HELPMEFIND PLANTS COMMERCIAL NON-COMMERCIAL RESOURCES EVENTS PEOPLE RATINGS
|
|
|
'Rose Edouard' rose Reviews & Comments
-
-
|
Does this rose set hips? I'm pretty sure it's triploid, but it clearly has a ton of descendents. Probably through pollen? A lot of bourbons are triploid, but I'm sure most of them are at least slightly fertile crossed to tets.
|
REPLY
|
|
IF the parentage is true, it is likely triploid. Regardless, many fertile triploids exist. Some more so than others.
At least one of its descendents should also triploid, or diploid, though.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Magazine of Horticulture 3(7): 246-248 (July 1837)
Art. II. Roses—new Varieties.
By An Amateur. (Gideon B. Smith, Esq.)
In one of your numbers of last winter, a correspondent, writing from Philadelphia, mentioned the monthly cabbage rose, that they had in Philadelphia, in such terms that I immediately sent to the person whom I guessed was the writer, for the monthly cabbage rose spoken of, referring to the Magazine for the description. He sent me the rose—and what do you think it proves to be? Why, the Gloria de France; the same we have had for some time, and of which one of our gardeners (Mr. John Feast,) had an abundance of saleable plants, the stock of which he got from Philadelphia. There is no mistake about it—the plants are in bloom, and speak, as loud as full-blown roses can speak, for themselves. Besides which, the label on the plant which I received bears this inscription, (in the hand-writing of the person of whom I obtained it, and who I guess to be the author of the article above alluded to in your Magazine.) The label is "Gloria de France, or Monthly cabbage." Now, sir, what is the object of giving a new name to this rose, but to enable the person to sell them to those who had them before under another name? When your Magazine arrived here with the notice of the monthly cabbage, all our gardeners and many amateurs were on tiptoe to get it. I got the start of them in my hurry to be cheated, and saved them the expense and trouble of getting what they already possessed. The rose is a very fine one, and is not inappropriately called the monthly cabbage; but its other and well known name should have accompanied the new one, to prevent mistakes, and paying dearly for duplicates. By the way, the monthly cabbage sells for something more in Philadelphia than the Gloria de France, which I suppose is to pay for the trouble of giving it a new name.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
A Catalogue of Exotic Plants Cultivated in the Island of Mauritius, at the Royal Botanic Garden Pamplemousses, at his Excellency the Governor's Garden at Reduit, at Mon Plaisir, Bois Cheri, &c. p. 23 (1822)
Systematic names: Rosa Borbonica
Native place: Bourbon
Where cultivated: Bot. Garden & Reduit
Time and by whom introduced: Governor Farquhar
It is interesting to note that neither the 1822 nor the 1816 edition mentions Damasks of any kind. Both do include Rosa Centifolia, which was cultivated in India.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 8 posted
14 JUL 12 by
 jedmar
|
I agree. I have been looking through contemporary travel books of the early 19th century and there is no evidence of Rosa damascena on Ile Bourbon or Mauritius. The damascena theory was based on a statement by Le Juge in 1760 that he received from Spain a rose that is now cultivated in every garden in the two Iles and that is used to make excellent rose water and that this rose grows so easily that hedges can be formed very rapidly. But R. provincialis was there, R. moschata, and even R. sempervirens.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 8 posted
8 AUG 17 by
CybeRose
|
Jedmar,
I just came across this item:
Journal of Horticulture and Practical Gardening, Volume 36, page 95 (Feb 6, 1879)
A Few Good Old and New Roses
Karl Koch
"According to the recent researches of Mr. Baker of Kew, the Rose of Adrianople is not in reality a Centifolia, but a Damask Rose, which alone supplies the true essence of Roses of Oriental India, Cashmere, and Morocco."
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 8 posted
9 AUG 17 by
jedmar
|
This is clear! Here from "Commercial Reports received at the Foreign Office from Her Majesty's Consuls in 1867", p. 252:
"Report by Mr. Vice-Consul Blunt on Kizanlik and on the Manufacture of Attar of Roses in the Vilayet of Adrianople for the Year 1866.
The district of Kizanlik is in the province of Philippopolio, and is included in the vilayet of Adrianople..."
Also, from "Notable Things of our own Time", by John Timbs, 1868, p. 105: "The rose-fields of the vilayet of Adrianople extend over 12,000 or 14,000 acres, and supply by far the most important source of wealth in the district. The season for picking the roses is from the latter part of April to the early part of June...with hundreds of Bulgarian boys and girls gathering the flowers into baskets..."
So, the Rose of Adrianople is actually 'Kazanlik'.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#4 of 8 posted
9 AUG 17 by
CybeRose
|
Jedmar,
So now I have to wonder:
Was the Rosa centifolia listed in the catalog of Mauritius (1822) really 'Kazanlik'?
Was the Rosa semperflorens of Breon's catalog of l'ile Bourbon (1820) a perpetual Damask rather than the crimson China?
Ventenat (Cels' Garden) rejected R. semperflorens Bot. Mag. because the name had already been used (Rosa semperflorens. Hort. Mus. Parisiens.) for "la Rose de tous les mois, qui paroît avoir été confondue par Linnaeus avec la Rosa centifolia, quoiqu'elle en diffère par plusieurs caractères."
Karl
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#5 of 8 posted
10 AUG 17 by
jedmar
|
Karl, I do not think that Kazanlik was distributed outside the area before the 1880s - Dieck speaks about it as a novelty when he brought it to Germany. From the correspondence of the British consuls of the 1860s, we can see that it was known earlier, but the interest seems to have been in the Attar, not the plant. In any case, Rosa damascena was already known since a long time in Europe. There is no confusion with R. centifolia in the publications of Lindley, Vibert, etc. from the 1820s.
Regarding Breon's catalogue, it is difficult to say what he actually identified. I must admit I do not trust him. He made a lot of noise about R. borbonica, and then kept quite silent after his return to France. I have a feeling he used this "find" to ehance his reputation and get an assignment back in the home Country. Just a feeling.
What we see is that R. semperflorens is listed in the 1816 Mauritius catalogue as China rose, and naturalized.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#6 of 8 posted
11 AUG 17 by
CybeRose
|
Illustrations of the Botany and Other Branches of the Natural History of the Himalayan Mountains, vol. 1 (1839) p. 203
John Forbes Royle
R. Damascena, goolab and sud-burg of the natives, wurd of the Arabs, is that most highly esteemed, and cultivated in Northern India for making rose-water, and the atter of roses.
If not 'Kazanlik', then some other Damask was grown in India.
Karl
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#7 of 8 posted
11 AUG 17 by
jedmar
|
That is correct. Kazanlik is the type which is cultivated in Bulgaria and Turkey. I read that in Iran there are 4 different types of R. damascena.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#8 of 8 posted
14 AUG 17 by
CybeRose
|
Linnaeus did not distinguish damasks from centifolias. That was left for Miller (1768).
So, those who knew only Linnaeus could call a damask R. centifolia.
And a Frenchman could refer to a perpetual damask as R. semperflorens.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Peter Beales Roses is not listing this cultivar on their website (still in the HMF nurseries for this rose).
https://www.classicroses.co.uk/catalogsearch/result/?q=rose+edouard&order=name&dir=asc
Not sure what the story is. Maybe a UK member could find out.
|
REPLY
|
|
|
