"Pay attention to the world." -- Susan Sontag
 

Ambitious Spring Snowflakes (Leucojum vernum) (2 of 3)

From “Snowflakes and Snowdrops: Leucojum” in The Little Bulbs: A Tale of Two Gardens by Elizabeth Lawrence:

“Nearly everyone in the South calls a snowflake a snowdrop. No matter how often Southerners are told that Leucojum aestivum, found in every dooryard, is a snowflake, they go on calling it snowdrop…. For no good reason the snowdrops (Galanthus) are very uncommon in my part of the country — not that they will not grow, but because local gardeners think that in having leucojums they already have snowdrops….

“The generic name of the snowflake, leucojum, is from the Greek. It means white violet, and was given to the plant because of the fragrance of the flowers. I never knew that they were fragrant until I read it in a book. The perfume is so subtle that you must warm the flowers in your hand before you become aware of it….

“If you trust in names there is a snowflake for each season — winter, summer, autumn, spring — but, like so many ideas that are charming in the abstract, the naming does not work out so well. The winter snowflake,
Leucojum hyemale, blooms in spring; the summer snowflake, L. aestivum, often blooms in winter in these parts; and the autumn snowflake, L. autumnale, blooms in summer.

“The spring snowflake,
L. vernum, does bloom at that season — a month later than the Galanthus, according to the books, but at the same time according to my garden record. The tips of the buds, folded between the leaves, appear above ground early in January, but they wait until the end of February to bloom. I keep hoping that a mild season will bring them out much sooner….

“Although this species has been common in British gardens since it was brought to England from central Europe at the end of the sixteenth century, it is very rare in America. In fifteen years of ordering
L. vernumwhenever I saw the name in a catalogue, the bulbs invariably proved to be L. aestivumwhen they arrived….

From “Cultivation of Leucojum” in Snowdrops and Snowflakes: A Study of the Genera Galanthus and Leucojum by F. C. Stern:

“The species of Leucojum which are most often seen in gardens are L. vernum and L. aestivum and their varieties. They all grow easily in good garden soil and are all very attractive plants. In the garden none of them appears to have any preference for any particular soils. They grow in well-drained positions in loam with or without lime and are perfectly hardy…. L. vernum is particularly useful in the garden as it flowers in February and March. It does well planted either on the north side or in a sunny place….”


Hello!

This is the second of three posts with photographs of Spring Snowflakes, Leucojum vernum, that I took at Oakland Cemetery in the middle of February. The first post is Ambitious Spring Snowflakes (Leucojum vernum) (1 of 3).

In that previous post, I described some of the differences between the Spring Snowflake and its companion species in the Leucojum genus, the Summer Snowflake (Leucojum aestivum), as well as how often plants in the Galanthus genus — Snowdrops — were thought to be the same plant, because they (allegedly!) looked like they were. So just imagine my excitement when I found this seventeenth-century botanical drawing by Hans Simon Holtzbecker (from the sites plantillustrations.org and SMK.OPEN) that shows how different these three plants really are. By placing all three in the same illustration and rendering their botanical characteristics with precision, Holtzbecker makes it easy to distinguish among them. The top plant in the drawing is the Summer Snowflake, the bottom right plant is the Spring Snowflake now made famous by my posts, and the bottom left plant is a Snowdrop.

The Snowdrop shows the distinctive helicopter blade or propeller-shaped flower petals, as I previously described. The Spring and Summer Snowflakes have flowers of similar appearance to each other, but the Summer version tends to produce a handful of flowers on each stem, whereas the Spring Snowflake typically produces only two or three. With more flowers clustered together in staggered positions, the Summer Snowflake is more likely to display flowers whose center structures are exposed to many kinds of midyear pollinators. The Spring Snowflake, on the other hand, keeps them turned toward the ground, accessible to intrepid flying insects emerging from winter and attracted to the flower’s scents, but protected from the potentially damaging elements of very early spring severe weather.

You might think, then, that we’ve dispensed with any confusion over similar-looking plants. Yet we learn through the excerpt from The Little Bulbs: A Tale of Two Gardens above that Elizabeth Lawrence, writing in 1957, considered the possibility that there was “a snowflake for each season” — so four, not just one for spring and one for summer. In this writing, the Autumn Snowflake (Leucojum autumnale) and the Winter Snowflake (Leucojum hyemale) bloom in those two additional seasons (with some overlap) to give us year-round Snowflakes.

I’ve never seen either of those Snowflakes, but if I had, I would have subsequently learned that the two plants with those names — originally Leucojum autumnale and Leucojum hyemale — have since been determined through genetic analysis to belong to a separate plant genus entirely (Acis), and are now known as Acis autumnalis and Acis trichophylla, respectively. Click here and here if you’d like to see images of these two Acis family members, where their visual similarities to both Snowdrops and our legit-Snowflakes are apparent — that visual similarity likely accounting for how all four plants got lumped into the same genus historically. When Lawrence later published Beautiful at All Seasons: Southern Gardening and Beyond in 2007, she no longer included the Autumn and Winter Snowflakes, but still gave attention to the Spring and Summer Snowflakes — noting the remains of species confusion that continue to this day, especially since the Spring Snowflake is still the more rarely encountered garden gem.

Thanks for reading and taking a look!









Ambitious Spring Snowflakes (Leucojum vernum) (1 of 3)

From “The Mediterranean and the Near East” in The Plant Hunters by Alice M. Coats:

“Spain was always a country apart, isolated physically by the barrier of the Pyrenees and politically by the Moorish occupation, which lingered till the end of the fifteenth century. The last country in Europe to be botanically explored, it was the first to be exploited by a professional horticultural collector, at a time when gardens were still in a transitional stage, part physic-garden, part botanic-garden, and only incidentally assemblages of ornamental plants.

“The collector in question was a Dutchman, Guillaume Boel (sometimes called Dr Boel), ‘in his time a very curious and cunning searcher of simples, who worked for Coys and Clusius as well as for John Parkinson, by whom he was ‘often before and hereinafter remembred’.

“The references to Boel in Parkinson’s first book (1629) are all complimentary, but in his second (1640) there are complaints that while travelling at Parkinson’s expense Boel had sent seeds to a rival (William Coys), who had forestalled the author with descriptions of the new plants — ‘while I beate the bush, another catcheth and cateth the bird.’ Nevertheless, Parkinson received from Boel some 200 packets of seeds, besides bulbs and ‘divers other rare plants dried and laid betweer papers and the collector could hardly be blamed if they did not all succeed….’

“As this implies, many of Boel’s introductions were annuals, and not all were new; but the plants he sent to England included
Scilla peruviana, Leucojum vernum, Armeria latifolia, Convolvulus tricolor, and possibly Linaria cymbalaria and Nigella hispanica.”

From Seeing Flowers: Discover the Hidden Life of Flowers by Teri Dunn Chace:

“Aptly named spring snowflake, Leucojum vernum, serves up a generous early season helping of tiny, chubby white bells with green accents. Sometimes placed in the Amaryllis family, sometimes placed with the lilies, it is especially valued for its ability to prosper in soggy ground.”


Hello!

This is the first of three posts with photographs of a flowering plant at Oakland Cemetery that always marks the transition from winter to spring in my photography projects. Its most recognized common name — Spring Snowflake — fits that timeline perfectly. It’s also sometimes referred to as Snowbell, because of the flower color and shape; or as St. Agnes Flower, a name connecting the plant to the January 21 Feast of Saint Agnes celebrated by several religious denominations. Its scientific name is Leucojum vernum, and it’s one of only two species of plants in the Leucojum genus, the other being the nearly identical Leucojum aestivum, or Summer Snowflake.

I first photographed and wrote about these plants in 2021 when I found them intermixed with Snowdrops, a plant in the Galanthus genus (see Snowdrops and Snowflakes, Daffodils and Tulip Leaves). Galanthus has since disappeared from Oakland and was probably crowded out by the highly ambitious Snowflakes, whose ground coverage has expanded dramatically each year I’ve photographed them. That 2021 post was one of the first ones where I learned — with the help of PlantNet — to distinguish between species of plants that are frequently confused until one takes a close look at the differences in their appearance. Galanthus flowers, notably, have petals that are more separate (rather than overlapping) and both longer and thinner, described, by me back then, like this: “Snowdrop flowers have petals that look like helicopter blades with only one flower on a stem; snowflakes look like tiny bells and will often produce multiple flowers, clustered near each other, at the tip of each stem.”

Five years later, that description still holds up reasonably well; but you can look at that post if you’d like to see photos that show how different they are. And if you’re really, really interested in learning about Leucojum versus Galanthus, take a look at the 1956 book Snowdrops and Snowflakes: A Study of the Genera Galanthus and Leucojum by F. C. Stern. The author covers nearly every botanical, historical, and gardening difference between the two kinds of plants going back to the 1500s, and includes posthumously published drawings and writings by E. A. Bowles — the celebrated botanist I first wrote about after stopping to photograph a Corkscrew Hazel (Corylus avellana ‘Contorta’) in 2023 (see Winter Shapes: Corkscrew Hazel), subsequently exploring that plant’s history and learning about how Bowles accumulated unusual, often overlooked or underappreciated plants in a section of his gardens that he called his “lunatic asylum.”

According to the book The Little Bulbs: A Tale of Two Gardens by Elizabeth Lawrence, Leucojum vernum — despite being vaguely characterized as having naturalized to parts of Georgia and Florida — is actually not common in southeastern gardens, so it’s noteworthy to find them at Oakland at all. But having observed and photographed these plants for six years now, and having photographed them as early as mid-February fully in bloom, I think it’s accurate to identify them as Spring Snowflakes because their Summer Snowflake relative would be unlikely to bloom before April, especially after atypically cold winters like ours of 2026. And it’s also true that the Summer Snowflake tends to produce more flowers per stem than the Spring Snowflake, which, as is evident from my photos, rarely produces more than three flowers (with an occasional exception) on each stem, and most consistently produces just three.

Here, actually, we have one of the exceptions — a plant that has produced four flowers, one of which was upturned to reveal the flower’s inner architecture. That rarity was of course what caught my eye when I was taking the photos, as it’s the only one in this entire series to reverse the plants’ normal bell-shaped nodding structure and give us a peek inside. Over my six years of photographing these plants and accumulating about 150 Snowflake photos, I only encountered upturned flowers one other time, in 2024. Like the flowers from 2024, this one appears to have become trapped between the pedicels of the other flowers, which is probably the reason it got stuck downside up.

I took this series of photos on a very blustery day, the morning after a series of thunderstorms had passed through the area — late enough in the morning that the plants had mostly breeze-dried but their bells bounced un-photogenically in the wind. One’s patience gets tested in conditions like that (especially with such tiny subjects), but I took dozens of photos from numerous distances, focal lengths, and shutter speeds to end up with enough that were decently focused and sufficient for three blog posts.

While working on the photos in Lightroom, I couldn’t help but notice the contrasts between the plants’ dark green leaves and stems, their dark surroundings, and the white blossoms — which produced a nice glow even on that cloudy day. Unlike most white flowers I photograph, Snowflake blooms are very close to pure white, featuring a complete lack of color pigment that is often present in flowers like, for example, white irises. Having noticed that, it tickled me to read that E. A. Bowles described the plant similarly in his 1914 book My Garden in Spring, where he noted that Spring Snowflakes produced flowers that are “hard to beat for pure white” — something captured 112 years later in photographs, by me!

Thanks for reading and taking a look!








Nature’s Palette: Exploring Iris Colors, Their Culture, and Their History (10 of 10)

From “Bearded Irises, Act I” in A Guide to Bearded Irises: Cultivating the Rainbow for Beginners and Enthusiasts by Kelly Norris:

“The earliest varieties of irises grown and appreciated by gardeners in the 16th and 17th centuries were likely wild hybrids between Iris pallida, the source of lavender pigments, and I. variegata, the source of yellow pigments. Early collectors gave them various names, some pawned off onto botanists as species names like I. amoena, I. squalens, and I. neglecta. Each represented a relatively distinct color group, but the variation seen between clones was highly suggestive of their hybrid constitution. These seed-grown bearded irises were variously distributed across European gardens from the mid-17th century on. It wasnโ€™t until the 1820s, when Parisian nurseryman Paul de Bure raised and named hundreds of seedlings, that the movement to popularize bearded irises gained a footing; โ€˜Buriensisโ€™ (c. 1822) was his first introduction….

“By the 1870s the bearded iris fascination had crossed the English Channel, and early enthusiasts like Peter Barr were leading the production of new varieties in the British Isles. It was in the 1890s that many breeders, churning out dozens of new varieties each year, began to wonder if theyโ€™d reached the limit of the bearded irisโ€™s potential. One of these was Sir Michael Foster, a professor of physiology at Cambridge and by all accounts among the most esteemed iris connoisseurs of his day. Foster grew and experimented with all irises, including oncocyclus irises from the Mideast and spurias….

“The American interest in bearded irises originated with diploids. Bertrand Farr, a music shop owner from Pennsylvania, imported Peter Barrโ€™s entire collection (over 100 cultivars) and established a nursery near Wyomissing in the early 1900s….

“As America was catching the initial round of bearded iris fever, a schoolmaster from Godalming, U.K., was feverishly making crosses of his own. William Rickatson Dykes is the undisputed godfather of the genus, a position he earned partly through his association with Sir Michael Foster, a friendship begun at Cambridge while Dykes was a student there. Upon Fosterโ€™s death, Dykes inherited, by way of a mutual friend, copies of his predecessorโ€™s notes and garden records, and like Foster, he bravely ventured into all sorts of deep and muddy waters with his experimental crosses between diploids and tetraploids and dwarf and tall species….


“Dykes traveled extensively to document species in the wild and collect them for horticultural evaluation; in his short breeding career, he introduced 34 cultivars, most in the early 1920s. Dykes died following a car accident in 1925. Two fitting tributes marked the next year: his wife, Katherine, introduced the yellow iris that bears his name, and in June 1926 the British Iris Society created the Dykes Medal honoring the most outstanding variety of the year — an award still coveted by breeders worldwide.”

From “Familiar Landscapes” by Lawrence Raab in The Bread Loaf Anthology of Contemporary American Poetry, edited by Robert Pack, Sydney Lea, and Jay Parini: 

Morning’s sudden and extravagant
green seems to suggest the higher
whiter waves of the air, what moves
through the flurry of these
first leaves, floating and falling
beyond everything I am able to see.

Against that brightness, a flock of blue,
a single yellow iris
creaks on its shaft….

How persistently
the eye resists the familiar,
so easily finding itself content
among its accustomed walls,
the expected trees and avenues,
that it fails to see them
and will acknowledge
only what has been changed or lost
or taken away.


Hello!

This is the tenth of ten posts featuring photographs of irises that I took at Oakland Cemetery toward the end of April. The previous posts are:

Natureโ€™s Palette: Exploring Iris Colors, Their Culture, and Their History (1 of 10);
Natureโ€™s Palette: Exploring Iris Colors, Their Culture, and Their History (2 of 10);
Natureโ€™s Palette: Exploring Iris Colors, Their Culture, and Their History (3 of 10):
Natureโ€™s Palette: Exploring Iris Colors, Their Culture, and Their History (4 of 10);
Natureโ€™s Palette: Exploring Iris Colors, Their Culture, and Their History (5 of 10);
Natureโ€™s Palette: Exploring Iris Colors, Their Culture, and Their History (6 of 10);
Natureโ€™s Palette: Exploring Iris Colors, Their Culture, and Their History (7 of 10);
Natureโ€™s Palette: Exploring Iris Colors, Their Culture, and Their History (8 of 10);
Natureโ€™s Palette: Exploring Iris Colors, Their Culture, and Their History (9 of 10).


In the ninth post in this series, I introduced a “self iris” whose standards and falls all demonstrated an intense, highly-saturated yellow color. As I described in that post, the ability of that iris to produce colors with such intensity originated in its genetic heritage (enhanced carotenoid production) as well as its growing environment (full day sunlight), which worked together to encourage the iris to produce more and more yellow-colored cells. In this post, we’ll look at some other yellow variations, so I’ve placed two representative samples to the right of the previous yellow self iris below to show their visual differences.

The irises like those in the second and third image above are located in older sections of Oakland Cemetery, neither kind receiving the same level of full-day sunlight as the first one. The partial sunlight they receive varies because they’re all located at boundaries between sun and shade, where nearby shrubs or trees filter out some sunlight at different times during the day. Both kinds get most of their sun exposure during the morning hours — something that irises like these are usually very happy about — with those like the second image spending most of their afternoons in full shade.

At the time I took the photographs — around mid-day — those like the second one were already fully shaded. That actually puzzled me a little, as I didn’t realize there were any irises that could do well with so little light, until I came across this brief note in Irises: A Gardener’s Encyclopedia by Claire Austin:

“In very hot climates, bearded irises will flower in shade. In Britain, the only bearded iris that managed to bloom in my garden in semi-shade was Iris flavescens, an old soft lemon variety.”

Though I couldn’t confirm it, I’d already concluded from my research on yellow irises that there was a good chance the shaded varieties were genetically related to Iris flavescens or its ancestors — because of their visual similarity to the yellows produced by William Rickatson Dykes and subsequent breeders. That such cultivars have been adapted to partial shade adds a bit of confirmation to that conclusion, especially since these shade-tolerant irises demonstrate another feature that enables them to adapt to lower levels of sunlight. Their falls — as you can see in the second image — don’t droop downward like the falls in the first and third images. Instead, they open to a horizontal or slightly upturned position and stay there while the flowers are in bloom. This enables them to capture additional sunlight (compared to the droopy falls), take advantage of fewer hours of sun shining on their petals, and still keep their photosynthesis humming along. Their ability to do so well with limited sunlight makes them ideal for their placement among the old memorial structures and stonework in the historical sections of the cemetery — where their heirloom quality fits perfectly with the garden design.

The final thirteen images below show different views of the blooms on a single iris plant, a very stately one positioned at the intersection of two walking paths in front of terraced walls, where it beckoned me to photograph it as well as its white and purple relatives in the background. This iris captures light midway between the well-sunned yellow self irises and the mostly-shaded heirloom irises, something that can be seen in its color production. The yellow saturation falls about midway between the other two cultivars; and its position in partial sun means that it doesn’t have to flood its petals with protective yellow carotenoids. It can, instead, retain and display one of its most significant features: carefully placed swatches of yellow near the throat of the falls, and similarly colored yellow striping edging those petals around an oval-shaped white foreground.

My camera, as it turns out, was somewhat mystified by this iris, and produced a RAW image that was mostly yellow — or at least appeared that way because there was enough yellow to create a color cast over the entire image. We end up with this color cast because there’s enough light (despite a cloudy sky) to over-saturate yellow and the color yellow fills so much of the frame in this close-up view.

A simple white balance adjustment — which removes yellow tint — gets us part way there; or, at least, starts to hint at the contrasting color combinations that are present in the falls. Now we can see that there’s pure white that was hidden by the camera’s interpretation.

This improved view of the colors in this iris’s falls influenced the adjustments I made next: I changed the color relationships to create greater separation between the flower’s yellow tones and its whites, then added some texture. The texture addition finishes the job, sharpening the contrast between yellow and white, and enhancing the fine vertical lines that run down the falls. Here are the three step changes showing the transition from the camera’s original interpretation, to the white balance adjustment, to the final version of this image.

Making these adjustments produces a cleaner and brighter image, but it also does something more important than that. It shows a flower that reflects the intentions of its breeders, who altered its genetics to produce the yellow and white contrasts, and the yellow edging, in the falls. The placement of this yellow edging reveals those intentions, because — as you can see in the final photograph — it’s so precise that it looks like it was drawn there, and appears not only on the tops of individual petals but is reflected or mirrored in the colors underneath the petals. Coloration like this is not likely an accident of nature for irises with decades of breeding history, so their photos should acknowledge the technological and scientific efforts, and examine that in the context of their use in formal or memorial gardens like those of Oakland Cemetery.

With that, we’ve come to the end of this project. Through ten posts, about 300 photographs, and around 10,000 words, we’ve done much more than just looked at pretty pictures of fine irises. We’ve traversed topics like how irises are classified scientifically and into color or pattern categories; how their appearance reveals their genetic history and breeding; and how they adapt to their environment by producing different colors and forms. We’ve positioned them across multiple cultural dimensions and explored how they fit into memorial or botanical gardens; how their presence relates to garden design; how photography, art, and poetry can help us see them better and learn more about them; and how they’ve been observed throughout history as symbols of life’s bounty, beauty, and endless complexity.

Thanks for reading and taking a look!