4 responses to “Clematis ‘Candida’”

  1. George L. in Vermont

    Wonderful photo. I love the high-res honoring of the real world details, the browning on the petal edges, the trellis, the browny thing resting on the flower. Captures the subtle interplay of translucence and reflectance of the petals perfectly.
    Here in Vermont I’m enjoying the wild exuberance of our native ‘Virgin’s Bower’ Clematis virginiana.

  2. Karen

    Of the more than 30 clematis I grow in my Vancouver, BC, garden this is by far the best! It scrambles over a small magnolia and the numerous, very large, pure white flowers show up so well against its dark foliage.

  3. Chris Black

    I’m curious how the naming conventions work here. If I were forced to guess, I would have called it Clematis lanuginosa x patens — is there an authoritative treatment on when to name the hybrid parents and when to assign a new cultivar name?

  4. Daniel Mosquin

    Chris, the progeny of a cross between Clematis lanuginosa and Clematis patens are variable. There are a number of cultivars produced from these crosses, including Clematis ‘Candida’, Clematis ‘Aureliana’ and Clematis ‘Aureliana Superba’.
    So, the question then becomes: why not use Clematis lanuginosa ×Clematis patens ‘Candida’ as the name? That configuration would cause confusion, I suspect.
    As an aside, I’m guessing that the hybrid between C. lanuginosa and C. patens has never been scientifically named, otherwise something like C. ×thisisthescientificnameofthecross ‘Candida’ might be used.

Leave a Reply