HelpMeFind Roses, Clematis and Peonies
Roses, Clematis and Peonies
and everything gardening related.
Member
Profile
PhotosFavoritesCommentsJournalMember
Garden
Member
Listings
 
billy teabag
most recent 21 OCT HIDE POSTS
 
Initial post 20 OCT by HubertG
Now that the bush I planted (that came as a 'Dr. Grill' but is supposed to be 'W.R. Smith' and the same as "Amelia Anderson") has flowered, I'm quite confident in saying that my Dr. Grill from Honeysuckle is definitely not William R.Smith. I posted a couple of flowers of W. R Smith, and they could very simply be described as creamy white (no real hints of pink at this stage). Their fragrance to me is like a weaker Maman Cochet scent, the petals are rather thick and waxy. The biggest difference so far is in the habit of the bushes and the leaves. My Dr.Grill has larger leaves with a more undulating edge; the growth of W R Smith is more classic Hybrid Tea like - straighter, more open, erect growth - whereas the my Dr. Grill's branches are a bit more sinuous, and they get sent up from seemingly anywhere on the bush so it creates a denser more Tea-like habit. Also, the flower stems on W.R.Smith have tended to remain reddish when the flowers open, whereas on my Dr. Grill they have changed to green at that point. W. R. Smith's unopened buds are squatter too.
I know I haven't had this new rose for long, and it's hard describing differences,and culture could come into play a bit, but I can tell simply by looking that they aren't the same.
REPLY
Reply #1 of 1 posted 21 OCT by billy teabag
Thanks for this excellent comparison HubertG.
Your description of the growth habit of 'W.R. Smith' matches my plants.
REPLY
most recent 11 OCT SHOW ALL
 
Initial post 7 OCT by rafael maino
Found Tea Rose, may be Mme Lombard?
REPLY
Reply #2 of 6 posted 7 OCT by Patricia Routley
Just wait. ‘Mme. Lambard’ sets many huge hips.
REPLY
Reply #3 of 6 posted 8 OCT by Jay-Jay
What a delightful rose, Rafael!
REPLY
Reply #4 of 6 posted 10 OCT by billy teabag
Gorgeous Rafael!
Do you have a close-up photo of the bud in profile?
Does this rose open to show stamens or is there a knot of short petals in the centre?
REPLY
Reply #5 of 6 posted 10 OCT by HubertG
My comment somehow disappeared. I said it looked like Maman Cochet, but I couldn't be sure.
REPLY
Reply #6 of 6 posted 10 OCT by Patricia Routley
You did say that HubertG. and I particularly noted your comment. I thought that you were aware that Maman Cochet does not set hips and deleted the comment yourself.

Rafael, I should have been clearer. With time the hips grow really large - you just have to leave them to grow. Here the bushes eventually almost look like a fruit tree laden with small red apples. I enjoy deadheading at last as the new spring growth pushes out, hearing the thump, thump, thump as the hips hit the ground.
REPLY
Reply #7 of 6 posted 11 OCT by HubertG
I can't see any hips in the photos. There are a couple of buds in the third photo (at the top towards the left) which appear to have a flattened base to the receptacles, but it's not distinct. That also suggests Maman Cochet to me.
REPLY
most recent 5 OCT SHOW ALL
 
Initial post 10 MAY by HubertG
From the 'Rosen-Zeitung' 1895, page 73:

"Neuste Rosen für 1894/95

(Beschreibungen der Züchter)

Strauch wüchsig und sehr remontierend; Blume sehr gefüllt, wundervoll geformt, auf geraden Stielen; Blumenblätter dick, sehr regelmässig rund, leicht aufblühend; Farbe neu in dieser Klasse, carmoisinrot samtig purpur mit lebhaft kirsch- und feuerrotem Widerschein."

My translation:

Newest Roses for 1894/95

(Descriptions of the breeders)

Bush vigorous and very remontant; flower very double, wonderfully shaped, on straight stems; petals thick, very regularly round, opening easily; colour new in this class, crimson-red velvety purple with lively cherry-red and flame-red reflexes.
REPLY
Reply #1 of 42 posted 10 MAY by Patricia Routley
That's interesting: "petals thick, very regularly round". Thanks HubertG. Reference added.
REPLY
Reply #2 of 42 posted 14 MAY by HubertG
This is the text accompanying the colour illustration of 'Francis Dubreuil' in the 1896 Rosen-Zeitung, page 41

"1. Francis Dubreuil. (Thee). Dubreuil 1894.
Reichblütigkeit, kräftiger Wuchs, gute Füllung, aufrechte Haltung, elegante Form und eine dunkelblutrote Färbung hatte man bisher noch nicht unter den Theerosen in einer Sorte vereinigt gefunden. In der Dubreuil'schen Züchtung haben wir etwas Hervorragendes dieser Art erhalten, so dass der Züchter mit recht sagen konnte: Die schönste, bekannte "rote Thee". Der Strauch ist wüchsig, sehr verzweigt, dunkelbläulichgrün belaubt und sehr remontierend. Die wundervoll schön geformte mittelgrosse Blume ist sehr gefüllt, wird von geraden, festen Stielen aufrecht getragen, öffnet sich bei jeder Witterung. Die samtig carmoisin purpurrote Farbe wird durch eine feuerroten Widerschein erhellt und leidet weder durch Hitze noch durch Regen leicht. Eine als Knospe geschnittene Blume dauert im Glase Wasser wohl 8 Tage lang. Für Blumenbinderei-Geschäfte wird sie ohne Fehl eine viel begehrte und gesuchte Schnittrose sein. Ihre Massenanpflanzung kann daher nur dringend empfohlen werden. Dass sie auch wegen ihrer seltenen Vorzüge schnell erkannt wurde, beweisst eine überaus starke Nachfrage in Pflanzen, sodass dieses Frühjahr wohl in keinem Geschäfte eine kräftige Pflanz unverkauft blieb. Auch dürfte sie zu Gruppenpflanzungen Verwendung finden und grosse Wirkung erzielen, doch besorge man ihr kräftige, humusreiche, lehmige Erde. Die in den letzten Jahren in den Handel gebrachten dunkelroten Thee sind von "Francis Dubreuil" alle in den Schatten gestellt. Ob sie eine Treibrose sein wird, können wir bis jetzt noch nicht sagen.
REPLY
Reply #3 of 42 posted 15 MAY by Patricia Routley
Thank you HubertG. Reference added.
REPLY
Reply #4 of 42 posted 15 MAY by HubertG
I should have time to do the translation tonight, Patricia.
REPLY
Reply #5 of 42 posted 15 MAY by HubertG
My translation:

1. Francis Dubreuil. (Tea). Dubreuil 1894. Amongst the Tea Roses, one had not found freedom of flowering, strong growth, good petalage, upright held flowers, elegant shape and a dark blood-red colouring combined in the one variety until now. In this Dubreuil creation we have obtained something outstanding of this kind, so that the breeder can rightly say: the most beautiful known "red Tea". The bush is vigorous, very branched, foliaged dark bluish-green and very remontant. The wonderful beautifully shaped medium-sized flower is very double, borne upright on straight firm stems, opening in any weather. The velvety crimson purple-red colour is lit with a fire-red reflection and neither through heat nor through rain does it suffer easily. A flower cut as a bud lasts well for 8 days in a glass of water. For florist businesses it will become a very coveted and sought after cut rose without fail. Therefore their mass planting can only be highly recommended. The fact that it was also quickly recognised because of its rare merits, established an exceedingly strong demand for plants, so that this spring hardly any vigorous plant remained unsold in the stores. It should also find use for group plantings and achieve great effect, but still, one should give it strong humus-rich, loamy soil. 'Francis Dubreuil' eclipses all dark red Teas introduced into commerce in recent years. Whether it will become forcing rose, we cannot yet say.

I hope it's still English. I've tried to translate it as literally as possible without it sounding too Germanic.
It would be interesting for someone who grows this rose to do the 8 day vase-life test.
REPLY
Reply #6 of 42 posted 15 MAY by Patricia Routley
The translation added. Thanks HubertG. The 8-day test in different seasons. I have found that the well-watered autumn roses last longer.
REPLY
Reply #7 of 42 posted 15 MAY by Margaret Furness
A better test of a true Francis Dubreuil would be the scent; if it has any, it should be Tea-scented. See old references.
REPLY
Reply #8 of 42 posted 16 MAY by HubertG
There is that reference that says it has a distinct apple scent.

Patricia, I left out an 'a' in the last sentence of that translation - it should be " become a forcing rose".

If the rose grown as 'Francis Dubreuil' lasts only a few days in water then that might be an argument that it isn't the original rose.
Although I haven't grown FD (and the main reason was really that it was not meant to be the correct variety), but I have to ask, since it isn't 'Barcelona' after all, what tea is it? I have to admit that it does rather match the German descriptions - regular rounded petals, dark blue-green foliage, colour description etc.
I think it might need to be reappraised as possibly the correct variety.
REPLY
Reply #9 of 42 posted 16 MAY by Margaret Furness
No, I can't buy anyone describing the rose currently-sold-as FD, as scentless. When the designated scent-testers for the Rose Trial grounds in Adelaide Botanic Gardens are assessing new varieties, and find they need to re-set 10 (like setting white balance!), they go and stick their noses in "Not Francis Dubreuil".
The Tea book includes an illustration of FD from Rosen-Zeitung 1896, showing long pointed leaves. The authors conclude their discussion of Not FD by saying "...we just wish that we could call it a Tea!".
REPLY
Reply #10 of 42 posted 16 MAY by HubertG
Yet the illustration from Betten's Die Rose 1903 doesn't show a long bud or leaves. Which one is correct? The Betten illustration looks more realistically drawn than the Rosen-Zeitung illustration.

I'm only going by the photos I've seen, but if this was the FD introduced in the 1890's, from its habit and freedom of flowering it wouldn't have been classed as a Hybrid Perpetual, a Bourbon or any other rose class at the time. No doubt a red tea would have had a little bit of 'something else' in its breeding to give it its colour and that perhaps makes it less typical of the appearance of the 'purer' teas, but like I say, how would this particular rose be classed back then?

I've only seen it a few times in person at visits to Parramatta Park in Sydney years ago. It certainly did have a good fragrance but I couldn't describe its scent after all this time.

At least we know it came from Sangerhausen. There can't be too many candidates in the early lists that match it.
REPLY
Reply #11 of 42 posted 28 MAY by HubertG
Here's an early American reference describing FD as "very fragrant":
From G. R. Gause's 1905 Catalogue of Roses (on the inside front cover)

"RED ROSE - FRANCOIS DUBREUIL.
A new red Tea Rose of unusual merit, with fine, large, double flowers, which, in color, are equal to the best of our deep-colored Hybrid Perpetuals. The flowers are large, very full and double, with thick, regularly arranged petals. Color is red, with velvety shadings; rich and very fragrant."
REPLY
Reply #12 of 42 posted 28 MAY by Margaret Furness
Interesting.
The rose photographed in 1906 isn't what is grown as FD now.
REPLY
Reply #13 of 42 posted 28 MAY by HubertG
I just uploaded the illustration of Francis Dubreuil on the cover of the Gause 1905 catalogue. Unfortunately, it's one of those catalogue illustrations which aren't really an accurate depiction but probably have some semblance of truth. It actually looks half-way between the 1906 photo and the currently grown FD.
REPLY
Reply #14 of 42 posted 28 MAY by Patricia Routley
Thanks HubertG. I have added the reference. Is the spelling in the original text Francis or Francois?
REPLY
Reply #15 of 42 posted 28 MAY by HubertG
Your welcome. In the original text it is spelt "Francois".
REPLY
Reply #38 of 42 posted 29 AUG by HubertG
I have said previously that I did not think 'Princess Bonnie' is a contender for the real identity of FD, but this photograph of Princess Bonnie in the 1916 catalogue of Dingee & Conard (the originators) has me thinking twice about it. The blooms do look cupped, and the petals have that same flattish appearance, with the little indent on the petal edges, giving them a somewhat heart shaped look. And Princess Bonnie was very fragrant. What do others think? The photo gives a good view of the buds too. Note that one stem seems to have a small cluster of three buds.
REPLY
Reply #39 of 42 posted 29 AUG by Margaret Furness
Not sure about the receptacle shape, but it's close.
REPLY
Reply #40 of 42 posted 30 AUG by HubertG
The problem is that this photo doesn't really look a lot like other depictions of Princess Bonnie, and I wonder if it's a catalogue photo mix up.
Princess Bonnie's pedigree is a tea x (probably triploid) HT, so that could give a fertile diploid rose (as 'FD' does sets hips), so that would make sense. Additionally PB's pollen parent 'William Francis Bennett' does look a bit like 'FD' regarding the blooms (at least in the only photo posted here). However PBonnie is usually described as exceptionally free flowering, and I'm not sure if that could be said about 'FD'.

Also 'Admiral Schley' could be another possible contender although I don't know that they had that rose at Sangerhausen. It certainly isn't mentioned in the Rosen-Zeitung.
REPLY
Reply #41 of 42 posted 30 AUG by HubertG
The rose on the left looks as if it has barely 3-4 rows of petals.
REPLY
Reply #42 of 42 posted 5 OCT by HubertG
I think it's probably pretty safe to scrap 'Marion Dingee' as a possibility for the true identity of Francis Dubreuil. The 1907 newspaper article from the Leader says it's almost devoid of fragrance, and this supports the early catalogue descriptions which seem to simply omit any reference to fragrance.
From the article:
"Deep red colors are rare among roses of the tea scented class, so rare, in fact, that they may scarcely be said to exist, as the two most, strongly marked examples, Marion Dingee and Princesse de Sagan, are almost devoid of the characteristic fragrance, but though probably containing Bengal or China rose blood, are classed as teas, and are otherwise quite typical in habit, growth and constant profusion of bloom."
REPLY
Reply #16 of 42 posted 31 MAY by Plazbo
I'm probably being dumb but are you calling it "Not Francis Dubreuil" because we aren't sure what is being sold in Australia is actually Barcelona? Or is it fairly certain it is Barcelona?

Just a little confused about whether I should be running it through my diploid lines or pairing it with something like Rhapsody In Blue instead...I'm assuming the latter based on a lot of comments on here.
REPLY
Reply #17 of 42 posted 31 MAY by HubertG
Plazbo, I'm confused too haha. Check out "David Martin's No41" which is the most likely candidate for the 1932 'Barcelona' (in fact in my opinion there is no reason to doubt that it is Barcelona).
Somehow the rose distributed as Francis Dubreuil had been confused for Barcelona in the US hence it wasn't thought to be FD, and so has become NotFD. Anyway, that's my take on it in a nutshell anyway.
I'm sure one of the Tealadies could expand on this.

I still think that it could be the original Francis Dubreuil. As I've mentioned previously, even though it has some atypical tea characteristics, it doesn't easily fall into another class either. It does match early descriptions especially the rounded regularly arranged velvety petals, and the dark bluish-green foliage. And it did come from Sangerhausen labelled as Francis Dubreuil. True, the bloom doesn't look a lot like the 1906 photo, but some of the photos here do show recurving petal edges. It certainly (to my mind) doesn't seem anything like what one would expect a Hybrid Tea given commercial release in the 1930's to be, so isn't Barcelona.

As to its ploidy, who knows? The original FD would most likely to have come through one of those early red teas like Duchess of Edinburgh which was introduced as a tea but clearly had hybrid characteristics, perhaps self pollinated and retaining enough Tea characteristics but developing the velvety red blooms. So if it was say a self pollination of a triploid that occasionally set hips, it could end up being a diploid or a tetraploid. This is just my speculation of course. Just for comparison of a similar possible breeding, look at 'Princess Bonnie' which is from a {T x (T x HP)} cross.
REPLY
Reply #18 of 42 posted 31 MAY by Margaret Furness
Sangerhausen has been through two world wars, and every big collection or garden or nursery has mislabels. Especially if the labels are small enough for the public to move around. We kept updating the labels at Renmark as new information came in, but there are still some I'm uneasy about or would change if it was worth spending more there at present. For example, what we have as Excellenz von Schubert and Merveille des Rouges are pretty clearly incorrect.
REPLY
Reply #19 of 42 posted 8 JUN by HubertG
I wonder if 'Marion Dingee' might be a possibilty for this rose. There are plenty of references online but I haven't come across a reference to its fragrance. The illustrations suggest a cupped shape and often the references describe a very dark colour. Here's the coloured plate for 'Marion Dingee' from Dingee's 1892 catalogue. Dingee's give the breeding as 'Comtesse de Casserta' x 'Duchess of Edinburgh'.
REPLY
Reply #20 of 42 posted 8 JUN by Patricia Routley
You might be on to something HubertG. The bloom shape is about right, the colour is about right, the "short compact" growth is about right.
We have:
1889 Marion Dingee (Early illustrations show a shorter bloom)
1894 Francis Dubreuil (Early illustrations, 1896 and 1906, show a taller bloom)
I'll search for 'Marion Dingee' in Australia later in the day.
REPLY
Reply #21 of 42 posted 8 JUN by HubertG
What's a bit out of place though is the lack of fragrance in the descriptions. Dingee's other red Tea was Princess Bonnie which they lauded as one of the sweetest scented roses available. One would think to promote their own rose (in Marion Dingee), if it had a good fragrance, they would at least mention its scent when it was introduced. I don't think Princess Bonnie is a contender from early references and illustrations, by the way.

It is interesting however to compare the buds in the coloured illustration I posted above with the photo Tomartyr posted on 30 Nov 2011, photo Id 187697.
REPLY
Reply #22 of 42 posted 9 JUN by billy teabag
A very quick response before a more considered one.
Reliable early Australian references to Francis Dubreuil tell us this was one of the big Teas. From memory, the 1930s reference to roses in NSW tells us it was 9 feet tall.
Even in the best conditions, with the best care and attention, the rose sold as Francis Dubreuil struggles to reach half that height.
REPLY
Reply #23 of 42 posted 9 JUN by Patricia Routley
In 1893 (four years after 'Marion Dingee' was introduced,) it was said to have a "short compact growth". The 1930s was about 60 years later. I hope you will share some of those references Billy. I probably have them, but I added 15 refs to 'Marion Dingee' yesterday and must move on. (My Francis Dubreuil' manages to make about 2 feet.)
REPLY
Reply #24 of 42 posted 10 JUN by billy teabag
The ref I was remembering is this one from George Knight's 1931 article Tea Roses in New South Wales which has already been added:
"What an opportunity is offered to some of the authorities in connection with the public gardens of the State to plant out some of the most vigorous of these old tea Roses and grow them into large shrubs. There is no more striking feature than to see a Rose bush eight or nine feet high, built in proportion and covered in bloom. I would suggest as some of the most suitable for this purpose : Corallina, Mme Charles, Dr. Grill, Francois Dubreuil, Mdlle. Christine de Noue and Mrs Dunlop Best. The latter makes a nice bush up to six feet. p104 Australian Rose Annual 1931.

The "Not Francis Dubreuil" we used to have also only managed about 2'6" in height and width before losing the will to live.
To my eye it looks like a hybrid of a China rose and something HP-ish.

I'll check to see whether I have anything else on my computer that hasn't been added to HMF and will have a look on Trove.
REPLY
Reply #25 of 42 posted 10 JUN by HubertG
Maybe another possibility to consider is 'Friedrichsruh' from 1907. It was a cross from 'Princesse de Bearn' x 'Francis Dubreuil' and appeared to be a shorter-growing bushy rose, Sangerhausen had it in their collection and gave it a 7/10 for fragrance. That's assuming of course that the rose grown as 'Friedrichsruh' at Sangerhausen now is incorrect. And despite being classed as a Hybrid Tea it had short stems and nodding flowers.
REPLY
Reply #26 of 42 posted 10 JUN by billy teabag
Worth a closer look, I think, HubertG. It's not uncommon to see mixups between roses in large collections that are close alphabetically.
Short stems and nodding flowers on a shorter plant is a good start.
REPLY
Reply #27 of 42 posted 11 JUN by HubertG
That's a good point Billy. Not only is there the possibility of them being confused if they looked similar but also as their names both start with FR, a mixup could have occurred in the cataloguing. Possibly.
There are quite a few references for 'Friedrichsruh' in the Rosen-Zeitung. One describes 'Souvenir de Clos Vougeot' as in the style of a paeony "like Friedrichsruh". I'm not sure how paeony-like FD is. Perhaps a bit.
REPLY
Reply #28 of 42 posted 13 JUN by Patricia Routley
I've added a few more refs for 'Friedrichsruh'.
REPLY
Reply #29 of 42 posted 13 JUN by true-blue
Hubert, sorry to barge in.
I've been reading this thread with a lot of interest.

However, I doubt if Francis Dubreuil was a fragrant rose. If you check the original advertisement in Journal des roses, thee's no mention of that:
Here is the text, translated from the original:

Mr. F. Dubreuil, rose-grower, 146, route de Grenoble, of Montplaisir-Lyon has two new roses for sale; the descriptions follow:
Francis Dubreuil (Tea). — A robuste and very remontant shrub, the flower is very full, of an admirable form, upright on rigid peduncles at the tips of the canes, with thick petals, very regularly rounded, in gracefully developed curves of a cup with softened contours, opening with extreme ease, of a color absolutely novel amongst the Teas, crimson red, velvety purple with vivid cherry-amaranth highlights, the bud is an elongated ovoid shape of great beauty.
Due to the perfection of its form and the intensity of its purple and amaranth hues, this variety constitutes the most beautiful red Tea Rose known
This variety has been awarded: 1) the silver medal of the Society of Practical Horticulture of the Rhône; 2) a prize at the Universal Exposition at Lyon, concourse of Jue 1894; 3) a first-class certificate from the Lyonnaise Horticultural Association.
REPLY
Reply #30 of 42 posted 14 JUN by HubertG
True-blue, no need to apologise. :-) The omission of the description of a fragrance when any rose is introduced is rather suspicious of it not having much scent. However an omission doesn't necessarily mean it didn't have a fragrance. There are other references which say it was fragrant, but when they come from catalogues trying to sell stock, you need to be a bit discerning, I suppose, as to whether they are exaggerations. The early apple fragrance description intrigues me.

Patricia, wow, you've been busy adding to 'Friedrichsruh'! Last I looked there were only half a dozen or so references. I want to add some more from the Rosen-Zeitung but maybe not till the weekend. One describes the buds and leaves in detail (including a bud photo), another says how it is mildew-free and the fragrance is intoxicating and emits particularly after rain. The mildew-free description is interesting because the few photos here of 'Friedrichsruh' from Sangerhausen show a somewhat mildew affected plant! (well it looks that way to me).

What's interesting about 'Friedrichsruh' is that it is a child of 'Francis Dubreuil'. If only we had an inexpensive genetic test to find out how much two roses are related to each other!
REPLY
Reply #31 of 42 posted 15 JUN by true-blue
Hubert, if memory serves me well, none of the French sources, noted FD as fragrant, hence my conclusion that is most probably not fragrance worthy, hence my conclusion.
REPLY
Reply #32 of 42 posted 28 JUL by HubertG
I just came across this one: "Francois Menard" a velvety crimson globular tea from 1892.
Sangerhausen's description: "
Ménard, François (tea) Tesnier 1892; crimson, centre velvety cherry, very large, very double, globular, floriferous, thick smooth branches, growth 6/10, bushy, short."

I haven't researched it at all yet - no initial mention of fragrance either - but I thought it might be interesting to look at it as a contender for "Francis Dubreuil" considering too they are both a Francois (well nearly).
REPLY
Reply #33 of 42 posted 29 JUL by HubertG
Here's my translation of the description of Francois Menard in the Rosen-Zeitung (from German, which would have been originally from French):

François Ménard (Tea). Shrub low, very vigorous, bushy, fairly smooth and thick-wooded, beautiful dark green foliage; bud very thick on a firm stem, flower very large, very double, globular, beautifully held; beautiful crimson red, centre cherry red blending to velvety crimson, choice, floriferous. (originates from a seedling).

Not sure about the "smooth" wood, if it fits "FD", and although the colour is crimson, that might not necessarily be a dark crimson. No mention of fragrance.
REPLY
Reply #34 of 42 posted 29 JUL by true-blue
Hubert, I sifted through my Journal des Roses/Amis des Rose, couldn't find anything tangible.
I checked the L'Haÿ's site, nada.

I found this in Page 42 of Dingee and Conard, 1898

Francois Menard.—New, crimson red, passing to purple.
REPLY
Reply #35 of 42 posted 29 JUL by true-blue
I found this to in
Journal of Horticulture and Practical Gardening, Volume 26, page 288, March 22, 1892


New French roses
....
15, François Ménard (Tesnier) - Crimson red, centre cherry red, passing into velvety crimson. Very large, very full, globular firm stem.

Link is : https://books.google.ca/books?id=U_xIAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA238&lpg=PA238&dq=rose+%22Francois+Ménard%22&source=bl&ots=_Dil-Ncm9U&sig=W0tv7tp-kSoSpN2ry0yeA73z0Sw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiWjvDUzsTcAhUvVt8KHTY5Ajo4ChDoATAAegQIARAB#v=onepage&q=rose%20%22Francois%20Ménard%22&f=false
REPLY
Reply #36 of 42 posted 30 JUL by HubertG
True-Blue It looks like Francois Menard never really caught on anywhere. Of course if the rose sold as Francis Dubreuil came from Sangerhausen, it could be any obscure rose from that collection, so doesn't necessarily rule out Francois Menard, but some aspects of FM seem to fit and others don't. If only 'Marion Dingee' came with a description of scent...
REPLY
Reply #37 of 42 posted 6 AUG by HubertG
Here's another contender to consider: Mme. Rivoy. Dingees class it among their Tea Roses in 1897 but say it is an old variety and has HP characteristics. From their catalogue:

"MADAME RIVOY.* Looks like a Hybrid Perpetual in Flower and Foliage. Is Hardy. In this grand old variety we have a Rose of no ordinary excellence. It is entitled to a place among Ever-blooming Roses equal to that which General Jacqueminot takes among Hybrid Perpetuals. Indeed it is not unlike a Hybrid Perpetual in the extra-large, full and loosely-formed double flowers, enchanting fragrance, intensity of color, large handsome foliage, and extreme vigor of growth ; it is hardy with slight protection, a quick, constant and profuse bloomer, and for outdoor culture cannot be excelled by any Rose of its color. The flowers are produced in wonderful abundance upon long stiff stems, and in color may be described as a rich crimson scarlet; very bright and effective. We doubt if any of our customers have ever seen this lovely Rose, and it is for their benefit, that all may secure one of the finest and best Roses grown, that we call special attention to it by our truthful illustration."

They include an illustration which isn't totally incompatible with "FD".
I don't know if it was in the Sangerhausen collection.
REPLY
most recent 4 OCT SHOW ALL
 
Initial post 2 JAN 16 by scvirginia
Has anyone considered 'Beauty of Rosemawr' as a possible match? Some of the photos look similar to me... especially buds, flowers and habit; hard to compare foliage from the photos at HMF...

There isn't a whole lot of info about this foundling on its description page... is it fragrant?, etc.

Thanks,
Virginia
REPLY
Reply #1 of 7 posted 3 JAN 16 by Patricia Routley
I have added the contenders to the Notes on the main page. These are the roses that I have considered in the past and are only one person's opinions. Other opinions are difficult to glean, but if anyone has any clues to offer, they would be most welcome and we will change the page accordingly.

I'll get to work and add a few botanical details.
REPLY
Reply #2 of 7 posted 3 JAN 16 by billy teabag
Thanks for the suggestion. I grow both roses and they are definitely not the same.
REPLY
Reply #3 of 7 posted 3 JAN 16 by scvirginia
Does your 'Beauty of Rosemawr' look like the one hmfusr has posted so many photos of? I wonder if there might be more than one rose in commerce as 'BoR'... at least in Australia. I did hear from someone in the U.S. who ordered 'BoR' years ago and got Ragged Robin (which I think is AKA Gloire des Rosomanes') instead, but that could have just been an isolated shipping error.

Thanks,
Virginia
REPLY
Reply #4 of 7 posted 4 JAN 16 by billy teabag
I see what you mean Virginia.
No - my 'Beauty of Rosemawr' doesn't look like the lovely rose in hmfusr's photos - and yes! that rose looks a lot like "Camnethan Cherry Red".
The rose I grow under the name 'Beauty of Rosemawr' was from Peter Ellis who obtained the budwood from Ruston's Roses a few years ago.
It's a fairly compact, overly prickly shrub that produces very generous inflorescences and repeats rapidly.
In my conditions, the blooms tend to be smaller and have many more petals than "Camnethan Cherry Red". It's generous and showy.
Our plant of "Camnethan Cherry Red" is more sparse and airy in habit and is far less prickly, though it may be more compact on its own roots or on a different understock as roses budded onto Fortuniana tend to be more stretched.
Hideous hot weather at the moment and any blooms are crispy and at their summer extreme. I'll take some photos showing my two side by side asap and share them here.
REPLY
Reply #7 of 7 posted 4 OCT by hmfusr
My plant is also very sparse, and tall. Leaves smallish, tender/soft. It and Titian along with Lorraine Lee are my champion winter bloomers.
REPLY
Reply #5 of 7 posted 4 JAN 16 by billy teabag
I'll try to upload some comparative photos of what we grow as "Camnethan Cherry Red" and 'Beauty of Rosemawr' here and add some to their sites.
REPLY
Reply #6 of 7 posted 4 JAN 16 by scvirginia
Despite the horrible heat, your 'BoR' looks fetching; the "CCR" also looks pretty good, though it doesn't seem to be a bloom with much structure, as you say.

Clearly not the same rose, and while I was wondering about hmfusr's plant, I don't know if it is 'CCR' or 'Gloire de Rosomanes', or (as seems likely) something else. I wish I knew- it looks- and sounds- like a good rose.

Virginia
REPLY
© 2018 HelpMeFind.com