HELPMEFIND PLANTS COMMERCIAL NON-COMMERCIAL RESOURCES EVENTS PEOPLE RATINGS
|
|
|
"Crenshaw Musk" rose Reviews & Comments
-
-
|
Our Heritage of Old Roses - 20-21 - 1987
Judyth A. McLeod
For some reason, then, the original fragrant autumn Musk rose lost favour by the beginning of the nineteenth century, and was gradually supplanted by the much larger summer flowering R. brunonii which is easily recognised by its long drooping downy leaves. This latter is the Musk rose of Miss Willmott and of Bean.
Which all leads us to that most charming of English garden writers, the great E.A. Bowles who, in My Garden in Summer says, 'The true and rare old Musk Rose exists here, but in a juvenile state at present, for it is not many years since I brought it as cuttings from the splendid old specimen on the Grange at Bitton and I must not expect its deliciously scented, late in the season flowers before it has scrambled up its wall space'.
G.S. Thomas, who unravelled the mystery of the old Musk rose with all the detective skills needed to prove he would have been a decided asset to New Scotland Yard, went to E.A. Bowles home, Myddelton House, in late August, 1963 and 'there on a cold north-west facing wall of the house was a rose just coming into flower. It was without doubt the Old Musk Rose. I had walked straight to it'. From this specimen G.S. Thomas took both cuttings and material for budding. The budded material flowered in their first season and, as G.S. Thomas explained, were to his amazement double flowered forms which exactly resembled the portrait by Redoute. Bowles' rose was a single so that, in one go, G.S. Thomas was rewarded with the sponteneously sported double form of the rose (apparently a common event in the past) as well as the single form. This material has since been disseminated by Graham Thomas. Our own shrub bears both single and double flowers in profusion.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
According to Malcolm Manners, "Crenshaw Musk" and "Crenshaw Double Musk" originated from the same plant in Hollywood Cemetery in Richmond, VA. It is not unusual for the single form of R. moschata to occasionally sport to a double form.
The even more doubled version of R. Moschata, "Temple Musk" was also found in another area of the Hollywood Cemetery, and it is not known if it may be a sport of "Crenshaw Double Musk".
http://forums.gardenweb.com/discussions/4904767/crenshaw-musk?n=15
Virginia
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 2 posted
7 APR 19 by
mmanners
|
I just noticed this older post. While surely at some point in history, the semi-double form of the musk rose must have sported from an original single form, in practice, among garden plants of R. moschata, what one normally sees is the reverse -- starting with a double form plant, sooner or later it will nearly always sport a branch back to single. The reverse is apparently quite rare (I've never seen it, and I've been growing musks for nearly 30 years now). The very double "Temple" musk is known to have sported from the common semi-double one only twice, that I'm aware of, and I'm unaware of it ever sporting back to either the semi-double or the single form.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 2 posted
28 JUN 19 by
 CybeRose
|
Malcolm,
I read somewhere, long ago, that the single-flowered form of the Musk rose begins to produce doubled flowers only after it made sufficient upwards growth.
This may be analogous to the ivy, Hedera helix, that retains its vining habit indefinitely when it has no choice but to trail. However, when it finds support to grow upwards to a suitable height, it changes to the flowering or "tree" form.
I haven't grown the Musk rose, and the one I watched for several years at the Heritage Rose Garden was always being cut back to remain bushy.
Karl
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Initial post
22 OCT 14 by
Hardy
|
"The sixt kinde of Roses called Muske Roses, hath slender springs and shoots, the leaves and flowers be smaller than the other Roses, yet they grow up almost as high as the Damaske or Province Rose. The flowers be small and single, and sometimes double, of a white colour and pleasant savour, in proportion not much unlike the wild Roses, or Canell Roses...
The five first kinds of garden Roses do flower in May & June, & so do the wild Roses & the Eglentine : but the Muske Roses do flower in June, and againe in September, or thereabouts."
A New Herball (1543), by Rembert Dodoens, translated by Henrie Lyte, London printing of 1586, pp. 757-8
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 1 posted
27 JUN 19 by
CybeRose
|
Hardy,
This one from John Rea (1665) is not so old a reference, but he does mention that the leaves were "shining", which is not the case with what we have now.
Rosa moschata flore pleno
The double Musk Rose riseth very high with many green branches, and dark green shining leaves, armed with great sharp thorns, the flowers come forth on long foot-stalks at the ends of the branches, many together in a tuft, most of them flowering together, being small whitish or Cream-coloured Roses, not very double, the first row of leaves being much bigger than the rest, which are small, and stand loosly, not forming so fair a double flower as the ordinary white Rose. There is another of this kind that beareth single Roses, of much lesser esteem than this; the flowers of both are chiefly valued for their scent, which is sweet like unto Musk, from whence they took the name: commonly they flower in August, after all others are past, but their usual time is in September.
Two older notes:
John Gerard: The Herball, or, Generall Historie of Plantes (1597)
Single and double Muske Rose
"... divers branches: whereon do grow long leaves, smooth and shining, made up of leaves set upon a middle rib, like the other Roses."
John Parkinson: A Garden of Pleasant Flowers (1629)
18. Rosa Moschata simplex & multiplex.
The Muske Rose single and double.
"... having small darke greene leaves on them, not much bigger then the leaves of Eglantine: "
It is odd that in the 16th through 18th centuries, the Musk roses in England were autumnal with dark green, "shining" leaves. Thereafter, it seems, the whitish leaved types displaced the former, but retained the flowering habit.
ps.
Gerard (1597): "... long leaves, smooth and shining, made up of leaves set upon a middle rib, like the other Roses."
Parkinson (1629): "... having small darke greene leaves on them, not much bigger then the leaves of Eglantine: "
Hanmer (1659): "... the leaves are long and shining greene."
Rea (1665): "... dark green shining leaves"
Mortimer (1708): "dark green shining Leaves"
Miller (1724): "... shining dark green Leaves"
Herrmann (1762): "Leaves ... dark-green, bright, smooth"
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
This is a great rose. It is nice and bushy, and I just like it so much more than a lot of modern grafted roses. Mind you, a hardy, own root hybrid tea is a very special thing. Only a few perform well for me, and interestingly enough, Blue Girl and Blue Moon do very well, as do several Hybrid Perpetual and Moss roses and other OGRs. Purple is my favorite color and coincidentally purple roses grow well for me. My aesthetic is very species oriented, and once again, species grow well for me. So it may be a chicken or the egg situation. Maybe they do well for me because I like them a lot so I take better care of them, or maybe they are better growers for me so I have adopted a soft spot for them. Both sides of that equation are probably true.
I'm hoping to get a cross of moschata x rugosa this year to send to someone, and to keep for myself. Probably the closest thing to that in existence is the gootendorst roses. It would be nice to get a direct species cross to capitalize on fragrance, hardiness, remontancy, and disease resistance. I can see a lot of potential there.
I would love to recreate the damask as rugosa x moschata x fedtschenkoana. It would normally have gallica instead of rugosa, but gallica is a once bloomer. With rugosa in the cross, all parents would be rebloomers and that would mean a nice steady reblooming fragrant damask type rose with improved cold tolerance. A lot of people would say I'm basically wasting my time making such primitive crosses, but a nice perfected species cross with a clean bloodline free of disease sources would be a good starting point to base a hybridizing program. Some of the nicest roses are very simple.
|
REPLY
|
|
|
