|
|
'Radiance' rose Reviews & Comments
-
-
|
I have a rose that arrived with the name 'Radiance' that's definitely not 'Radiance'. Trying to discover its correct identity, I've noticed a change in the description of 'Radiance' over time.
The early descriptions tell us that the backs of the petals are darker than the petal faces and this can be confirmed in the earliest photographs.
However, by 1958, Modern Roses V has this reversed: ("rose-pink, reverse lighter"), and this description has carried forward to at least Modern Roses 10. I don't have a copy of the most recent Modern Roses and haven't been able to check whether this has been amended.
Wondering how widespread the confusion is and how many are growing or selling 'Radiance' impostors.
|
REPLY
|
|
The photos on hmf look like they have the darker pink outside (apart from one that I'm not sure is correct). The one in the HRIAI Collection is from an old plant of David Ruston's, budded by John N, who presumably also supplied the plant at Maddingley.
|
REPLY
|
|
It hasn't been amended. Still ("rose-pink, reverse lighter")
|
REPLY
|
|
Thanks Margaret.
Do you know the provenance of Red Radiance at the respository?
My rose is flattish-globular warm deep pink with lighter petal reverses and about double the usual Radiance petal number.
The budwood was said to be from Rustons some years ago - not the respository.
|
REPLY
|
|
Yep - Red Radiance came from 'Kombacy' via Thomas for Roses.
|
REPLY
|
|
Thanks Margaret. A long shot - Would you happen to know whether the Red Radiance budwood for the Stirling Square project would have come from the repository plant or another 'Red Radiance' from the Ruston collection?
|
REPLY
|
|
I have the Kombacy Red Radiance here - do you want photos of it?
|
REPLY
|
|
Always good to see more photos, but this will be the same as the one in the repository and that doesn't look like our ring in.
|
REPLY
|
|
I think on my plant the outside of the Red Radiance petals is minimally darker than the inside, but is quickly bleached by hot sunshine.
A while back I posted a photo of the unstable Careless Love in the channel row at Renmark, but I don't think it helps much.
|
REPLY
|
|
Pat tells me that David's plant list doesn't include Red Radiance (which must be why Thomases asked me for budwood from Kombacy when they lost their stock plant). Can't tell you where the budwood sent to WA came from.
|
REPLY
|
|
Weren't there a few Radiances at a property near Hay at that conference?
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
American Rose Magazine 1(5-6): 5-6 (November-December 1933)
Novelties and Why
J. H. Nicolas
Roses are essentially local, but some people are expecting them to be all universal. They expect a rose originated in Timbuktu to be adaptable and good in the mountains of Podunk and the alkali of Death Valley! And because that rose rebels under strange condtions, they blame the hybridizer! Even Radiance, perhaps the most widely adaptable rose of all, is not universal; it is not even good everywhere in the United States, and it simply refuses to perform in Europe.
|
REPLY
|
|
I lol'd at this one, hahaha.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Gardening 15: 348 (Aug. 1, 1907)
HYBRIDIZING
John Cook
I have one now which has good points for commercial winter work. It is the second generation of my white seedling, Madonna, and Enchanter. It has a stronger growth than either of them, stiff stem and large pink flowers, a shade lighter than Enchanter.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Gardeners' Chronicle of America, 19(5): 226 (May 1915)
GROWING ROSE SEEDLINGS.
John Cook, Maryland.
In 1908 I introduced Radiance, a rose pink with a silver lining to the petals. This is a seedling from Cardinal crossed with an unnamed pink seedling. This rose received a silver medal at the Hartford Test Gardens, and this, in my opinion, is the very best of all the Hybrid Tea Roses for out of doors. The demand for this rose is increasing every year.
|
REPLY
|
|
