HelpMeFind Roses, Clematis and Peonies
Roses, Clematis and Peonies
and everything gardening related.
DescriptionPhotosLineageAwardsReferencesMember RatingsMember CommentsMember JournalsCuttingsGardensBuy From 
'Busybody' rose Reviews & Comments
Discussion id : 30-587
most recent 31 MAY SHOW ALL
 
Initial post 27 SEP 08 by Patricia Routley
I pressed the wrong button and inadvertently deleted these two comments. For the record, here they are again.

2008. Patricia Routley to Helpmefind August 26,
I don't have Alister Clark's 1929 'Busybody'. Does any one else? There is mention in the references that R. gigantea may have been involved in the parentage. And it is of interest that it is not available in the Australian nurseries, and yet Ruston Roses is carrying this rose. Does any one know the provenance of the Ruston Roses plant?

2008. Margaret Furness to Helpmefind. Sep 25
David says that the rose sent to Ruston's some years ago as Busybody turned out to be Sunlit mislabelled. I didn't ask where it had come from. There isn't a true plant of Busybody at Ruston's. We stated in the most recent HRiAI journal that we were looking for a source of Busybody for the Tea Collection, but have had no response.
REPLY
Reply #1 of 10 posted 15 FEB 15 by Eric Timewell
Patricia, I've posted two photos of the Nieuwesteeg 'Busybody' now in the garden at Bulla. It's quite close to Sunlit and doesn't look the same. Sunlit is bigger, taller and far more yellow. Mid-February, Busybody is pale beige on the outer petals, apricot-beige at the centre. Little or no scent today.
Incidentally that colour you specify is not "chrome and yellow" but Chrome Yellow, the yellow made from chromium; it has a lot of brown in it.
REPLY
Reply #2 of 10 posted 15 FEB 15 by Margaret Furness
The one in the HRIAI Collection at Renmark, of which I've posted photos in the past, came from John Nieuwesteeg.
REPLY
Reply #3 of 10 posted 15 FEB 15 by Eric Timewell
Thanks, Margaret, for the clarification, which certainly explains why your photos and mine look the same. I think they are of Busybody and certainly not of Sunlit. Unless the Sunlit at Bulla and Werribee itself is bogus, which strains credulity to breaking point.
REPLY
Reply #4 of 10 posted 15 FEB 15 by Patricia Routley
Eric - I took the colours from the horse's mouth (see 1927 and 1930 refs). Alister also said the bud was dark Indian apricot so I've added that as well.
REPLY
Reply #5 of 10 posted 15 FEB 15 by Eric Timewell
Thank you, Patricia. As soon as I saw that rose I thought, "Dark Indian apricot," one of my favourite colours. W.G. Randall says "a rich orange-yellow toning much admired by ladies", for goodness sake.
The plants at Bulla are only a foot high. But perhaps that's because they are so young.
REPLY
Reply #6 of 10 posted 16 FEB 15 by billy teabag
Another quick thing to check is the presence or absence of prickles.
'Sunlit' is often prickle-less or almost and 'Busybody' we saw at Rustons had plenty of them.
REPLY
Reply #7 of 10 posted 16 FEB 15 by Eric Timewell
Thank you, Billy. I'll check it as soon as I can.
REPLY
Reply #8 of 10 posted 21 FEB 15 by Eric Timewell
Billy, at Bulla this morning, reading left to right:
Sunlit, completely thornless
Busybody, visibly what Patricia calls "chrome and yellow"
Busybody thorns
Busybody thorns.
Sunlit and Busybody are a metre apart, so the differences can't be attributed to different growing conditions.
Both were supplied by John Nieuwesteeg.
REPLY
Reply #9 of 10 posted 4 MAR 15 by billy teabag
Thanks very much Eric!
REPLY
Reply #10 of 10 posted 31 MAY by HubertG
From the photo here (photo Id: 312268, 17 Feb 2018) it seems that 'Busybody' readily sets hips, something which 'Sunlit' never did for me.
There's an interesting reference to a "seedling from Busybody" in 'The Age' newspaper of 10th April 1930, page 7, which describes some of Clark's new seedlings:

"NATIONAL ROSE SOCIETY. - AUTUMN SHOW.
Mr Alister Clark of "Glenara" Bulla, again staged no fewer than four tables of his decorative roses. While these included many well known varieties of other raisers, the majority were his own productions. [ ... ]  No 3222 is a nice seedling from Busybody."

At least it confirms to us that 'Busybody' did set seed. 'Sunlit' is probably T x HT and most likely triploid.

Edit: I do wonder whether this seedling was in fact 'Lady Huntingfield' released seven years later, or maybe even 'Sunlit' itself since it seems to bear some similarities to 'Busybody'.
REPLY
© 2019 HelpMeFind.com