[1] It was confirmed as a form of wych, and first described by Lindley in The Gardeners' Chronicle, 1845,[2] later descriptions being added by Gill (1845)[1] and Morren (1848), who called it U. montana var.

[5][7] H. Jensen[note 1] examined the tree at Späth's nursery and confirmed (1912) that it was identical to Morren's Ulmus montana superba.

[10] Späth admitted the error in an article in Möller's Deutsche Gärtner-Zeitung (1912),[11] where he stated that U. praestans E. Schoch was an Ulmus × hollandica hybrid, and implied that Morren's tree was a form of U. montana (wych elm).

An 1880 herbarium specimen showing a large-leaved wych cultivar at Kew Gardens, labelled U. montana superba, has dimensions similar to those given by Gill and Morren (juvenile elm leaves may be larger than those of mature canopy-leaves).

[18] Morren states that 'Superba' was so called "parce qu'en effet cette variété l'emporte sur les autres par sa beauté" [:because indeed this variety surpasses others in beauty].

Mid 20th-century herbarium specimens from the Wageningen Aboretum, The Netherlands, show a wych cultivar there "formerly labelled Ulmus × hollandica 'Superba'".

[24] The absence of Späth's names from the Bobbink and Atkins and the Kelsey lists and their use of 'Blandford Elm' suggest that the cultivar was Gill's clone.

A large-leaved elm described as Ulmus campestris 'Superba' obtained from Louis van Houtte of Ghent, Belgium, before 1841 was photographed at the Ellwanger and Barry nursery at Mount Hope, Rochester, New York, c.

[20] Arnold Arboretum identified it in 1915 as a varietal form of Ulmus glabra Huds., which would match Blandford Elm, despite the apparent discrepancy in dates.