The earliest references for this rose all call it a Hybrid China or Bengal, not a Noisette. A few later references call it a Noisette. Possibly there was a Noisette of the same name, or maybe just a difference in opinion about how the same rose should be classed?
I think the description page should say this is a Hybrid China; I don't know if the rose described as a Noisette is the same, but a tricky bit is that the earliest references say 'Violet sans Aiguillons' has a uniformly deep violet bloom. while a few other references describe a violet rose that has a crimson center (at least when the bloom first opens).
Also, just to confuse things further, the 1861 German reference is the only one to describe this as a climbing rose, but it doesn't class the rose as a Hybrid China or a Noisette.
Agreed. All the contemporary sources state that this is a hybrid china of uniform (dark) violet colour. Only Singer in 1885, who probably hasn't seen this rose in natura, and later authors claim it is a purple/crimson noisette.
I am not sure,there is only this one reference which states climber. It is possibly a shrub which can be trained as a climber, but as it is lost, it does not make much sense to add that.
But what if it is not? It is highly likely that an 1828 rose is long gone, but I think Virginia might be considering 'Violet sans Aiguillons' for "Matchmaker"
