|
|
'Léon XIII' rose Reviews & Comments
-
-
|
The breeder's description gives the parentage as 'Alba rosea x Sylphide'.
From page 76 of the 1891 Rosen-Zeitung.
|
REPLY
|
|
That's different. Reference added.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 6 posted
19 APR 18 by
 HubertG
|
Here's the full description from the same source:
"Neuste Rosen für 1892 (Beschreibungen der Züchter)
Züchter: Soupert & Notting - Luxemburg ...
5. Léon XIII. Strauch kräftig, hellgrüne Belaubung; Blume gross, gefüllt, in Büscheln blühend, 5 bis 6 Blumen auf jedem Zweige, schalenförmig; Farbe glänzend porzellanweiss, sehr zart gelb nuanciert im Zentrum. Varietät extra. (Alba rosea x Sylphide.)"
My translation:
Newest roses for 1892 (descriptions of the breeders)
Breeder: Soupert & Notting - Luxembourg
5. Léon XIII. Bush vigourous, light green foliage; Flower large, double, blooming in clusters, 5 to 6 flowers on each shoot, shallowly cupped; Colour lustrous porcelain white, nuanced with very delicate yellow in the centre. Exceptional variety. (Alba rosea x Sylphide.)
[Of the other four roses from Soupert & Notting described, three also have their parentages given.]
|
REPLY
|
|
It's hard to tell what's going on with the parentage. In 1892, the Journal of Roses, giving "the descriptions of them copying verbatim [*textuellement*] the prospectus addressed to us, leaving all responsibility to the breeders" (the implication being that the prospectus was from the breeder), gives the parentage as 'Anna Olivier' x 'Earl of Eldon'. (Journal of Roses, 1892, p. 138 (for the "textuellement" comment) and p. 139 (for the variety's description)). I note that, the same year, Tea 'Léonie Osterrieth', also from S&N, has parentage 'La Sylphide' x 'Alba Rosea'. Maybe it's worth noting that Soupert & Notting, in listing their own varieties, would have 'Léon XIII' and 'Léonie Osterrieth' adjacent; the eye could easily skip. In his 1893 catalog, Lambert repeats the Olivier/Eldon parentage, and doesn't change/correct it in 1894.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#5 of 6 posted
7 JUN by
Lee H.
|
Just FYI, the same parentage is repeated in the 1894 Journal.
|
REPLY
|
|
Thanks--much appreciated!
|
REPLY
|
|
