|
|
"Birte Venske's No. 13" rose Reviews & Comments
-
-
|
Despite the ridiculous situation of me describing this rose's colour as chatenay pink, I never really contemplated it as being 'Mme. Abel Chatenay', until now. However, the foliage does have a "bluish tint" (1912 ref); it was (once) a "strong and erect" bush (1913 ref); and the wood does turn red, as in some photos of 'Mme. Abel Chatenay'.
Any thoughts please?
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 2 posted
6 DEC 21 by
 HubertG
|
Only that 'Mme Abel Chatenay' has quite a few descendants, to say the least, many of which would bear great similarity to her, and your rose does look quite a bit darker in some photos than Chatenay's colour. If you had never suspected these two being the same, your intuition is probably telling you they aren't.
|
REPLY
|
|
My intuition is now telling me that it is ‘Mme. Abel Chatenay’. But one person does not make an identification - it takes consultation and agreement.
I took a look at the list of descendants and my heart sank. I think I am going to take up another interest. But thanks for your response HubertG.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
I am struck by the similarity of Cyberose's 1928 photo of 'Jonkheer J. L. Mock' to my foundling "Birte Venske's No. 13". I have long thought that if my rose was not 'Elli Knab', it might be 'Jonkheer J. L. Mock'. However, the 1930 and 1936 references for 'Jonkheer J. L. Mock' say "borne singly".
Can those who grow 'Jonkheer J. L. Mock' advise on the inflorescence of their plant. and I would love it if people could re-look at my photos of "Birte Venske's No. 13" again.
Thanks. Patricia
|
REPLY
|
|
