|
|
"Ruth Spencer’s Chowerup Pink HT" rose Reviews & Comments
-
-
|
The latest photo of this rose triggered a memory for me - "Bishop's Lodge Roset's Rose".
Ozoldroser (May 2, 2015) advises that it appears to be the same as other Australian foundlings "Adolphus Marks", "Annie Norris" and "William Whaite" (all Rookwood).
Jack Sampson's found HT "Beechworth" may have been the same.
Unfortunately there aren't good comparison pics of "Roset's Rose", but it may be worth looking at.
|
REPLY
|
|
The bud photos seem similar. Can you ask around about any mildew on this rose. ‘Killarney’ was most susceptible, but I have never seen any on “Ruth Spencer’s Chowerup pink HT”. However my garden doesn’t really suffer from mildew.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
The long, pointed bud is really quite distinct on this variety. It's the kind of feature that I imagine might be included in early catalogue descriptions under its original name. It might be helpful in its identification.
|
REPLY
|
|
it certainly might be. I have never really noticed the buds on the budded plant being as long as the own root potted plant showed recently. But agree, it is something to watch for. (I will contact you in May for a postal address, but you can start preparing a planting hole fairly soon. A cutting grown plant has your name on it. )
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 11 posted
13 FEB 20 by
 HubertG
|
Patricia, many thanks, I'm looking forward to it (and whatever fragrance it might have).
Do you think it is a variety that might have had exhibition potential in its time? I ask because I'm trying to look up old varieties that are potential identities, and when I look at the photo of 8 March 2014 (id 244836) it seems to have pretty good form in its opening bud stage, even though other photos show it quite loose in its open stage.
|
REPLY
|
|
No I don’t think it is an exhibition rose, simply because it doesn’t keep its early shape for long.
I did a most interesting piece of research once on the roses recommended by the National Rose Society of Western Australia from 1933 to 1969. It showed the exhibition and garden roses and I managed to squeeze in a very basic colour guide as well. Because they were recommended, I am presuming that more of them were planted and the chances of some of them surviving is probably quite high. From that listing there are a few that I need to look at more closely, but really, at this stage none of these really jumps out at me.
Ballet 1858
Editor McFarland 1931
Eiffel Tower 1963
First Love 1950
Korovo 1931
Margaret 1954
Michelle Meilland 1945
Show Girl 1945
Silver Lining 1958
Sterling 1933
|
REPLY
|
|
Not Mrs. Georgia Chobe. See refs for that rose, and main page for "Ruth Spencer's Chowerup Pink Tea".
But thanks for the possibility (as evidenced in your refs)
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#5 of 11 posted
15 FEB 20 by
HubertG
|
Yes, I was considering 'Mrs. Georgia Chobe' but that seems to be more of an exhibition type.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#6 of 11 posted
29 FEB 20 by
HubertG
|
Patricia, how do you think your rose might compare with 'Mrs. E. Willis'? I can see similarities in the two photos here. I'm not sure about the references to salmon pink though.
|
REPLY
|
|
Could be, but only in the hot summer blooms of the own-root “Ruth Spencer” have I seen the centre stamens displayed so prominently as in one of the photos of ‘Mrs. E. Willis’. In 1938 Alister Clark called that rose refined and “Ruth Spencer’s” ages in the way of an unmade bed.
Recently I saw a cluster of three opening blooms on the Fortuneana rootstocked rose and thought, if I was an exhibitor, I would like to have shown that cluster. So perhaps I was too hasty in saying it might not have been an exhibition rose.
Something a few days ago made me look at “Ruth Spencer’s” and think of Sunny South’. It may have been a slight squaring of the petal edge that made me think so. I have followed this line of thought and looked at the ‘Sunny South’ parentage and descendants but have drawn a blank.
Perhaps my foundling may be the same as one of the two ‘Mrs. Fred Danks’ at Thomas for Roses, as mentioned in the 2005 reference for that rose. We could be seeing a clear difference in the two versions, rather than just “one more pinkie”.
‘Mrs. Fred Danks’ (white filaments)
‘Mrs. Fred Danks’ (red filaments)
What colour do you make of the filaments of Mrs. Fred Danks’ at the Alister Clark garden at Bulla? See here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Alister_Clark_roses#/media/File:Mrs_Fred_Danks_ACMRG_March_2011.jpg
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#8 of 11 posted
1 MAR 20 by
HubertG
|
It's hard to determine the colour of the filaments from that photo. To me they look whitish with a definite pink cast. That probably doesn't help.
I should add that looking at the two photos here of 'Mrs. Fred Danks' in the Alister Clark Garden uploaded by hmfusr on 15 Nov 13, there's something about them that doesn't really gel with me as looking like the 'Mrs. Fred Danks' that I know - they're rather high-centred, outer petals reflex differently, looks rather double, no white petal edges. I'm not saying it's the wrong rose; maybe those particular blooms were just atypical. However I couldn't rule out a mixup, especially as I notice that the photo of 'Amy Johnson' in your link above doesn't appear to be the 'Amy Johnson' that I grow.
|
REPLY
|
|
HubertG, how did you get on with the small plant of “Ruth Spencer’s Chowerup Pink HT”? Did it grow for you?
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#10 of 11 posted
26 JAN 23 by
HubertG
|
I'll have to check it again. I did make the mistake of planting it near a fence within access from a possum or two, but recently my garden has been like a jungle of weeds owing to time constraints from caring for my elderly mother. I haven't been able to care for the garden properly for the last couple of years. I'll let you know, Patricia.
|
REPLY
|
|
If you find anything left of it, I think it may be either ‘Killarney’ 1898, ‘Double Killarney’ 1907, or ‘Dark Pink Killarney’ 1910. There are quite a few UK Annual references I need to type up yet to get a clearer picture of which one.
|
REPLY
|
|
