CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Ulmus minor 'Erecta'

elm cultivar

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionMar 23, 2021
Entity authorityQ7879520 ↗
Source-derived summary

The Field Elm cultivar Ulmus minor 'Erecta' was identified by Loudon in Arboretum et Fruticetum Britannicum, 3: 1396, 1838 as Ulmus campestris var erecta.

Description

Loudon described the tree as having "a tall, narrow head, resembling the Cornish Elm, but differing from that tree in having much broader leaves, and a corky bark".

Cultivation

No specimens are known to survive.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Ulmus minor 'Erecta'” as elm cultivar. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewA dependable orientation record for establishing vocabulary, names and a first evidence trail. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1396, 1838—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. The account is most persuasive where Ulmus, minor and 'Erecta' can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as elm cultivar. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Mar 23, 2021. The linked authority identifier is Q7879520. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1396 and 1838.

Critical limits

The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Ulmus minor 'Erecta'”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Ulmus minor 'Erecta' primary sources, Ulmus minor 'Erecta' archive and Ulmus research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Ulmus minor 'Erecta'”?
  2. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Ulmus minor 'Erecta'” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.