74 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
July  27,  1899. 
COLOURS  OF  FLOWERS— A  COLOUR 
DICTIONARY. 
Y  den  on  the  premises  of  one  of  our  local  printers  recently  I  was 
shown  some  poiticns  of  a  dictionary  of  colours  in  process  of  prepara¬ 
tion.  Ihe  author,  Mr.  B.  W.  Warburst  of  Chelsea,  who  is  not  at  aU 
unknown  to  horticulture,  has  very  kindly,  at  the  instigation  of  my 
friend  the  printer,  sent  me  a  copy,  and  a  very  useful  book  it  is. 
Whilst  specially  prepared  for  philatelists,  certainly  the  illustrations 
of  some  fifty  colours  have  great  value  for  florists  who  find  considerable 
difficulty  in  determining  colours  in  flowers,  as  these  are  so  varied  and 
so  mixed  that  clear  explanation  is  most  difficult.  Then  it  so  often 
happens  that  the  colours  of  the  same  flower  are  variously 
described,  not  only  in  the  press,  but  in  trade  lists,  and  the  public  is  in 
consequence  much  confused.  A  colour  map,  as  set  out  very  much  like 
a  large  flower,  having  six  petals,  the  dominant  seifs  being  red,  blue, 
and  yellow,  and  then  ranged  about  them  a  number  of  diverse  colours, 
made  up  of  combinations,  and  such  as  are  common  in  flowers,  is  very 
helpful.  In  addition  the  whole  of  the  fifty  colours  described  are  shown, 
although  for  florists  it  would  have  been  better  had  each  one  been  in 
block  form  rather  than  as  a  large  stamp  illustrated.  Mr.  YVarhurst 
has  endeavoured  to  reduce  to  something  like  order  colour  descriptions 
which  are  now  very  confusing.  Of  course  colours  on  paper  have  not 
that  fire  or  brilliancy  they  display  on  flower  petals,  but  the  ground 
tints  are  provided,  and  having  a  clear  apprehension  as  to  the  real  colour 
of  the  base  the  rest  should  not  be  difficult  to  describe. _ A.  D. 
[Some  years  ago  Mr.  Warhurst  was  a  successful  exhibitor  at  the 
shows  of  the  R.H.S.  at  South  Kensington,  and  his  “  Ben’s  Boiler  ” 
and  an  excellent  method  of  glazing  won  the  high  approval  of  the 
Judges.  His  physical  afflict’ons  have  for  some  years  been  so  great 
as  to  practically  confine  him  to  his  room,  though  his  mental  activities 
appear  to  have  undergone  no  abatement.  He  has,  as  an  ardent 
pnilatelist,  been  giving  close  attention  to  the  subject  of  colours,  their 
description  and  composition,  and  would  evidently  like,  with  the  'aid  of 
botanists,  horticulturists,  and  artists,  to  formulate  easily  comprehended 
names  for  the  several  hues  that  are  now  variously  described.  His 
book,  of  which  we  have  received  a  copy,  is  well  worthy  of  study  bv 
young  (and  old)  gardeners  and  others,  and  we  think  they  will  not  find 
another  like  it  for  half  a  crown.  On  the  important,  but  much 
confused,  subject  of  the  colours  of  flowers  we  take  an  interesting 
extract  from  Miss  Jekyll’s  beautiful  book,  “Wood  and  Garden ” 
which  we  have  previously  noticed  in  the  Journal  of  Horticulture  ] 
.  \  N}  always  surprised  at  the  vague,  not  to  say  reckless,  fashion 
m  which  garden  folk  set  to  work  to  describe  the  colour  of  flowers,  and 
at  the  way  in  which  quite  wrong  colours  are  attributed  to  them’  It 
is  done  in  perfectly  good  faith,  and  without  the  least  consciousness  of 
describing  wrongly.  In  many  cases  it  appears  to  be  because  the 
names  of  certain  substances  have  been  used  conventionally  or 
poetically  to  convey  the  idea  of  certain  colours.  And  some  of  those 
errors  are  so  eld  that  they  have  acquired  a  kind  of  respectability  and 
are  m  a  way  accepted  without  challenge.  When  thev  are  used  about 
familiar  flowers  it  do;s  not  occur  to  one  to  detect  them,  because  one 
knows  the  flower  and  its  true  colour;  but  when  the  same  old  error  is 
used  in  the  description  of  a  new  flower  it  is  distinctly  misleading. 
for  instance,  when  we  hear  of  golden  Buttercups  we  know  that,  it 
means  bright  yellow  Buttercups  ;  but  in  the  case  of  a  new  flower  nr 
one  not  generally  known,  surely  it  is  better  and  more  accurate  to  say 
bright  yellow  at  once.  Nothing  is  more  frequent  in  plant  catalogues 
than  bright  golden  yellow,  when  bright  yellow  is  meant.  Gold  is 
not  bright  yellow.  I  find  ihat  a  gold  piece  laid  on  a  gravel  path,  nr 
against  a  sandy  bank,  nearly  matches  it  in  colour;  and" I  cannot  think 
ot  any  flower  that  matches  or  even  approaches  the  true  colour  of  gold 
though  something  near  it  may  be  seen  in  the  pollen-covered  anthers  of 
many  flowers  A  match  for  gold  mav  more  nearly  be  found  among 
Jma  beech  leaves,  and  some  dark  colours  of  straw  or  dry  grass  bents 
but  none  of  those  when  they  match  the  gold  are  bright  yellow.  In 
literature  it  is  quite  another  matter;  when  the  poet  or  imaginative 
writer  says  a  held  of  golden  Buttercups,”  or  “a  golden  sunset,”  he  is 
quite  right,  because  he  appeals  to  our  artistic  perception,  and  in  such 
case  only  uses  the  word  as  an  image  of  something  that  is  rich  and 
sumptuous  and  glowing. 
Ihe  same  irrelevance  of  comparison  seems  to  run  through  all  the 
Tn  •,/ °2VerS  °f  a  ful1’ ^'ght  hhle  colour  are  often  described  as 
of  a  brilliant  amethystine  blue.”  Why  amethystine  ?  The  aravthyst 
as  we  generally  see  it,  is  a  stone  of  a  washy  purple,  and  though  there 
are  amethysts  of  a  fine  purple,  they  are  not  so  often  seen  as  the  paler 
ones,  and  I  have  never  seen  one  even  faintly  approaching  a  really 
blue  co  oiir.  _  A\  hat  therefore,  is  the  sense  of  likening  a  flower,  such 
as  a  Delphinium,  which  is  really  of  a  splendid  pure  blue  colour,  to  the 
ouller  and  totally  different  colour  of  a  third-rate  gem  ? 
Another  example  of  the  same  slip-slop  is  the  term  flame  coloured, 
and  it  is  often  preceded  by  the  word  “gorgeous.”  This  contradictory 
*  Stanley  Gibbons,  Ltd.,  391,  Strand,  W.(L 
mixture  of  terms  is  generally  used  to  mean  bright  scarlet.  When  1 
look  at  a  flame,  ■whether  of  fire  or  candle,  I  see  that  the  colour  is 
rather  pale  yellow,  with  a  reddish  tinge  about  its  upper  forks,  and 
side  wings  often  of  a  bluish  white — no  scarlet  anywhere.  The  nearest 
approach  to  red  is  in  the  coals,  not  in  the  flame.  In  the  case  of  the 
candle,  the  point  of  the  wick  is  faintly  red  when  compared  with  the 
flaffie,  but  about  the  flame  there  is  no  red  whatever.  A  distant 
bonfire  looks  red  at  night,  but  I  take  it  that  the  apparent  redness  is 
from  seeing  the  flames  through  damp  atmosphere,  just  as  the  harvest 
moon  looks  red  when  it  rises. 
And  the  strange  thing  is  that  in  all  these  cases  the  likeness  to  the 
unlike,  and  much  less  bright,  colour  is  given  with  the  air  of  conferring 
the  highest  compliment  on  the  flower  in  question.  It  is  as  if,  wishing 
to  praise  some  flower  of  a  beautiful  blue,  one  called  it  a  brilliant  slate- 
roof  blue.  This  sounds  absurd,  because  it  is  unfamiliar,  but  the 
unsuitability  of  the  comparison  is  scarcely  greater  than  in  the 
examples  just  quoted. 
It  seems  most  reasonable  in  describing  the  colour  of  the  flowers  to 
look  out  for  substances  whose  normal  colour  shows  but  little  varia¬ 
tion — such,  for  example,  as  sulphur.  The  colour  of  sulphur  is  nearly 
always  the  same.  Citron,  lemon,  and  canary  are  useful  colour  names 
indicating  different  strengths  of  pure  pale  yellow,  inclining  towards 
a  tinge  of  the  palest  green.  Gentian  blue  is  a  useful  word,  bringing 
to  mind  the  piercingly  powerful  hue  of  the  Gentianella.  So  also  is 
torquoise  blue,  for  the  stone  has  little  variety  of  shade,  and  the  colour 
is  always  of  the  same  type.  Forget-me-not  blue  is  also  a  good 
word,  meaning  the  colour  of  the  native  water  Forget-me-not. 
Sky  blue  is  a  little  vague,  though  it  has  come  by  the  “crystallising” 
force  of  usage  to  stand  for  a  blue  rather  pale  than  full,  and  not  far 
from  that  of  the  Forget-me-not ;  indeed,  I  seeip  to  remember  written 
passages  in  avhich  the  colours  of  flowers  and  firmament  were  used 
reciprocally,  the  one  in  describing  the  other.  Cobalt  is  a  word  some¬ 
times  used,  but  more  often  misused,  for  only  watercolour  painters 
know  just  what  it  represents,  and  it  is  of  little  use,  as  it  so  rarely 
occurs  among  flowers. 
Crimson  is  a  word  to  beware  of ;  it  covers  such  a  wide  extent  of 
ground,  and  is  used  so  Carelessly  in  plant  catalogues,  that  one  cannot 
know  whtther  it  stands  for  a  rich  blood  colour  or  for  a  malignant 
magenta.  For  the  latter  class  of  colour  the  term  amaranth,  so 
generally  used  in  French  plant-lists,  is  extremely  useful,  both  as  a 
definition  and  a  warning.  Salmon  is  an  excellent  colour-word, 
copper  is  also  useful,  the  two  covering  a  limited  range  of  beautiful 
colouring  of  the  utmost  value.  Blood-red  is  also  accurately  descriptive. 
Terra-cotta  is  useful  but  indefinite,  as  it  may  mean  anything  between 
brick-red  and  buff.  Red  lead,  if  it  would  be  accepted  as  a  colour 
word,  would  be  useful,  denoting  the  shades  of  colour  between  the 
strongest  orange  and  the  palest  scarlet,  frequent  in  the  lightest  of  the 
Oriental  Poppies.  Amber  is  a  misleading  word,  for  who  is  to  know 
when  it  means  the  transparent  amber,  whose  colour  approaches  that 
of  resin,  or  the  pale,  almost  opaque,  dull-yellow  kind  ?  And  what  is 
meant  by  coral-red  ?  It  is  the  red  of  the  old-fashioned  dull  scarlet 
coral,  or  of  the  pink  kind  more  recently  in  flavour. 
The  terms  bronze  and  smoke  may  well  be  used  in  their  place,  as  in 
describing  or  attempting  to  describe  the  wonderful  colouring  of  such 
flowers  as  Spanish  Iris,  and  the  varieties  of  Iris  of  the  squalens 
section.  But  often  in  describing  a  flower  a  reference  to  texture  much 
helps  and  strengthens  the  colour  word.  I  have  often  described  the 
modest  little  Iris  tuberosa  as  a  flower  made  of  green  satin  and  black 
velvet.  The  green  portion  is  only  slightly  green,  but  is  entirely 
sreen  satin,  and  the  black  of  the  velvet  is  barely  black,  but  is  quite 
black  velvet  like.  The  texture  of  the  flower  of  Ornithogalum  nutans 
is  silver  satin,  neither  very  silvery  nor  very  satin  like,  and  yet  so 
nearly  suggesting  the  texture  of  both  that  the  words  may  well  be 
used  in  speaking  of  it.  Indeed,  texture  plays  so  important  a  part  in 
the  appearance  of  colour  surface,  that  one  can  hardly  think  of  colour 
without  also  thinking  of  texture.  A  piece  of  black  satin  and  a  piece 
of  black  velvet  may  be  woven  of  the  same  batch  of  material,  but  when 
the  satin  is  finished  and  the  velvet  cut,  the  appearance  is  often  so 
dissimilar  that  they  may  look  quite  different  in  colour.  A  wmrking 
painter  is  never  happy  if  you  give  him  an  oil  colour  pattern  to  match 
in  distemper;  he  must  have  it  of  the  same  texture,  or  he  will  not 
undertake  to  get  it  like. 
What  a  wonderful  range  of  colouring  there  is  in  black  alone  to  a 
trained  colour  eve  !  There  is  the  dull  brown  black  of  soot,  and  the 
velvety  brown  black  of  the  Bean  flower’s  blotch;  to  my  own  eye  I 
have  never  found  anything  so  entirely  black  in  a  natural  product  as 
the  patch  on  the  lower  petals  of  Iris  iberica.  Is  it  not  Ruskin  who 
says  of  Velasquez,  that  there  is  more  colour  in  his  black  than  in  many 
another  painter’s  whole  palette  ?  The  blotch  of  the  Bean  flower 
appears  black  at  first,  till  you  look  at  it  close  in  the  sunlight,  and 
then  you  see  its  rich  velvety  texture,  so  nearly  like  some  of  the  brown 
velvet  markings  on  butterflies’  wings.  And  the  same  kind  of  rich 
colour  and  texture  occurs  again  on  some  of  the  tough,  flat,  half-round 
funguses,  marked  with  shaded  liDgs,  that  grow  out  of  old  posts,  and 
