Prunus persica ‘Royal’
A Prunus persica (L.) Batsch. cultivar. ‘Flowers small, pale red. Fruit large, 10 or 11 inches in circumference, of a roundish figure, rather inclining to oval. Suture deep, having the flesh swelled boldly and equally on both sides, with a slight depression on the summit, where there is usually a small, pointed nipple. Skin pale green or yellowish next the wall; but of a pale red, marbled and streaked with darker shades on the sunny side, cavity of the base rather small, flesh delicate, melting, of a greenish white, but red at the stone, from which it separates. Juice plentiful, and, in a warm season, highly flavoured. Ripe the end of September.’ [George Lindley – Orchard Guide p.260/1831].
Horticultural & Botanical History
‘This magnificent Peach ripens about the latter end of September, and is by far the most valuable of our late varieties. These, in an English autumn, are too often remarkable for nothing but their want of colour and flavour; but the Royal yields to no summer Peach in the richness of its juice, the delicacy of its flesh, or the beauty of its colour. Every writer agrees on this point, and we scarcely remember an autumn which was too unfavourable for bringing it to perfection.
There is no doubt whatever of the identity of the Royal, the Bourdine, the Têton de Vénus, and the Late Admirable. The Royal and Late Admirable are admitted to be the same. Butret, a writer of the highest authority in all that relates to the Peach, declares that the Têton de Vénus, the Royal, and the Bourdine, are absolutely the same, and that the pretended differences between them are only ''un charlatanisme des pepiniéristes.” Even M. Noisette, in his Manuel Complet, although he retains the Têton de Vénus and Bourdine as distinct, remarks that the Bourdine is nothing but the other in perfection. And finally, the observations of Mr. Thompson, in the Garden of the Horticultural Society, go completely to prove the identity of the whole.’ [PM t.73/1829].
‘M. Butret, a French writer, it seems, has been alluded to, as authority for considering this peach, the Bourdine, and Têton de Vénus, as absolutely one and the same fruit, declaring the pretended differences between them are only “un charlatanisme des pepiniéristes.” If by this he means to allude to his own countrymen, I have nothing further to say, than that an illiberal idea does not usually arise in a liberal mind. I must leave it to M. Noisette, who is now living, to defend himself in the publication of the Bon Jardinier and Jardinier Fruitier, in which he has to the present day kept them distinct. Duhamel I need not, on this point mention again. To writers of our own country, I would suggest the propriety of their trying to propagate any two or three sorts of peaches, which they may consider alike, upon the Muscle stock, and ascertain the result, before they declare them to be absolutely one and the same fruit.’ [George Lindley – Orchard Guide p.260/1831].
‘From all accounts this variety was known long before Merlet mentioned it in 1667 but its exact origin cannot be learned. According to Leroy it seems at one time to have been called Pêche du Chevalier but this name was permanently replaced by the present one about 1789 — applied because of the unique shape of the fruit.’ [Peaches of New York p.478/1916].
Also figured in Pomona Britannica [PB pl.XXXV/1812].
History at Camden Park
Listed as ‘Late admirable peach’ in an Addendum to the 1857 catalogue [Peach no.14/1857].
Notes
Published Jun 03, 2010 - 03:03 PM | Last updated Jul 21, 2011 - 04:29 PM
Prunus persica ‘Royal’ | PM t.73/1829 | BHL
| Family | Rosaceae |
|---|---|
| Category | |
| Region of origin | Garden origin, France |
| Synonyms |
|
| Common Name | Peach, autumn |
| Name in the Camden Park Record |
Late admirable peach
|
| Confidence level | high |
