HelpMeFind Roses, Clematis and Peonies
Roses, Clematis and Peonies
and everything gardening related.
Member
Profile
PhotosFavoritesCommentsJournalCuttings 
HubertG
most recent today HIDE POSTS
 
Initial post yesterday by HubertG
If I was told this was a 19th century French Tea Rose I wouldn't doubt it, that is, just going by the photos here.
REPLY
Reply #1 of 2 posted yesterday by jedmar
The volatile components are closest to Comtesse de Labarthe and Gloire de Dijon.
REPLY
Reply #2 of 2 posted today by HubertG
That's interesting. A lot of the other Chinese roses in that fragrance analysis contain geraniol, nerol and citronellol, which this rose lacks. I do think that at least some of the rediscovered Chinese roses are likely to be old European cultivars which simply lost their name and identity over time.
REPLY
most recent 13 days ago HIDE POSTS
 
Initial post 13 days ago by HubertG
I assume 1789 is just a typo for either 1879 or 1889, but in either case it's interesting in that if the 'Yellow Tea' depicted is 'Parks' Yellow' it was still available at that time. Maybe it was just some other yellow Tea Rose.
REPLY
Reply #1 of 3 posted 13 days ago by Lee H.
It certainly could be Parks, but I looked at several of their catalogs from ca. 1880-1900, and they were listing a generic yellow tea. As they also had many, many named tea varieties, I too find this unusual.
REPLY
Reply #2 of 3 posted 13 days ago by HubertG
Ellwanger, around the same time, refers to Parks' Yellow simply as 'Yellow Tea' but in the Nanz & Neuner it draws comparison to a 'White Tea' and I can't think of any earlier counterpart for that. Perhaps they were both home-grown US Teas.
REPLY
Reply #3 of 3 posted 13 days ago by jedmar
A White Tea or White China was described by Andrews in his Monograph of 1826. This was a side remark to the Yellow China, supposedly bred by Knights from 'Old Blush'. The history of this Yellow vs Park's Yellow is quite a mess.
REPLY
most recent 17 FEB HIDE POSTS
 
Initial post 17 FEB by HubertG
Interesting receptacle.
REPLY
Reply #1 of 5 posted 17 FEB by Patricia Routley
Very.
REPLY
Reply #2 of 5 posted 17 FEB by jedmar
It differs from the rose in commerce and is more like the receptacle of a damask perpetual.
REPLY
Reply #3 of 5 posted 17 FEB by Patricia Routley
Henry Curtis, Beauties of the Rose, 1850 included plates of both Chromatella (a more rounded receptacle) and Solfatare (slim receptacle).
REPLY
Reply #4 of 5 posted 17 FEB by HubertG
Which would be unusual and unexpected in a Tea-Noisette, especially a yellow one. Perhaps it inherits it from one of the early Chinas which are sometimes shown to have those type of slimmer receptacles.
REPLY
Reply #5 of 5 posted 17 FEB by Margaret Furness
We won't know till DNA comparisons are done, whether "Ma Lovelock's" (the putative Rev. T. C. Cole) is the same as Chromatella: but my notes on it say "variable receptacles".
REPLY
most recent 16 FEB HIDE POSTS
 
Initial post 16 FEB by jedmar
The painting is supposedly from 1910.
REPLY
Reply #1 of 1 posted 16 FEB by HubertG
Jedmar, good to know. It may not be our Irene Watts of course but there couldn't have been too many ladies with that name who were in a social position to have their own portrait painted and/or a rose named for them. It would help to know who the lady with the English surname and with a French-bred rose named after her really was. I can't find anything convincing.
REPLY
© 2024 HelpMeFind.com