|
|
'Fraser's Pink Musk' rose Reviews & Comments
-
-
|
Is there any evidence that John Fraser bred this rose, as is stated on the Description page? I have doubts that he had anything to do with it, aside from being the rose's namesake, and it seems just as plausible that the rose was named for his brother, James Fraser, or for one of his sons.
He did have a nursery import/export business set up in South Carolina and England, but it was known for introducing North American native plants to European consumers, such as Magnolias, Rhododendrons and Philadelphus. If, for example, the Frasers' neighbor, John Champneys, named a rose for one of the Frasers, they certainly had the set-up in place to propagate and introduce that variety to Europe, but did they?
In his Monographie du genre rosier (1824), Lindley thanked *James* Fraser for sending him specimens of North American rose species, but that's the only contemporary reference I can find linking the Fraser name with roses.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 2 posted
18 JUL by
 Lee H.
|
Since John Fraser reportedly lived from 1750 - 1811 (HMF breeder page) and the HMF reported release date of this rose is 1818, it would seem more likely to be James, or later descendant. But I can see the record is rather muddy concerning not only the release date, but also when John died.
|
REPLY
|
|
I don't have much reason to doubt his death date of 1811. If there is muddying, though, it may be because John, Jr. also was a successful (perhaps more financially successful than his father?) plant hunter and nurseryman. I don't know what became of his other son, who was named James like his uncle. Not at all confusing.
The Wikipedia entry for John Fraser, botanist, is quite good, as is a short biography of Mr. Fraser written by Robert Hogg and published in Cottage Gardener, vol. 8, pp. 250-252, July 22, 1852. I'd link to it, but then this comment would disappear into the ether.
His life as a plant collector is fairly well-documented, but I have not yet been able to discover any mention of him breeding roses, or hybridizing plants. I have little difficulty believing that Champneys or Noisette named a rose for him, but it seems less likely that he had the time or inclination to breed roses when he was always on the move.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
HMF has a file for "Frazer's Pink Musk" and 'Fraser's Pink Musk'. References for both mention John Fraser. Are these roses the same, just with alternate spellings? Or is there a "found" rose once thought to be 'Fraser's Pink Musk' but not?
:-)
~Christopher
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
There is a date reference on "Fraser's Pink Musk" of "bred by Unknown (before 1597)" that I believe is incorrect. The rose is classified as a Noisette, a class that did not exist until the early 19th century. Also, under references, there is an entry from "The Herball, or General Historie of Plantes" by John Gerard that may be the reason for the incorrect date reference. I do not believe that this entry's reference to "blush rose" can be related to this noisette rose; one of the characteristics of noisette roses is they bloom throughout the season, a characteristic that was not identified in roses in the late 16th century.
I recommend that the reference to Gerard's "General Historie of Plantes" be removed from this rose's profile and the "Bred by..." entry be edited to only the "Bred by Fraser (Unknown, 1818)" entry.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
I do think it was a misprint, and 'Blush' was intended, rather than 'Black'.
I did see an 1826 advertisement for 'Fraser's Black' cherries. This could be the source of the mix-up with the name.
Virginia
|
REPLY
|
|
