HelpMeFind Roses, Clematis and Peonies
Roses, Clematis and Peonies
and everything gardening related.
DescriptionPhotosLineageAwardsReferencesMember RatingsMember CommentsMember JournalsCuttingsGardensBuy From 
'Duchesse de Brabant' rose Reviews & Comments
Discussion id : 100-629
most recent 9 JUN HIDE POSTS
 
Initial post 9 JUN by Patricia Routley
1986 New Zealand Rose Annual
p65. Jennifer Howard. Save Our Tea Roses. Many of you will know the pale pink cupped Tea Rose with a "gutsy" constitution, found growing throughout New Zealand. "Teddy" Roosevelt wore a flower of it in his buttonhole. America and the rest of the world seemingly know it as Duchesse de Brabant. In New Zealand we love it and grow it as 'Irene Watts'.
REPLY
Discussion id : 98-083
most recent 16 MAR HIDE POSTS
 
Initial post 16 MAR by theycallmejoe
I've had this rose (grafted on multiflora) for 3 seasons, 2.5 of which it spent in a small pot situated in less than ideal light--shade from trees local and neighbouring. This season, season 3, seemed to be her year of readiness, putting on fast, red growth and with blooms much larger than I've seen in her short history. She went in the ground in season 3, jumping from pot and running. She was planted at the end of a heat wave (3 weeks of 35C and above weather), and at the beginning of a 2-week spell of heavy rain. Incidentally, two giant trees surrounding had been taken down by the council. She immediately put out 3 big basals, much top growth, all while flowering continuously. Notably, her flowers never balled through the heavy rain (though the petals were mauled by the downpour), and she never showed signs of disease, even from day 1 of life here in a shady yard.

Flowers vary from pure shell pink, to shell pink thinly outlined with darker shade of pink, to pure 'Queen Elizabeth' pink. The family all say she has a "planty" fragrance, which they don't particularly like. But if in her development she is to have the sweet fragrance much described, then that's one more thing to look forward to with this real champion of a rose.
REPLY
Discussion id : 92-780
most recent 19 MAY 16 HIDE POSTS
 
Initial post 17 MAY 16 by NikosR
Duchesse de Brabant is now not shown as a synonym though the rose is searchable by this name. Funnily enough DdB is maintained for the climbing 'version'. Regardless of which is the historically correct name, I think this creates more confusion rather than settling the issue. I believe DdB should be given as a synonym to CdL. The rose is sold as DdB both in the US and in Europe so providing this name as a synonym should help users. Both this rose and its climbing sport should be treated equally with regards to the naming.
REPLY
Reply #1 of 23 posted 17 MAY 16 by Patricia Routley
The Australian girls (Tea Roses: Old Roses for Warm Gardens) found no reference to the name Duchesse de Brabant’ before the 1980s. Not to heed their research seems as though we are rejecting the work they did. Your excellent point that both the tea and the climber should be treated equally is well taken. We have made the incorrect names ‘Duchesse de Brabant’ and ‘Duchesse de Brabant Cl.’ both hidden synonyms so they are still searchable, but the main name is shown as ‘Comtesse de Labarthe’ for both the bush and the climber. Thank you NikosR for helping to fine tune HelpMeFind.
REPLY
Reply #2 of 23 posted 17 MAY 16 by NikosR
I believe that DdB should be a NOT hidden synonym. What's the point of a hidden synonym? It just adds to confusion. I knew that Ddb is also called CdL but I was initially confused when I searched for it and found only the climbing version and CdL. What if someone is not aware of this? Should one go through the fineprint to find out he's looking at the same rose? Since the rose is known and marketed in the US and in Europe as DdB (not to mention ARS calls it like this), that should be a not hidden synonym. All this not withstanding the fact that the 'proper' name for the rose should be CdL. Just add Ddb as a real synonym and point out that it seems the proper name should be CdL. However, it's your call.
REPLY
Reply #3 of 23 posted 17 MAY 16 by billy teabag
Just to clarify - it is true that we found no reference to the name 'Duchesse de Brabant' on Australian rose catalogues or Australian rose literature before the 1980s but the rose was widely known as 'Duchesse de Brabant' in the USA by 1900 eg. the Dingee and Conard 1901 catalogue lists 'Duchesse de Brabant'.

There is no dispute that the rose was introduced under the name 'Comtesse de Labarthe' but how and why it acquired the synonym 'Duchesse de Brabant' is a question we were unable to discover an answer to.

'Duchesse de Brabant' is listed as a synonym of 'Comtesse de Labarthe' in a number of articles and publications dating from the 1880s - eg. Ellwanger (1893 edition) lists 'Comtesse de Labarthe', noting 'Duchesse de Brabant' as a synonym.
REPLY
Reply #4 of 23 posted 17 MAY 16 by Rose_Insanity
Especially in light of what Billy had to say about the use of the incorrect name since the late 1800's, I have to agree with Nik that DdB should NOT be a *hidden*, but rather a visible, synonym. Since DdB is the the most used in commerce, not having it visible makes it too easy for someone not familiar with the rose to find the listing for CdL, then acquire it thinking they have a completely different rose than DdB. With DdB listed as a visible synomyn it prevents someone making that mistake.
REPLY
Reply #5 of 23 posted 17 MAY 16 by scvirginia
I very much agree that hidden information is not consistent with transparency, and causes confusion for users. Even if the hidden synonym takes users to the correct page, there isn't anything on the description page to reassure users that they are at the right place.

Someone who wants to buy 'Duchesse de Brabant' and searches HMF for a vendor may get confused by ending up at a record for a "different" rose; that person probably doesn't care what the rose was originally called; they just want to buy one.

My two cents,
Virginia
REPLY
Reply #6 of 23 posted 17 MAY 16 by Greenman
I feel the real issue here is that this rose is still widely in commerce under the name Duchesse de Brabant, and we need to be able to research what the rose we are preparing to buy is like. There are many roses listed with recently invented names under which they are sold. Cinderella, for example, has the name True Pearl listed with it because a marketer decided to advertise several miniature roses with a Pirate theme, and True Pearl was the name chosen for Cinderella in this scheme. Since many sources list this rose as the Duchesse de Brabant, wouldn't it be fair to include that as a visible synonym. It would perhaps be different if there were another claiment to the name Duchesse de Brabant, but as this is not the case, I don't see the advantage of hiding this name.
REPLY
Reply #7 of 23 posted 18 MAY 16 by Patricia Routley
On my (Administrator’s) screen, I see:
Synonyms:
Also referenced as: Duchesse de Brabant, Comtesse de Labarathe, Shell, Countess Bertha, The Shell Rose (tea, Bernede 1857), Mademoiselle de Labathe.

I have taken a moment to have a look on my husband’s computer and am disturbed to find this section missing. So while these “Also referenced as….” names will point you to the correct page, I do agree that they should be shown. The hidden name feature was added quite late in HMF’s life and perhaps might yet need some adjustment.

If all the names (above) were shown as synonyms, then depending on which one you click on, there would have been no way of telling which was the original name. If we clicked on “Countess Bertha”, it would show in THE name and all the others, including ‘Comtesse de Labarthe’, would be shown as synonyms of “Countess Bertha”. Again, if Bermudians (and others) click on “Shell”, it would appear as THE name, with ‘Comtesse de Labarthe’ shown as a synonym of it. The intention was that HelpMeFind point the way as to the original name for the rose and I really liked the “Also referenced as…”. Please bear with us while we sort this out.
Patricia
REPLY
Reply #8 of 23 posted 18 MAY 16 by scvirginia
I'll just quickly point out that there are two American references to 'Duchesse de Brabant' dating to 1875. I don't think it's impossible that they started out as separate roses, but were later confused in commerce and/or determined to be 'synonymous' for exhibition purposes...
Virginia
REPLY
Reply #9 of 23 posted 18 MAY 16 by HMF Admin
The point of hidden synonyms is to prevent rose listings from having dozens of synonyms that are often obscure, misspelled, alternate spelling, or nursery specific variations. As such, synonym type assignment is at times a subjective decision and that is where HelpMeFind as a mutable resource really shines. HMF from its conception has been about the pooling of insight, experience, and expertise of the rose community world wide.

Anyone and everyone is welcome to make a case for changes to both our underlying data and our presentation. We greatly rely on our user community to constantly refine, correct, and improve HelpMeFind.

In this instance, the use of this hidden synonym appears to generate confusion so it is likely we will change it to a standard synonym.

The point of referencing the various hidden synonyms also has merit but the jury is still out on that one; hidden synonyms are typically misspellings and various forms of abbreviations that are necessary primarily/only for improving HMF's search capability. The inclusion of synonyms has many obvious advantages but it also has some not so obvious disadvantages. As is often the case, there are very few perfect solutions.
REPLY
Reply #10 of 23 posted 18 MAY 16 by scvirginia
I do think that HMF's rose records should show all of the commonly used names for that rose, regardless of how the names were acquired. I will go further and say that commonly used spellings such as 'Solfaterre' (which is the ARS official spelling and almost as old as the rose itself) ought not to be hidden.

I can maybe see a case for using the hidden names "feature" for roses which have numerous mis-spellings, since that could theoretically assist users to find a rose record without cluttering up the description page, but I think it's probably better to avoid adding every mis-spelling/ typo as a synonym, and figuring out a better way to display (not hide) the spellings/ names in common use.

Why HMF volunteers need to be the judges of which one name is the pure, unsullied, properly spelled name as intended by the long-deceased breeder is beyond me. In many cases it isn't possible to know what the original intention was. But that seems to be the concern; if all synonyms are displayed equally, how will HMF users know which is the truly-best name for the rose? To me, the obvious answer would be to change the way names are displayed so that the best name looks different from the others (a bolded font might work).

I do not mean to sound flippant; in most cases there IS a clear best name. But in cases when the references don't provide an obvious best name, display the synonyms equally and let the users who care decide for themselves.

Virginia
REPLY
Reply #12 of 23 posted 18 MAY 16 by HMF Admin
First, thank you both (Virginia, NikosR) for your input. Above all, user input is the guiding force behind HelpMeFind. I'll address these issues point by point.

"should show all of the commonly used names". First, that is primarily what HMF currently does. Second, please consider the fact terms like "commonly used", "best", "widely used", or "sensible" are subjective. What shall we use for a definition of commonly or widely used? Is that 60% of the nurseries; referenced in 3 or more publications; used in rose shows in countries X and Y but ignoring country Z ?

Who shall we entrust to define said formula and what do we tell those that question its veracity. Further, what resources are available to apply a possibly labor intensive process ? At some point subjective decisions have to be made. You can move that point around but you can not eliminate it. What you can do is refine and improve upon the process to reduce the the subjective elements as much as possible. To that end, HelpMeFind has always been open.

"could theoretically assist users to find a rose record" . There is nothing theoretical about this need; this is how databases work. There are technical aspects of software systems that frequently complicate presentation and trade offs are necessary.

"figuring out a better way", We're always open to suggestions but please keep in mind HMF is severely constrained by it available resources, both man power and computational. If a change requires individuals to comb through HMF's 50,000+ rose listing to reclassify names that's simply not possible with our resources... unless one embraces HelpMeFind's concept of our website as a tool and not a service. As the tool it has always intended to be, HMF resources envelop the world-wide rose community at large and posts like yours serve to correct, refine, and improve our website.

"displayed so that the best name looks different". "there IS a clear best name". Yes, this is true and this is what HMF currently does in most every case. I fear we are extrapolating the impact of some specific cases to the entire database.

"in cases when the references don't provide an obvious best name, display the synonyms equally and let the users who care decide for themselves." This is currently how HMF works, but still, keeping in mind, in a global setting, your opinion of the "obvious best name" may not be shared by all.

Rose names are a thorny (pun intended) issue to be sure. Please keep in mind HMF draws on many diverse resources (publications, nurseries, rose shows, historical catalogs, etc.) for its information and we do our best to reconcile the frequent variations we find. And let's not forget about the language issues involved. Please also keep in mind there are technical limitations as well as resource constraints and HelpMeFind will never be perfect but with your help we can get closer.
REPLY
Reply #15 of 23 posted 18 MAY 16 by Spectrograph
Duchesse de Brabant is a very common name for this rose, and should not be hidden. I understand there is a large list of synonyms for many older roses. However, this is the name of the rose in commerce, in historical references, and in current gardens. For example, the Sarah P. Duke Gardens exhibit this rose solely as "Duchesse de Brabant". Hiding this name not only creates confusion, but makes this site less useful to the general public. I see no reason to have this extremely common name hidden on this entry.
REPLY
Reply #17 of 23 posted 18 MAY 16 by scvirginia
I do not understand your reply. Your response to my suggestions is both "we're already doing that" and "it would require too great a strain on our resources to do that".

As a volunteer administrator who has added thousands of references to HMF, I see what is hidden, and can't recall seeing anything in the hidden names that would be confusing were it to be unhidden. And of course, going through every single rose name is neither possible nor necessary, but I would like to hear a good justification for hiding names, because I haven't yet. Unless "there are technical aspects of software systems that frequently complicate presentation and trade offs are necessary" is the reason.

If HMF policy is to display commonly used names, I don't understand why 'Duchesse de Brabant' and 'Solfaterre' are currently hidden. If one searches for 'Solfaterre', one ends up looking at several rose records. How many users will know that the record with 'Augusta' (syn. 'Solfatare') is (probably) the correct choice? Likewise searching for 'Duchesse de Brabant' and not finding it. Hiding these names is far more confusing for users than displaying the names. Is there an HMF guideline about when names should be hidden and when they should be displayed? Are 'Duchesse de Brabant' and 'Solfaterre' somehow more wrong than, for example, 'Marie Pavie' and 'Paul Neyron'?

I don't ask for the sake of argument; I ask because I would really like to know if HMF has guidelines in place for how to handle "thorny" rose names. It might be useful the next time I add a plant record with more than one name referenced.

Thanks,
Virginia
REPLY
Reply #20 of 23 posted 18 MAY 16 by HMF Admin
Virgina,

You (mostly) answered your own question - "there are technical aspects of software systems that frequently complicate presentation and trade offs are necessary".

Attempts to formalize a specific policy for recording names has been fraught with complications. It is not a simple issue by any stretch of the imagination and yes many of the issues are technical in nature. Even excluding the technical issues, who's definition of "common use ", "wide use", or "best" do we go with - those are completely subjective terms.

For example, there are many instances of where nurseries have misspelled or even misnamed a rose on their website. These names need to be included for HMF's search to be of any use but you certainly do not want to start listing them all on the individual rose pages. They too will cause confusion.

There is no perfect solution here. If one stops and really gives thought to explicitly codifying a procedure to record names to suit HelpMeFind's objectives, over a global multi-language audience, and within technical constraints it is both a daunting task and one very likely to not gain a consensus.

We have almost two decades of experience around how difficult it is to get a consensus on much simpler issues.

"If HMF policy is to display commonly used names, I don't understand why 'Duchesse de Brabant' and 'Solfaterre' are currently hidden." I can't answer that question. I would agree in THESE cases these aliases should be listed as standard synonyms that normally show up.

HelpMeFind, like any resource is not perfect but the difference is HMF is mutable and as long as we have people like yourself and Patricia (and many others over the years) that generously give of their time and energy to make it better it will continue to be the most comprehensive, publicly available rose related database in the world.

There are steps we can take to reduce user confusion. Possibly we can include a comment where a guest has searched by one name and we've displayed what we feel is its equivalent. Or possibly we need different levels of 'hidden' names where while a name is not considered a common use / wide use / best synonym it is still noted on a rose listing.

Of course system changes and enhancements cost money and far too many people seem to think HMF runs on fairy dust. As expected, this translates into an unfortunately slow progressing project list.
REPLY
Reply #22 of 23 posted 19 MAY 16 by scvirginia
Regarding the steps that can be taken to reduce user confusion, I'm not sure what you mean by a comment for a user who is redirected to a record not searched for, but it sounds like that would require something like an explanatory pop-up message, or something as technically complex.

I do like the idea of names "not considered a common use/ wide use/ best synonym" still being noted somehow at the description page. If I search for "Shell Rose" and end up at the record for 'DdB'/ 'CdlB', I might be confused at first, but if I see 'The Shell Rose' listed on the description page, I will feel reassured that I ended up where I intended to end up.

Thanks,
Virginia
REPLY
Reply #11 of 23 posted 18 MAY 16 by NikosR
Any widely used 'nursery' name (being that a different name or different spelling) means it is a name by which a buyer will encounter that rose in commerce. As such, if this name does not appear in the rose description it is guarranteed to create confusion. The case under discussion is one of the most obvious ones (virtually no one is selling the rose under the name CdL in the US or Europe - the two largest rose markets in the world and according to the Australian Tea book, it is sold under both names in Aus, many influential rose books refer to it as Ddb etc etc etc) but lots of other cases may exist. I believe that a standard sensible policy should be decided on and this should not be left to the judgement of any individual volunteer administrator.
REPLY
Reply #13 of 23 posted 18 MAY 16 by HMF Admin
Please see reply to scvirginia and thanks for your input.
REPLY
Reply #14 of 23 posted 18 MAY 16 by NikosR
This will be my last comment in this particular thread. I think you're making a big deal out of a trivial thing. If you feel you really need to, it IS trivial to google a name and get a fair impression of how commonly this is referenced on the net. Had you done that you might not had decided to virtually 'erase' the name DdB from HMF memory. It is much less trivial to take an informed decision on which name is the 'proper' name for a rose and make all others disappear. from sight.. It will also have implications leading to confusion when someone reads the references, the comments or looks at the pictures of a rose (as is currently the case for this particular rose). Gosh, what's wrong? Im looking at CdL but I'm seeing pics of DdB and everyone is commenting on that rose... I think your new policy is unfortunate and will make every user's life more difficult and I fail to see why this should be so.
REPLY
Reply #19 of 23 posted 18 MAY 16 by HMF Admin
Yes, I agree this is certainly being blown out of proportion.

This is about this specific rose not having a common alias listed. This ONE rose, although there are very likely others. This hardly calls for a revamping of HelpMeFind's policies and procedures. Why this rose is missing this standard synonym is a perfectly valid, and welcomed, question especially given this synonym is included in our references.

In the end, the system worked: someone in the rose community generously took the time to point out an error and make HelpMeFind better. That's what HelpMeFind is all about. It's a tool for all of you to best collect, organize, and disseminate the wealth of rose knowledge around the world.

Using a single rose to infer our policies are not sensible or we are lacking in our research is quite a stretch.
REPLY
Reply #16 of 23 posted 18 MAY 16 by Spectrograph
If only one name must be displayed, I see no reason why it should not be Duchesse de Brabant. I have never seen Comtesse de Labarthe exhibited in a public garden, but I have seen Duchesse de Brabant. Searching the listings of nurseries, I see dozens offering the Duchesse, and none on the first page of a Google search for Comtesse de Labarthe. As other commenters have noted, the name Duchesse de Brabant is not a new name for this rose, there is documentation for it. As commenters noted above:

"'Duchesse de Brabant' is listed as a synonym of 'Comtesse de Labarthe' in a number of articles and publications dating from the 1880s - eg. Ellwanger (1893 edition) lists 'Comtesse de Labarthe', noting 'Duchesse de Brabant' as a synonym."
REPLY
Reply #21 of 23 posted 18 MAY 16 by HMF Admin
HMF supports displaying multiple names. The issue is which names to display as frequently a name used for a particular rose is simply a nursery's careless misspelling.
REPLY
Reply #23 of 23 posted 19 MAY 16 by Patricia Routley
A most interesting and informative discussion. All synonyms have been added back and you may now take your pick of whatever you would like to call this rose.
REPLY
Reply #24 of 23 posted 19 MAY 16 by NikosR
Thank you.
REPLY
Discussion id : 82-615
most recent 23 JAN 15 HIDE POSTS
 
Initial post 22 JAN 15 by wrygrass
Is this rose really hardy in zone 5b? Earth Kind, Chamblee, and Antique Rose Emporium all list it as hardy in zones 7-9. I'd love to give it a try here in 6a/7a (depending on elevation/shelter here in Walla Walla) because mildew is not a big problem.
REPLY
Reply #1 of 1 posted 23 JAN 15 by jedmar
Looking at the Gardens listing, there are two 5b's, a 6a, a couple of 6b's and 7a's. The microclimate in these gardens is unknown, but you might address these members to find out more.
REPLY
© 2017 HelpMeFind.com