HELPMEFIND PLANTS COMMERCIAL NON-COMMERCIAL RESOURCES EVENTS PEOPLE RATINGS
|
|
|
'Faux thé rouge' rose Reviews & Comments
-
-
|
OK, trying again....
The 1824 Pronville reference does NOT classify it as once-blooming. The second quoted segment in the reference here does not refer to 'Var. Anemating' but instead is a sort of "side-note" about China roses -- though they were previously described under the header of "semperflorens" ("ever-blooming"), their seedlings bloom once per year. This probably refers to the time before controlled pollination, and the hips collected from the Chinas may thus be pollinated by once-blooming European roses, the resulting seedlings being once-blooming Hybrid Chinas. Please see link below, start at page 177 (where the header of LVII 'R. semperflorens' appears at line 277), then follow through the list of repeat-blooming Chinas. Then, on page 178, you'll see the next line quoted in the reference for this rose appearing as a sort of side-note: "N. B. Toutes les varietes de semis du bengal ne fleurissent qu'une fois l'anee" which translates to "All varieties of China seedlings bloom only once a year".
www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/52529#page/194/mode/1up
The 1826 Noisette reference (linked below) does list this rose among other known once-blooming Hybrid Chinas, and that is a bit of a mystery, considering the other references listed here. I wonder if perhaps a seedling of 'Animating' was passed off as 'Animating' and Noisette described that rose. The practice of giving parent-names to seedlings was not always known to be incorrect at that time -- surely the subtle variations of the first Chinas in Europe as depicted in paintings and descriptions result from, for example, seedlings of 'Slater's Crimson' being raised as 'Slater's Crimson'. Another possibility is that Noisette simply made an error.
Considering that Noisette's is the only reference calling the rose once-blooming, and that other references list this rose as among those imported directly from China (thus not a "classic Hybrid China" with a European rose parent), is it not more likely that one reference was incorrect about this characteristic rather than that all the others were?
www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/95904#page/531/mode/1up
:-)
~Christopher
|
REPLY
|
|
LeRouge (1819) says, "There aren’t any fanciers who can make it bloom all year."
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 3 posted
22 APR by
 jedmar
|
Could it be that there were different roses propagated under this name? The 1823 reference states it was blooming end of September in Boursault's garden.
|
REPLY
|
|
While it's intellectually conceivable that there could be different China roses under one name, the rose folks of that time (and of all times!) were pretty sharp-eyed for (a) new roses on the scene, and (b) shenanigans by competitors and rivals. It would be most odd if someone wouldn't have published something warning people not to get two same-named roses mixed up, especially as one was a sparse bloomer, indeed perhaps a once-bloomer. That, and 'Animating' (in whatever form) is a most odd name for a rose (could the Chinese equivalent, with different naming traditions, have been the original name back in its place of origin?). That two roses at the same time would manage independently to have the same weird name seems unlikely; that someone would attempt a rip-off by knowingly naming another rose the same would be lunacy, given what I stated above, that the rose folks of that time were pretty sharp-eyed (especially when dealing with a comparatively new, exciting, and so closely-watched category like Chinas which had quite a limited number of varieties at that time to deal with)--the fraud would be detected without much delay, and the fraudster denounced. I tend to think that the range of differences found would more likely be due to cultural factors--own-root/grafted, grown outdoors/grown in a glass-house, weather here/weather there, even perhaps just the simple amount of skill or lack of it for particular growers.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Where can I find this rose, I desperately want to add to my garden
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
The description is wrong. It says 'Cruenta' is the purple-red rose, and this one is described as pinkish red.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 7 posted
3 FEB 14 by
jedmar
|
We are following the early 19th century descriptions, which vary from purplish red to blush.
|
REPLY
|
|
lol my mind is blown. I'm just going to have to tell myself that the lack of optometry science back then is the culprit :] ...or roses got misplaced over time. I think the former is more poetic though.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 7 posted
4 FEB 14 by
jedmar
|
I have seen that what we would call deep pink today was sometimes called red back then. The variance purplish red to blush is admittedly too large. Possibly 'Animating' was mislabeled even then. We certainly need a few more early references to pinpoint the true colour.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#4 of 7 posted
8 FEB 19 by
CybeRose
|
Buist's 'Animated' is not the same as Knight's 'Animating'.
Buist's had the unusual habit of closing at night.
Knight's was possibly a cross between the Crimson China and the Blush Tea scented. It had a distinctive odor of its own, that inspired Vibert to name a Noisette 'odeur de Bengale animating'.
|
REPLY
|
|
The Horticultural Cabinet, UK 1836 lists under China Roses, p245:
'Animating' purplish red. cupped and small.
In John Cree's Addlestone Nursery, Chertsey, Surrey 1832, I have a photocopied (modern looking) listing headed up Trees and Shrubs, which shows on p33 (and I have no idea what the figures in brackets are):
72. Lee's Blush (10 blush)
73 New large blush (10 blush)
74 Ronald's Superb (10 pale pink)
75 Ronald's Red (10 dark rose)
76 Cabbage China (10 blush)
77 Purple China (6 purplish rose)
78 Animating (10 pale pink)
79 Dwarf China (3 pale pink)
80 Bengalensis alba (16 blush)
81 Bengal florida (15 purple pink)
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#6 of 7 posted
8 FEB 19 by
jedmar
|
The same systematic is also in "Hortus Addlestonensis". The figure after the name is the height in feet.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#7 of 7 posted
8 FEB 19 by
CybeRose
|
I have noticed that some of these early writers neglected to mention that a particular variety is changeable ... passing from light to dark in a few days. They may refer only to the color on opening.
Ventenat wrote of the plant he called Rosa diversifolia, "*...its color varies from the softest pink to the darkest purple." It took me a while to accept that he meant the color changed from light to dark. And this fact neatly explained why some other nurserymen of the 19th century read the name as "Diversiflora". And it also leads me to suspect that this old variety is still around as 'Emmie Gray'.
Prince (1823)
239, —, blush changeable, or diversiflora,, $1.
Mills (1826)
441 † Bluish do. or diversiflora, variegated cerulea
[Mills' inclusion of 'cerulea' is possibly due to Trattinnick (1823), who deepened the confusion by suggesting that 'Animating' was the so-called "blue rose" that had been "imported from China about the year 1810, to the gardens of Lord Milford," according to H. C. Andrews (1828).]
Redouté, in his 'Choix de soixante roses' (1836), illustrated 'Bengale à grandes feuilles' (L. Noisette) with no indication that the flowers changed from pale to dark. Singer (1885) wrote, "...d'un rose tendre lors de l'épanouissement, puis carmin, et enfin passant au pourpre foncé."
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
The The New York Farmer and American Gardener's Magazine, Volume 1, p. 206 (June 1835)
Mr. Buist has a fine collection of Roses, among which are some of the most beautiful kinds; he also has raised several from seed, which are known by the names of R. Websterii, Jacksonii, purpurea, &c. The animated Daily is a very desirable rose, as it retains its form for many days, closing up every night, a peculiarity quite uncommon.
[Buist's Animated is not the same as Animating]
|
REPLY
|
|
|
