HELPMEFIND PLANTS COMMERCIAL NON-COMMERCIAL RESOURCES EVENTS PEOPLE RATINGS
|
|
|
Jocelyn Janon 
-
-
|
There was a suggestion some years ago that a true Irene Watts might still exist in New Zealand. What's its current status there?
|
REPLY
|
|
Only saw Pink Gruss an Aachen in NZ.
|
REPLY
|
-
PlantDiscussion id : 122-717
-
|
According to Sisley (1886), 'Anne Marie de Montravel' was raised from a yellowish-white, double-flowered seedling from Rosa polyantha (multiflora) that Sisley gave him.
Rambaux called his little plants Noisettes because they had that look, though they were derived (maternal side from 'Polyantha'.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 25 posted
24 JUL 20 by
jedmar
|
Yes, you can ready the story in The Garden of 1886. All the first Polyanthas were bred from this double white seedling, which was called 'Polyantha alba sarmentosa'. This was actually imported from Japan by Robert Fortune around 1865 and was clearly an older cultivar, perhaps with China genes. For me that is the only explanation why there is a such a great difference between the earlier R. multifora Thunberg cultivars and the later strain of Polyanthas.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 25 posted
24 JUL 20 by
CybeRose
|
Jedmar,
There is more than a little confusion in those late accounts. Sisley was clear that he had the single flowered type. From this he raised several doubles. Seeds from one such plant were given to Guillot, who raised 'Paquerette'. In 1878, Guillot gave his account, but neglected to mention Sisley. He also allowed the reader to assume that the "very sarmentose", double-flowered plant came directly from Japan. Not so.
In the Revue Horticole (1876) we may read that the original type was a "Shrub extremely bushy, very vigorous; nonblooming branches nearly climbing, growing to nearly two meters [ca. 6 feet], in the case of young plants on their own roots;" (Translation from The Old Rose Advisor).
I think it is relevant that the source of Guillot seeds was "very sarmentose", though the original was "nearly climbing".
Sisley (1886) clearly stated that the seed parent of 'Anne Marie de Montravel' was different from the parent of 'Paquerette'. He also wrote:
"Ph. Rambaux exhibited a few seedlings which he referred to as noisettes, because they look like them; but they came from Rosa polyantha, which he wanted to cover up, as most sowers do.
We had the opportunity to see and study the vegetation and flowering of these plants of Mr. Rambaux, and we do not hesitate to declare that all had the facies of teas and noisettes, and that their flowers, which also had the character of those of these two groups, had also the color and the odor."
Around 25 years ago (or so). I crossed Blush Noisette x Popcorn. The latter is a strong Mini-polyantha that looks like a reblooming miniature R. multiflora with semi-double flowers. Most of the seedlings were bushes. But three were very sarmentose. Still growing in buckets, they sent up slender canes six feet or more in length and flowered. Nothing bushy about them.
It seems to me that something in the R. moschata ancestry "clicks" with something in R. multiflora/polyantha to unleash the climbing habit in seedlings. I have seen hundreds of R. multiflora plants, growing along highways or naturalized. The only ones I've seen that could be called "climbing" are those that happen to be growing beside trees or otherwise supported. Only then could they be called "very sarmentose".
bulbnrose.x10.mx/Roses/Rose_Pictures/Rosa/R_multiflora.html
|
REPLY
|
|
A fascinating comment and am trying to follow it all (I have an interest through my foundling “Beryl Turner’s Tiny White” which I believe is ‘Paquerette’).
As far as I can see Guillot sowed seeds in 1869, as well as receiving, c1871 seeds of Sisley’s 1870 plant.
Perhaps Guillot had Polyantha Simplex <1825 which Dickerson says was introduced into France c1862
Perhaps Sisley had Alba nova sarmentosa <1836
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#4 of 25 posted
25 JUL 20 by
CybeRose
|
Sisley stated that he had the simple (single-flowered) form. He raised several double-flowered seedlings from the single. He also distributed the single-flowered form, apparently encouraging other growers to try it for themselves.
In the early days, Sisley seemed to believe that the variations were due to the inherent variability of the species. Later, he was more certain that pollination by other varieties in the garden was responsible.
Sisley claimed that seed from one of his doubles gave Guillot fils Paquerette. Guillot fils insisted, at about the same time, that he had raised a seedling with two rows of petals from the original single. Paquerette (he wrote) was a seedling from his own 2-rowed seeding. I will not take one side or the other on this dispute.
Sisley wrote that he gave a plant with double, yellowish-white flowers to Rambaux. This was to be the parent of Anne Marie de Montravel.
From Sisley's accounts, it is clear that it was the single-flowered form that was distributed widely, and used by various breeders. Being single, this variety was very accepting of foreign (mostly Noisette) pollen. This is pretty much the same story as the early work with Rosa setigera.
I have posted further information from Revue Horticole, 1876, p. 253-256.
bulbnrose.x10.mx/Roses/breeding/SisleyPolyantha1876/SisleyPolyantha1876.html
Karl
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#5 of 25 posted
25 JUL 20 by
jedmar
|
I am still struggling with the timings mentioned for the introduction of the various forms of R. multiflora.
1. Various authors (Krüssman, Joyaux etc) agree that the type species of R. multiflora was only introduced to Europe in the 1860s. This would mean that the 2 two climbers of Wells (1835) cannot be descendant of R. multiflora Thunberg, but maybe of R. multiflora carnea (intr. 1804).
2. Flon obtains in 1824 a white sport of Rose multiflore ordinaire, otherwise same as the mother. This must then be a sport of R. multiflora carnea and a double white - equal to a Multiflora alba plena, which is supposedly only introduced in 1844.
3. If Flon's sport was a white double, it cannot be the 'Multiflora alba simplex' in Noisette's 1826 catalogue. Such a single white multiflora would precede the 1860s import by almost 40 years.
4. According to various sources, Coignet, a French engineer in Japan, sent the seeds of Rosa polyantha (or Rosa multiflora) to Lyon, which were then passed on to Guillot. "Seeds" tells to me that it was not the species which arrived in Lyon, but actually seedlings of some plant in Japan. It could have been R. multiflora, or some hybrid of it.
5. According to Sisley, the seeds were sent by Robert Fortune. Why would Fortune send them to France and not to the RHS? And why are there no conteemporary Britisha ccounts?
6. Carrière mentions in 1868 when describing his Rosa intermedia, that this is from seeds received by André Leroy from China (not Japan). Later in 1876 he sets his Rosa intermedia equal to Rosa Polyantha, using the same drawings. Rosa intermedia is an unresolved taxon according to The Plant List, which however equates Rosa polyantha Sieb. & Zucc. with Rosa multiflora Thunb.
7. In 1873 further seeds arrive from Japan to the Botanical garden of Bordeaux, who experiment with them as understocks. The author in 1879 calls these also Rosa Polyantha, but it is possibly R. multiflora Thunb. seeds This species is still widely used as an understock.
Too many seeds going around! None of this can be R. multiflora with certainty. When was the actual plant (white, single) introduced to Europe?
I think we have here
- various early cultivars of R. multiflora carnea (not R. multiflora Thunb.)
- a or more possible seedling(s) of R. multiflora, which I will group as Rosa Polyantha Hort. (single form)
- from this Rosa Polyantha Hort a double form was bred - Polyantha Alba Sarmentosa?
Comments are welcome!
|
REPLY
|
|
Here are my sums. They might not add up though.
<1824. Pumila Noisette
Bred by Louis Claude Noisette (Feance, before 1824)
Introduced by Margottin pere & fils in circa 1847 as ‘Pumila alba’
<1825. Polyantha Simplex
Bred by unknown Japanese Breeders Japan befire 1825
Introduced in Germany by Philipp von Siebold in 1825 as Polyantha Simplex
(and intro in France around 1862)
Nearly climbing, yellowish white, single
<1836. Alba nova sarmentosa
Bred by Jean Laffay (France, 1830). Bred by Jean-Pierre Vibert (France, before 1836).
Introduced in France by Julien-Alexandre Hardy / Roseraie du Luxembourg in before 1837 as 'Reine blanche'.
Climbing. Semi-double to double.
<1865 Polyantha alba Plena sarmentosa
Bred by Unknown Japanese Breeder(s) (Japan, before 1865).
Discovered by Robert Fortune (United Kingdom 1865)
Climbing. Double. Spring only. (Perhaps with China genes)
============
A TIMELINE
Jedmar’s point 4. Coignet, a French engineer in Japan, sent the seeds of Rosa polyantha (or Rosa multiflora) to Lyon, which were then passed on to Guillot.
1969 Feb. Guillot fils: In February 1869 I [Guillot fils] sowed a great quantity of seed which I had harvested from the variety 'Polyantha', a Multiflora variety originating in Japan which was very much a climber, and non-remontant, having a quite small single white blossom much like that of a bramble or strawberry, and blooming in panicles. Among the many seedlings, there were many which resembled in their wood and foliage multifloras and Noisettes. Quite a few bore flowers of moderate quality, singles, semi-doubles, and full blossoms, with petals as large as the roses of our gardens, and with a variety of colours: yellow, white, bright pink, etc. I didn't have so many as two which resembled their Mother! Among the seedlings which didn't bloom until the second or third year was found one which had blossoms with two rows of petals, an inch to an inch and a half across, not remontant as the others were, but which gave me wonderful seeds which I sowed in February, 1872. Out of this came my dear little 'Pâquerette', which I put into commerce in November, 1875. [1878 ref]
Sisley had the single nearly climbing. [Patricia’s guess Polyantha Simplex]
1870. From this Sisley raised several doubles, all sarmentose, spring only.
c1871. Sisley gives to Rambaux a plant of a yellowish white double rose, spring only. “A different kind from the type”.
c1871. Sisley gives some seed of his 1870 plants to Guillot.
Some of Guillot’s sowings were remontant.
Among them Guillot gets one which has blossoms with two rows of petals, an inch to an inch and a half across, spring only. He sows seeds of this in February 1872. [2001-140 ref]
1872. Guillot got several up.
1875 Guillot sends out Pacquerette, a perpetual bloomer 1” blooms.
1876. “This very double white-blossomed plant looks like a miniature Noisette”. [2001-318 ref]
1879. Rambaux sends out Anne Marie de Montravel.
(Rambaux called his little plants Noisettes because they had that look)
1880-38. Paquerette reference: “ recalling the sweet Rosa Lawrenciana fl. albo or the dwarf Noisette-rose pumila”
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#7 of 25 posted
26 JUL 20 by
CybeRose
|
I found yet another report by Sisley, slightly different from the others. It was published in the Botanical Index, March 1881, then reprinted in the Gardener's Monthly in July, 1881.
bulbnrose.x10.mx/Roses/breeding/SisleyPolyantha1881.html
Sisley wrote, "This species is originally from Japan, from where it was imported to France about fifteen years ago by Robert Fortune, with several others."
It would be interesting to know what those "others" were,
Shirley Hibberd, in his The Rose Book (1874), wrote "Through M. Sisley's kindness R. polyantha is now in my possession.--S. H."
And another note:
geography.name/robert-fortune-collecting-in-northern-china/
"From 1860 to 1862, Fortune was acquiring plants in Japan on his own behalf. On that expedition he did not search for wild plants, but bought cultivated varieties, including chrysanthemums, from Japanese nurseries."
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#8 of 25 posted
26 JUL 20 by
jedmar
|
Yes, I have seen and added that and a number of further references. The single and double forms of Rosa polyantha are now listed separately. The single form Rosa polyantha Hort is probably identical to 'Polyantha simplex', a term used later. Need to assign the descendants of both forms, based mainly on Sisley's articles.
I think introduction of 'Polyantha simplex' by Siebold & Zuccarini in 1825 is not correct. They described a R. polyantha = R. multiflora Thunb. Carrière in 1876 was equating Rosa polyantha Hort. with R. polyantha Sieb. & Zucc, but he had based this only on a statement by Mr. Lavallée, general secretary of the Horticultural Society of France. The latter is a synonym of R. multiflora Thunb., but the plant imported in the 1860s is distinct from the species: only a semi-climber, up to 2 m tall (multiflora is up to 5 m), different hips, tea fragrance....
The import of Polyantha into France is still unclear. The engineer Coignet mentioned as having sent seeds to the Mayor of Lyon turned out to be Jean Sisley's son-in-law! Great! I thought, here is a direct link to Sisley, but Francisque Coignet was in Japan in 1867-77, not 1862. So, the importer might have been Robert Fortune still. Fortune was 1860-1862 in Japan (to be read in "Yedo and Peking") and sent Clematis Fortunei and Standishii from Japan to England in 1860. Could not yet find a direct proof that he also sent Roses in the 1860s. His year of return to the UK in 1862 tallies with the date of the introduction of Polyantha.
Sisley's statements are a bit contradictory too. In 1881 he says that he distributed seeds 5 years ago to other Rosarians - that would have been 1876; in another place he tells that the double form was a seedling or sport from his place and that he gave the double to Guillot (and Dubreuil) - before 1871. It's of course possible that the first Polyanthas were from the double form and the single Polyantha was used for breeding only later. Will check that out tomorrow.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#9 of 25 posted
27 JUL 20 by
CybeRose
|
Wiliam Prince, nurseryman of Long Island of New York, listed "Roxburg's single multiflora"in 1825 and several years after. I suspect that this was a single-flowered Rosa banksiae. There was one circulating at around this time, called single multiflora, or Banksian.
In 1878 Sisley mentioned his son, who was an engineer in Japan. Could this have been his son-in-law, or maybe both were in the same profession.
I wouldn't worry too much about height. The form of R. multiflora I've seen growing in Kansas, Kentucky, Tennessee and Virginia is bushy and not too tall ... unless it finds itself in a shady situation with support.
ps:
New England Farmer 5(40): 316 (Apr 27, 1827)
This rose [Rosa Grevillii] has been introduced in the U. States, and we are informed that about fifty plants are now in the possession of Mr. Prince, of Long Island. Among other roses peculiarly beautiful and of recent introduction, is the single white Multiflora, the double white ever-green Multiflora or Banksian rose.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#10 of 25 posted
27 JUL 20 by
jedmar
|
Jean Sisley's son Léon Sisley was also working in Japan, as an assistant to his brother-in-law Francisque Coignet
ikuno-kankou.jp/en/greats-ikuno/leon-sisley/
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#11 of 25 posted
27 JUL 20 by
HubertG
|
The fact that Sisley's son was an engineer made me look up 'The Engineer's Rose' thinking that perhaps there was a connection. The engineer of that rose was English, so no connection in that sense but under the 1917 reference of that rose was this comment:
"The true Rambler Rose (R. multiflora) is a native of Japan and has single white flowers in large panicles. This was sent to Lyons, France, from Japan in 1862, by Monsieur Coignet, an engineer. The pink-flowered Chinese variety has only just been dignified by a distinctive name."
So it provides a specific date and a Sisley family connection.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#12 of 25 posted
27 JUL 20 by
CybeRose
|
There is always more detail to be discovered, and more confusions to be untangled.
If the single Polyantha was sent to Lyons by Sisley's son-in-law, why would Sisley credit Fortune?
Besides, Jedmar noted above that Coignet was in Japan in 1867-77.
Apparently a later writer put 2 and 2 together and got 5, so to speak.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#13 of 25 posted
27 JUL 20 by
jedmar
|
Quite confusing, isn't it? I have just found a catalogue of von Siebold's specialty nursery in Leiden, Netherlands, which has both R. multiflora Thunb. and R. polyantha S. and Z. on offer - in 1867! The introductory text which is an obituary states that von Siebold opened this nursery in 1844 and continuously received plants and seeds from Japan!
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#14 of 25 posted
29 JUL 20 by
CybeRose
|
And along that line, Walpers (Annales Botanices Systematicae - Volume 1 - Page 971-972, 1849) listed Rosa multiflora Thunbrg. as a variety (beta) of R. polyantha Sieb. et Zucc.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#15 of 25 posted
30 JUL 20 by
jedmar
|
These botanists of old times! Reading the original decriptions makes me very skeptical of their attributions. Take Crépin, "the authority" on roses: In 1869, he publishes a description of R. intermedia Carr., based on a sample with hips plus a twig with leaves and a piece of cane, from the garden of André Leroy. Crépin states it's a new species, no mention of R. multiflora Thunb.
In 1876, Carrière renames his R. intermedia as R. polyantha Sieb. & Zucc. because Mr. Lavallée, general secretary of the Société centrale d'horticulture de France, told him that is the correct name.
Crépin, meanwhile in 1874, tells us that his description of R. intermedia = R. polyantha was actually R. multiflora Thunb., as he had "numerous" materials of R. multiflora to study. The confusion was because there were so little local Japanese samples of this rose in the herbariums and because R. multiflora cultivated in gardens is a cultivated variety which is somewhat different from the true Japanese type! Did he base this on new herbarium samples? Possibly Thunberg's?
A few chance samples define the whole subsequent literature. Has anyone really studied R. multiflora in the wild in Japan, comparing hundreds of sites and thousands of plants? That would give us statistically significant information on this species. This kind of work was done by Hong De-Yuan for peonies and the result is a convincing standard.
Until this happens, I trust more the rose breeders who actually saw something novel in their R. polyantha Hort. and achieved seedlings which were so much different than the first generation descendants of R. multiflora.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#20 of 25 posted
30 JUL 20 by
CybeRose
|
I cannot disagree with you on this matter. In fact, we find similar fragments allegedly representing the "true" Rosa indica.
Here is another tidbit to further stir our confusions:
Garden and Forest
August 20, 1890. p. 404-406.
Rosa multiflora
THIS species is an old inhabitant of the Arnold Arboretum, where it was raised from seed sent by Max Leichtlin in 1874. It was first made known by Thunberg, who discovered it in Japan, and published the first description in his "Flora Japonica," printed in Leipsic in 1784. It has only been known, however, in a living state in recent years, the earliest description of it as a garden plant appearing in the Revue Horticole for 1876, where it is stated to have been introduced into France about 1862 by André Leroy of Anger, who obtained it from China.
So I reread the Revue Horticole story. It is a bit ambiguous. In the first paragraph, the species is said to have been introduced to France from Japan around 1862. No mention of Fortune. Further along we read that Leroy got it from China, as the Garden and Forest article states.
The double pink 'Carnea' was also imported from China.
And another expert who is not always reliable:
Aristocrats of the Garden pp. 8-9. (1917)
Ernest Wilson
In 1878, Prof. R. Smith sent from Japan to Mr. Jenner in England a Rose which the recipient named The Engineer in compliment to the profession of its donor. In course of time this Rose came into possession of a nurseryman named Gilbert who exhibited some cut flowers of it under the above name in 1890, and received an Award of Merit from the Royal Horticultural Society. Soon afterward Messrs. Chas. Turner, of Slough, purchased the stock and changed the name to Crimson Rambler. This Rose is generally assumed to be a hybrid between Rosa multiflora and some China Monthly Rose, but to me this view is untenable. I do not think it has any China Monthly blood in it at all. It has long been cultivated in China and I consider that, like the Seven Sisters Rose, it is a sport from the common, wild pink-flowered China Rambler (R. multiflora, var. cathayensis). These various Chinese Roses were introduced from Chinese gardens where they have been cultivated from time immemorial and their wild prototypes were not discovered, much less introduced, until comparatively recently.
The true Rambler Rose (R. multiflora) is a native of Japan and has single white flowers in large panicles. This was sent to Lyons, France, from Japan in 1862, by Monsieur Coignet, an engineer. The pink-flowered Chinese variety has only just been dignified by a distinctive name.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#21 of 25 posted
30 JUL 20 by
jedmar
|
This thread has very little to do with Anne Marie de Montravel. I will ask if HMF Admin can move it to Rosa polyatha Hort.
|
REPLY
|
|
Sisley's son was a geologist.
|
REPLY
|
|
Just discovered this thread today.
I have just finished an article about this where I explain who is whom. (coming in Roses Anciennes en France, then in Japan).
You are on the right track but all the dates are a bit wrong. Once the article is out I will add my references etc. to HMF.
Also, Rambaux tried to hide the fact he had "polyanthas" (dwarf multifloras) by lying and calling them 'Noisettes'...
In that 'department' we should have only 1 record for
• Rosa multiflora 'Nana'
• Nana, R. multiflora nana
• Rosa multiflora nana perpetua
• 'Garden Party'
• Multiflora nana perpétuelle
• Multiflora nana remontant
• Multiflore nain remontant
• Rosa multiflora nana perpetua 'Garden Party'
• R. multiflora var. nana (hort.)
They should come under "rosiers polyantha nains variés". Leonard Lille sold these roses in seeds paquets. Out of those you would get an array of shapes and forms. And the occasional rambler...
This is why you have different roses depending where you are (and so many different photos).
Plate-Bande is a different plante (at least marketed separately).
I have catalogues from Leonard Lille which I could add in the references. I can't remember how to merge plants...
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#19 of 25 posted
30 JUL 20 by
CybeRose
|
What are the dates for Lille's catalogs?
Mottet, in the The Gardeners’ Chronicle for June 1, 1895, wrote about the strain of precocious little roses developed by Vilmorin, Andrieux & Co.
bulbnrose.x10.mx/Roses/breeding/MottetAngelRoses1895/MottetAngelRoses1895.html
|
REPLY
|
|
"[...] deux Rosiers multiflores nains présentation très intéressante comme exemple d'une précocité extraordinaire. Les deux petits sujets, l'un à fleurs blanches, l'autre à fleurs rouges, ont été semés le 1er mars 1895, en serre chaude; ils ont été repiqués en serre chaude et ont fleuri sous châssis froid le 28 du même mois".
The translation in English is a bit misleading. They just 'presented' these plants (it does not mean they bred them).
|
REPLY
|
|
The oldest references we have for 'Nana' on HMFr are Lille's catalogues where he calls the roses he has for sale "Rosier multiflora nain remontant" or "multiflora nain remontant varié". Not Nana.
I do not understand the logic...
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#24 of 25 posted
31 JUL 20 by
jedmar
|
Most of these names were already together in one listing of Léonard Lille. Merged two further stragglers, so,now all should be together.
|
REPLY
|
|
Rambaux (not his real name) died in July 1878.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#25 of 25 posted
20 AUG 20 by
CybeRose
|
"3. If Flon's sport was a white double, it cannot be the 'Multiflora alba simplex' in Noisette's 1826 catalogue. Such a single white multiflora would precede the 1860s import by almost 40 years."
Compare: Desportes p. 110 1829
Rosier Multiflore-Rosa Multiflora
Introduit en Angleterre, en 1804, par M. Th. Evans; à Paris, par M. Boursault, en 1808.
2470 — de Roxburgh. — Multiflora simple. — Roxburghiana. N. — R. Roxburghii. Hortul. R. Grevillii. Hortul. —*Fl. blanche
I think that "Multiflora alba simplex" could have been a seedling of 'Grevillii'. I don't know who this Roxburgh was, but Prince (1825) listed:
1417 Roxburg's single multiflora do. Roxburgii
Lindley (Rosarum Monographia 1820)
Under Rosa multiflora:
R. Grevillii, known also under the name of Roxburghii, is a weak variety.
[The original Greville rose was very vigorous.]
PS: "Weak" may indicate that the plant was a creeper
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Teriha-No--Ibara.
Drawing by Hokkai Takashima.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
He also wrote
Flore et Pomone lyonnaises, ou Dessins et description des fleurs et des fruits obtenus ou introduits par les horticulteurs du département du Rhône, 1847.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 1 posted
13 JUL 20 by
jedmar
|
Thank you, will check it out!
|
REPLY
|
|
|
