|
|
Bonfiglioli & figlio, Gaetano
-
-
|
I don't say this is an error, rather a question. In your list of Bonfiglioli e Figlio roses you have Isabeau, Italia, Clementina Carbonari and Garisenda though elsewhere you give (as does everyone else) Variegata di Bologna as having been bred by that nursery (and Massimiliano Lodi - perhaps the latter is the raiser and the nursery introduced it) and elsewhere again Principessa di Napoli. Perhaps this could be clearer.
On the matter of Principessa di Napoli, we ask: is this not the same rose as the Braeuer rose of the same name and date introduced by Ketten? (Braeuer was German, of course, but he worked extensively in Italy.) If it is, who really raised it? Braeuer or Bonfiglioli?
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 3 posted
4 JAN 11 by
 jedmar
|
New research has shown that many of the roses attributed to Bonfiglioli were actually bred by Massimo Lodi and introduced by Bonfiglioli's nursery.
There are actually 2 'Principessa di Napoli', issued about the same time. One is the Tea by Bräuer, the other a Cl. HP by Lodi/Bonfiglioli. We believe these roses commemorated the marriage of Elena of Montenegro with Vittorio Emanuele III (who was Principe di Napoli at the time) on October 24, 1896.
|
REPLY
|
|
Thank you so much, that's really interesting.
By the way, your readers may wish to know - people are often curious as to names - that Garisenda is presumably named after the Garisenda Tower in Bologna (Bonfiglioli's home town), itself named after the family credited with having built it in the 12th century. Given that the tower is 48 metres high it's quite a good name for a climber.
|
REPLY
|
|
Thank you. Mr. Harald Enders, author of Early Rose Breeding in Germany, has been kind enough in the meantime to send me cuttings (no not that kind!) from contemporary Gderman publications showing that the Brauer rose is a cross between Safrano and Duc de Magenta, while the Bonfiglioli/Lodi introduction is a cross between La France and Captain Christy. Brauer claims to have been the first to use the name, but then, I guess he would. Certainly the Rosenzeiting of 1898 (which reports Brauer's claim - and continues to praise this rose in many articles in that year and later - simply says that they both appeared in 1898.
Thank you for your work.
|
REPLY
|
|
