffodil Conference and Peter Barr’s additions to Baker’s classification, the number of cultivars has increased dramatically. The term cultivar simply means what most gardeners would refer to as a variety. It is in fact a garden variety or a plant that has arisen in cultivation. In order that each may be clearly
ation Authorit King Alfred'The rise in rules similar to tho medby a se ose used in the naming of wild plants.these being known as the Intemational Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated plants How many daffodil cultivars have been raised and registered over the past 150 years?This question is almost impossible to answer with any certainty but the total is probably close to 27,000. The Revised System of deleted as the thought to no longer exist.Betv veen 1965 and 1969.more than Classification of Daffodils 850 new cultivars were registered,appearing in the 1969 edition 9774 of the Classified List.In size,the List increased from 112 pages in 1927to374 n969.The number of species and cultivar names stored in the American Daf todil Society's Data Bank (1984) now su by the org odil Was11,ǒ0. sho n Table 4.2 and ilustrated fo Divisions to3 in Plate 4.2 A further revision of daffodil classification took place in 1998,the Centenary Year of The Daffodil Society.While the 1977 classification was mainly concemned with the means for defining flow that of rned witl creati I to o the re ined ns 5 to 9 in order to more strongly stress the characteristics of the species from which the cultivars in 5 to 9 have or are said to have arisen.Division 10,which formerly held the species,wild forms and hybrids was given over to cultivars of N.bulbocodium,the numbers of which merited a division of their own. Plate 4.2.The colour code lassification of 1977 divided into di ng the c ents in two who and the whorl of pe anth s nts In the panillons the nt are usually in a single whorl of six.alternating with the six perianth segments.Division 12,as before.contained miscellaneous daffodil cultivars not catered for in other divisions.Division 13 was newly created and contained those daffodils distinguished solely by a botanical name. urthe of daffodil classification took place.the Centenary Year of The Daffod Society. on wa 100g Wh 1 inly co evt for Di ns 5 to o ir order to more str ongly stress the characteristics of the sn cies from which the cultivars in 5 to 9 have or are said to have arisen.Division 10,which formerly held the species,wild forms and hybrids was given over to cultivars of N.bulbocodium,the numbers of which merited a division of their own.The split corona daffodils of Division 11 were divided into two sub-divisions containing the Collar Daffodils and Papillon Daffodils.In the former,the othe r and consist of six corona segments in two whorls of and the single whorl of perianth segments.I 41
41 recognised, cultivar names are given, each being registered by the International Cultivar Registration Authority for the genus, which is the RHS. Such cultivar names are always obvious as such, being enclosed within a single set of inverted commas thus – ‘King Alfred’. The naming of plants that arise in cultivation is governed by a set of rules similar to those used in the naming of wild plants, these being known as the International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants. How many daffodil cultivars have been raised and registered over the past 150 years? This question is almost impossible to answer with any certainty but the total is probably close to 27,000. In the 1955 edition of the Classified List and International Register of Daffodil Names(14), 4,000 cultivars that had been listed in earlier editions were deleted as they were thought to no longer exist. Between 1965 and 1969, more than 850 new cultivars were registered, appearing in the 1969 edition of the Classified List. In size, the List increased from 112 pages in 1927 to 374 in 1969. The number of species and cultivar names stored in the American Daffodil Society’s Data Bank (1984)(15) (now succeeded by the Daffseek.org website) was 11,896. A summary of the revised system of daffodil classification as it appeared in 1977 is shown in Table 4.2 and illustrated for Divisions 1 to 3 in Plate 4.2. A further revision of daffodil classification took place in 1998, the Centenary Year of The Daffodil Society. While the 1977 classification was mainly concerned with the means for defining flower colour that of 1998 was chiefly concerned with the creation of new divisions and sub-divisions and the reallocation of already existing ones. Divisions 1 to 9 remained basically as before with some revision of the text for Divisions 5 to 9 in order to more strongly stress the characteristics of the species from which the cultivars in 5 to 9 have or are said to have arisen. Division 10, which formerly held the species, wild forms and hybrids was given over to cultivars of N. bulbocodium, the numbers of which merited a division of their own. Plate 4.2. The colour code classification of 1977 applied to Divisions 1, 2 and 3. The split corona daffodils of Division 11 were divided into two sub-divisions containing the Collar Daffodils and Papillon Daffodils. In the former, the normal three flower whorls overlie each other and consist of six corona segments in two whorls of three and the single whorl of perianth segments. In the Papillons, the corona segments are usually in a single whorl of six, alternating with the six perianth segments. Division 12, as before, contained miscellaneous daffodil cultivars not catered for in other divisions. Division 13 was newly created and contained those daffodils distinguished solely by a botanical name. A further revision of daffodil classification took place in 1998, the Centenary Year of The Daffodil Society. While the 1977 classification was mainly concerned with the means for defining flower colour that of 1998 was chiefly concerned with the creation of new divisions and sub-divisions and the re-allocation of already existing ones. Divisions 1 to 9 remained basically as before with some revision of the text for Divisions 5 to 9 in order to more strongly stress the characteristics of the species from which the cultivars in 5 to 9 have or are said to have arisen. Division 10, which formerly held the species, wild forms and hybrids was given over to cultivars of N. bulbocodium, the numbers of which merited a division of their own. The split corona daffodils of Division 11 were divided into two sub-divisions containing the Collar Daffodils and Papillon Daffodils. In the former, the normal three flower whorls overlie each other and consist of six corona segments in two whorls of three and the single whorl of perianth segments. In the Papillons, the corona segments are usually in a single whorl of six
or in other divisions.Division 13 was newly created and a botanical name The Classified List of Daffodil Names and the International Register Towards the end of the 19th century.it became plain that some system of naming and recording of new cultivars was required due to the increasing interest in hybridisation and the collection and naming of natural hybrids from old gar den sites At the time of the 18 erence it was agreed n B s decisio 2in188 very fev th Code for the Nor of Cultivated Plants has.as o e of its hasic tenets the ac e of only fancy names as being appropriate for cultivars and since 1980 Latinized forms have been systematically replaced. Lists of daffodil names have been lo vstematic fashion for over 100 years,the first Classified in 1908.although a list had been issued by the RHS in the The Cla cen up-dat a r on a regua eve from 195 rity for t nle in the 107i ed fo ssified list wa ted on the fin rmous increase in the number of named daffodils and the crossing and inter-cross ng of the once fairly distinct classes This volume contained about 84 pages of cultivars.listed in alphabetical order together with the breeders name and indication of the cultivar division to which each belonged.A formal system for the registration of new cultivars w as in place,with standard re gistration forms available from the Hon. Secretary of the Narcissus Committee with whom registr ion could be effected on payment of the fee of s(5p).Registra ng the ver e or name 103 h f Me By In lti 600 h interval between this and the r edin edition it was in the 1929 edition that the a ual reg station date for all varieties(cultivars)registered since 1927 were given.With all pre-1927 cultivars the date shown was that in which reference to it was found in RHS publications. ently.In th between 192 ame 1935 shown as pre in appe rd t Itivars is im nt 'We rovides eed fo change,for in 1969 its date was given as 1894 while in 1998 it was shown much more realistically as pre-1869. the year in which its raiser,William Backhouse,died.From an historical perspective,the dates have some significence as they should c 127nd r inthenc n whch cultivars apparcd.Ifheda ed between ation dates they are the ones which should be quot d as it s and for th co stency it is those d tes that be found in this ere th e- wid K,as mn 1887 .tho ught top iest kpping but itis de h known that Weardale Perfection'which appeared as a seedling in 1866 or 1867 was perhaps.though not necessarily,15 to 20 years ahead of it.Because of the importance of tetraploidy in the improvement of many cultivar divisions and the known widespread use of 'Weardale Perfection'by early hybridists an attempt at realistic dating could be important. 42
42 alternating with the six perianth segments. Division 12, as before, contained miscellaneous daffodil cultivars not catered for in other divisions. Division 13 was newly created and contained those daffodils distinguished solely by a botanical name. The Classified List of Daffodil Names and the International Register Towards the end of the 19th century, it became plain that some system of naming and recording of new cultivars was required due to the increasing interest in hybridisation and the collection and naming of natural hybrids from old garden sites. At the time of the 1884 Daffodil Conference it was agreed that varietal (cultivar) names, as they were known then, should be exclusively fancy names and should not be Latinized forms which may be confused with specific epithets. Because of this decision in 1884 very few Latinized cultivar names were to be found among the daffodils, although they were widespread among other genera. In order to eliminate confusion the International Code for the Nomenclature of Cultivated Plants has, as one of its basic tenets, the acceptance of only fancy names as being appropriate for cultivars and since 1980 Latinized forms have been systematically replaced. Lists of daffodil names have been logged in a systematic fashion for over 100 years, the first Classified List of Daffodil Names being issued by the RHS in 1908, although a list had been issued by the RHS in the previous year. The Classified List has been up-dated and reissued on a regular basis ever since and from 1955 when the RHS became the international registration authority for the genus has added the words International Register to its title. With each updated version has come an ever-increasing volume and content of information. For example, in the 1923 issue, the need for a classified list was clearly stated on the first page as being “the enormous increase in the number of named daffodils and the crossing and inter-crossing of the once fairly distinct classes”(16). This volume contained about 84 pages of cultivars, listed in alphabetical order together with the breeders name and indication of the cultivar division to which each belonged. A formal system for the registration of new cultivars was in place, with standard registration forms available from the Hon. Secretary of the Narcissus Committee with whom registration could be effected on payment of the fee of 1s (5p). Registration of new cultivars was confirmed by exhibiting the flower before the Committee. By 1927, the volume of names had increased to 103 pages as had the content, information on Awards of Merit and First Class Certificates also being included. In the 1929 edition, there were 120 pages of cultivar names, 600 new cultivars being registered in the interval between this and the preceding edition. It was in the 1929 edition that the actual registation date for all varieties (cultivars) registered since 1927 were given. With all pre-1927 cultivars the date shown was that in which reference to it was found in RHS publications. This system persisted until recently. In the 1998 issue, it was decided that all registration dates logged between 1927 and 1955, when the RHS became the International Registration Authority, should be shown as prethe formerly stated registation date. Thus ‘Evening’ previously shown as being registered in 1935 now appeared as being registered pre-1935. While the need for such a change is not obvious, the need for change with regard to the older cultivars is immediately apparent. ‘Weardale Perfection’ provides a good example of the need for change, for in 1969 its date was given as 1894 while in 1998 it was shown much more realistically as pre-1869, the year in which its raiser, William Backhouse, died. From an historical perspective, the dates have some significence as they should give an indication of the time sequence in which cultivars appeared. If the dates logged between 1927 and 1955 are in fact the real registration dates they are the ones which should be quoted as it is these dates that tend to appear in literature prior to 1998 and for the sake of consistency it is those dates that will be found in this text. Where the pre-1998 date is clearly shown to be wide of the mark, as in the above example, a more realistic date has been used for this too is important in mapping daffodil progress. ‘Madame de Graaff’, dated pre-1887, was until very recently thought to be the earliest known tetraploid cultivar, but it is now known that ‘Weardale Perfection’ which appeared as a seedling in 1866 or 1867 was perhaps, though not necessarily, 15 to 20 years ahead of it. Because of the importance of tetraploidy in the improvement of many cultivar divisions and the known widespread use of ‘Weardale Perfection’ by early hybridists an attempt at realistic dating could be important
The International Register and Classified Lists issued in 200)are massive works of over 1000 pages each and contain a vast amount of information,including names,chromosome status and parentage where known,classification,colour coding,along with the hybridists name.With over 27000 cultivars listed the need for the 1000 pages will be quickly realised and it can only be described as a work of considerable significance and help to all who wish to follow the history of daffodil development.No longer is the registration process completed by acquiring a form from the Hon. Secretary of the Narcissus Committee and the payment of one shilling,for the genus has attained such a status that an International Registrar is required. Awards to Daffodils Awards to daffodil beenmdthend of the 1thct com some aspect of excellence ey are ma RHS Award of Merit First Class Certificate AM/FCC(c)for cutting AM/FCC(e)for exhibition AM/FCC Haarlem ard of) Eirst class certificate (both the above indicate a cultivar's suitability as a commercial cut flower) Forcing Award (FA) First Class Forcing Award(FCFA) Early Forci ng Award (EFA) s orcing Award(FCEFA The Award of Ga follow coration,must r tible to any pest tor dis eand should hav a and stable nstitution Classification of daffodils has thus pursued a complex and protracted course of many decades as experts have sought to bring order to the bewildering variety of types of daffodil;and,albeit somewhat disconcerting,it A3
43 The International Register and Classified Lists issued in 1998(17) and 2008(18) are massive works of over 1000 pages each and contain a vast amount of information, including names, chromosome status and parentage where known, classification, colour coding, along with the hybridists name. With over 27000 cultivars listed the need for the 1000 pages will be quickly realised and it can only be described as a work of considerable significance and help to all who wish to follow the history of daffodil development. No longer is the registration process completed by acquiring a form from the Hon. Secretary of the Narcissus Committee and the payment of one shilling, for the genus has attained such a status that an International Registrar is required. Awards to Daffodils Awards to daffodils have been made since the end of the 19th century in order to confirm some aspect of excellence. They are made by the Royal Horticultural Society and by the Koninklijke Âlgemeene Vereeniging voor Bloembollencultuur (Royal General Bulb Growers Society) of Haarlem, the Netherlands. The main awards and categories from each are as follows: RHS Award of Merit First Class Certificate AM/FCC (c) for cutting AM/FCC (e) for exhibition AM/FCC (f) for forcing AM/FCC (g) for garden decoration AM/FCC (m) market cultivar Haarlem Award of Merit First Class Certificate (both the above indicate a cultivar’s suitability as a commercial cut flower) Forcing Award (FA) First Class Forcing Award (FCFA) Early Forcing Award (EFA) First Class Early Forcing Award (FCEFA) The Award of Garden Merit (AGM) has now replaced the AM/FCC (g) shown above. Its award is made following trials that must show that the selected plant is of outstanding excellence for garden decoration, must not be particularly susceptible to any pest or disease, and should have a good and stable constitution. Classification of daffodils has thus pursued a complex and protracted course of many decades as experts have sought to bring order to the bewildering variety of types of daffodil; and, albeit somewhat disconcerting, it will not be surprising if further such changes lie ahead. The flowers, of course, have not been affected by any of this but have simply ‘got on’ with the task of blooming beautifully each year!