HelpMeFind Roses, Clematis and Peonies
Roses, Clematis and Peonies
and everything gardening related.
Member
Profile
PhotosFavoritesCommentsJournalCuttingsMember
Listings
 
jedmar
most recent 6 days ago HIDE POSTS
 
Initial post 7 days ago by StefanDC
This is obviously R. multiflora (=R. polyantha), and is so labeled, but there is nothing double about it so it cannot be "alba plena sarmentosa".
REPLY
Reply #1 of 1 posted 6 days ago by jedmar
Thank you, reassigned to R. multiflora
REPLY
most recent 3 JAN HIDE POSTS
 
Initial post 3 JAN by Nastarana
High Country Roses is offering a moss rose under this name. The picture on their website does show quite attractive mossing. It is a foundling they think they have correctly IDed.
REPLY
Reply #1 of 2 posted 3 JAN by jedmar
I always wonder how someone can ID a rose which has not been in gardens or nurseries for over 150 years. For all purposes 'Bérenger' should be considered extinct.
REPLY
Reply #2 of 2 posted 3 JAN by Nastarana
I am afraid I can't answer that. The foundling, whatever it might be, does look charming. I might like to grow it. What surprises me is that Fairmount Cemetery, where a number of unnamed roses seem to have been found, kept no records of cultivars.
REPLY
Rose∆C2a
most recent 1 JAN HIDE POSTS
 
Initial post 1 JAN by jedmar
I like your breeder codes!
REPLY
most recent 31 DEC HIDE POSTS
 
Initial post 30 DEC by JJS
This is a very interesting picture: it was copied in various books from the 16th century. Of course, it appears in all versions of Leonhart Fuchs' herbal, but also in the early versions of Dodoens' herbal, incl. the 1578 translation by Henry Lyte (but not in Lyte's edition of 1586). Also in the herbal by Hieronymus Bock (edition of 1572) the same picture is used, although enhanced with more red flowers and even showing a spider web. The Dodoens and Bock versions of the picture are mirrored with respect to Fuchs' figure. Interestingly, in a colored version of Dodoens herbal, of 1554, all flowers are painted white!
It is somewhat of a puzzle to me why the left side of the picture shown here should be Rosa canina and the right side should be rosa gallica. Does this information come from www.waimann.de ? Fuchs clearly writes that the figure is a generic picture of a rose: The German text (1543) reads "Der Rosen seind zweyerley geschlecht fürnemlich / zam unn wild. ... Wir haben beyderley geschlecht under einer form des gemäls begriffen." In English this means something like: "There are mostly two kinds of roses, domestic and wild. ... We have shown the form of both kinds in a single picture."
Thus, as I understand it, this figure is not the picture of any specific rose. In Fuch's original Latin edition of 1542 the figure caption is just "Rosa - Rosen".
REPLY
Reply #1 of 1 posted 31 DEC by jedmar
On page 654 of "New Kreüterbuch" of Leomhardt Fuchs it describes Roses as follows:
German: Rose, Essig- ; Rose, Hunds-
English: Rose, dog ; Rose, French
French: rosier de France
Latin: Rosa gallica ; Rosa canina
We therefore believe Fuchs had Rosa canina as representative of "Wild Roses" and Rosa gallica as those of "Domestic Roses" in mind.
REPLY
© 2019 HelpMeFind.com