|
|
'Scorcher' rose Reviews & Comments
-
-
|
Re: Parentage:Madame Abel Chatenay × Seedling of Rosa moyesii Hemsl. & E.H.Wilson
Notes:For clarification of Parentage, see References.
There are now many references in the 'Scorcher' file. I don't think there is any 'clarification' on the pollen parent, either for R. moyesii, or for R. gigantea.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 3 posted
2 JUN 21 by
 HubertG
|
Alister Clark was exhibiting R. moyesii as early as November 1915 in Australia. According to the Leader newspaper article in the references he imported it himself directly from England and he had intentions to use it in his breeding programme. Veitch first exhibited R. moyesii at Chelsea in 1908, so presumably Clark would have received it after 1908 and at least a couple of years before 1915. I can only imagine that he would have wasted no time at all at putting the pollen of his first flowers on one of his favoured seed parents. 'Scorcher' was described as being well tested in the 1921 reference so must have existed some time before that. My feeling therefore is that there was ample time for Clark to use a Moyesii cross as a pollen parent for 'Scorcher'. Also, I think it unlikely that he would have used Moyesii on Gigantea, or even another species rose like Multiflora or wichurana at the time, knowing that this wasn't likely to produce repeat flowers, but I suppose anything was possible.
|
REPLY
|
|
HubertG, your thoughts, and added references, are very much appreciated. You make me want to delve again into his early years. Thank you.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 3 posted
3 JUN 21 by
HubertG
|
You're welcome, and here are some more thoughts ...
Apparently E. H. Wilson visited Australia for some months in the first half of 1921. Newspaper articles at the time make it clear that he met Alister Clark, and seem to suggest that he visited Glenara. It appears that Wilson gave public talks whilst in Australia and one is reported in the Sydney Mail and other newspapers where he enthuses about the possibility of Australian breeders being the first in the world to offer a Moyesii hybrid.
"It is, however, as a parent of some wonderfully coloured roses that this rose is going to become popular. Professor Wilson says so; he also says that, being a Chinese wild rose, it is more likely that if our own raisers get going at once they will be the first to introduce to the world a Moyesii hybrid."
If Clark had been dabbling with Moyesii since at least 1915 and 'Scorcher' was somehow the result of Moyesii experimentation, I wonder if the visit and encouragement from Wilson was what convinced Clark to say at the end of 1921 that he'd release 'Scorcher' in 1922.
It's only speculation and could just be a timely coincidence, but I find it interesting.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
For Nadene and Deborah at the Old Parliament House Gardens, Senate Tennis Courts.
Scorcher
I have plant of ‘Scorcher’ that I believe came from Judyth McLeod in NSW. It has glossy wichurana-type leaves. (See also the 2003 reference which mentions wichurana.) Unfortunately nobody has ever responded to my 2008 Comment on the pollen parent of ‘Scorcher’.
1932. Whilst Alister Clark mentioned gigantea in the same paragraph, he did not actually call ‘Scorcher’ a gigantea.
1935-98. “Does not appear to owe anything to R.gigantea ancestry.”
2007. Laurie Newman said that the pollen parent should be R. Gigantea, but he gave no substantiating evidence. I have underlined this sentence as being possibly incorrect.
In the absence of any more gigantea proof, I would be inclined to class this rose as a Hybrid Tea Climber in your set-in-stone marker.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
it would be interesting to see more photos of 'Scorcher's petals. I am not sure if mine was misnamed in the nursery, or whether it is representative of all the Australian plants. I believe 'Scorcher' was found in Victoria in the 1980's. My plant has the deep green shiny leaves more suggestive of R. wichurana, than to R. gigantea or R. moyesii.
|
REPLY
|
|
