@purplerallim Ok, I've found your earlier photos of this mystery rose, the one against the wall and two photos of blooms.. Your new information provided about the rose leads me to think it is actually 'Claire Austin' [2007], which is against what Lizzie and Tack have said, and they have it, but I don't think that bloom with the button eye is typical from what you're saying.. I've looked at the foliage, bud clusters and the receptacle and to me they match 'Claire Austin'.. also the growth habit, and your description of what the rose usually looks like..
I feel sure it's an Austin and that would be the only one possible for the time period and type..
Right @Marlorena I will take your word for it! I can vouch that roses can take different forms, re- Sheila's Perfumed last year, that looked nothing like it's former years , it is possible. Thankyou.😁
@ElbFee thank you for the advice. I agree that Chandos is very upright in growth. Your weeping standard looks amazing. To determine the height of my standards am I measuring from the soil/crown to the very top of the flowering growth? If so the Graham Thomas standard it is currently 170cm and from what Nollie said I think I will try to grow it as a weeping standard as I have a perfect spot for one. Are there any tips you have for getting it to look like your Musquee SS. Would love to see that in bloom by the way. Thanks
@edhelka yes, there are 2 Reine des Violettes. Both have Millet-Malet 1860 Pius as one parent and a seedling as the other parent. Obviously not the same seedling though. The pics are not pretty, but the colour is accurate. I bought mine as the dark version. Would you say we have the same version?
I think I don't believe this. This is helpmefind page for 'Reine des Violettes', obviously the rose everyone knows under this name and all shops selling 'Reine des Violettes' without no other specification sell this. https://www.helpmefind.com/rose/l.php?l=2.5179 None of the older references (from the 19th century) mentions two types (newer references also don't but they aren't really relevant)- The description given in the oldest references, closest to when it was released (1860s) matches the rose known today as 'Reine des Violettes' very well. Needless to say, this is a very unique rose, both in colour and bloom form. Some gallicas have similar color (not the same though) and form, some portlands like the seedlings of 'Belle de Trianon' share the bloom form but not the colour, and that's basically it. None of these share the growth habit and thornless stems. Among roses currently grown and sold, it is instantly recognizable.
It almost sounds like a made-up modern thing. But...
There is also the parent rose. https://www.helpmefind.com/rose/l.php?l=2.22414.3 Thornless. Very similar bloom form to RdV. HMF mentions: "'Reine de Violettes - helle variante' sold in Germany is possibly Pius IX." and I wouldn't be surprised if it is the case.
There are many mysteries and controversies when it comes to old roses and mistakes happen. It's possible there was a different seedling released in 1860s, somewhat similar to RdV but under a different name (not the same year though because nothing from references from that time matches a possible lighter variant). This wouldn't be RdV though, it would be a completely different rose misidentified for some time as RdV. Or someone found the parent rose and misidentified it as RdV.
Either way, the rose marketed as RdV light variant is a found rose that maybe is and maybe isn't related to the real RdV. It could even be several roses sold under this name (HMF also mentions this option). Without genetic testing, there is no way how to be sure.
There is only one 'Reine de Violettes'. Whatever the light variant is.
I like doing rose research so if you have any sources opposing this or offering more info, I would love to see it.
Some photos of my RdV because posting so long test without photos would be wrong
As a side note, the references can be good fun. This was written in a gardening magazine in 1851: "I am inclined to think, this much-be-praised Rose will have to be put into the Rose grower's no-go drawers. It is very vigorous, quite smooth in the wood; it comes out a good colour, but immediately commences to fade; on the second day is quite dingy, and dies off into a very poor slaty thing- such at any rate is my experience of it." And in the same magazine, in 1961: "But there is one Rose which was lauded up as the best Rose of the season- Reine des Violettes- which, I believe, will be found to be not worth growing. Triomphe d'Amiens, on the contrary, is a very novel flower- of good substance, and very singularly mottled and barred with deep crimson on a lighter crimson ground." The same author, different magazine: "I think those slaty colours are much more according to French than to English taste." It looks like it had its hater. Now imagine this guy could see 'Minerva'.
Scented Garden on the fence and Starlight Symphony on the trellis .
Your front garden is lovely, too- down to the white picket fence. Starlight Symphony looks terrific against the brick. And thank you for the "orange blue and white" tribute to Luton Town FC in the second picture. It was eerily prescient of you to predict our wild success this year and to plant for it.
@WAMS I like them all so it is hard to recommend any in particular! The Portland roses perhaps best rival modern roses in reblooming, superior health and compact form. Especially Rose de Rescht, Rose du Roi, Indigo and Jacques Cartier.
@Imprevu I thought it was easy! The stems were bendy and easy to tie along the wires. This was just the first year, so the main canes were easy to identify. I guess second year and figuring out what will be the new growth to tie in and what to take out will be more interesting (:
Posts
Ok, I've found your earlier photos of this mystery rose, the one against the wall and two photos of blooms..
Your new information provided about the rose leads me to think it is actually 'Claire Austin' [2007], which is against what Lizzie and Tack have said, and they have it, but I don't think that bloom with the button eye is typical from what you're saying..
I've looked at the foliage, bud clusters and the receptacle and to me they match 'Claire Austin'.. also the growth habit, and your description of what the rose usually looks like..
I feel sure it's an Austin and that would be the only one possible for the time period and type..
This is helpmefind page for 'Reine des Violettes', obviously the rose everyone knows under this name and all shops selling 'Reine des Violettes' without no other specification sell this.
https://www.helpmefind.com/rose/l.php?l=2.5179
None of the older references (from the 19th century) mentions two types (newer references also don't but they aren't really relevant)- The description given in the oldest references, closest to when it was released (1860s) matches the rose known today as 'Reine des Violettes' very well.
Needless to say, this is a very unique rose, both in colour and bloom form. Some gallicas have similar color (not the same though) and form, some portlands like the seedlings of 'Belle de Trianon' share the bloom form but not the colour, and that's basically it. None of these share the growth habit and thornless stems. Among roses currently grown and sold, it is instantly recognizable.
The page for the light variant is here:
https://www.helpmefind.com/rose/l.php?l=2.42554&tab=1
Almost no info there and the only reference is 2014 German source.
It almost sounds like a made-up modern thing. But...
There is also the parent rose.
https://www.helpmefind.com/rose/l.php?l=2.22414.3
Thornless. Very similar bloom form to RdV.
HMF mentions: "'Reine de Violettes - helle variante' sold in Germany is possibly Pius IX." and I wouldn't be surprised if it is the case.
There are many mysteries and controversies when it comes to old roses and mistakes happen. It's possible there was a different seedling released in 1860s, somewhat similar to RdV but under a different name (not the same year though because nothing from references from that time matches a possible lighter variant). This wouldn't be RdV though, it would be a completely different rose misidentified for some time as RdV.
Or someone found the parent rose and misidentified it as RdV.
Either way, the rose marketed as RdV light variant is a found rose that maybe is and maybe isn't related to the real RdV. It could even be several roses sold under this name (HMF also mentions this option). Without genetic testing, there is no way how to be sure.
There is only one 'Reine de Violettes'. Whatever the light variant is.
I like doing rose research so if you have any sources opposing this or offering more info, I would love to see it.
Some photos of my RdV because posting so long test without photos would be wrong
As a side note, the references can be good fun. This was written in a gardening magazine in 1851:
"I am inclined to think, this much-be-praised Rose will have to be put into the Rose grower's no-go drawers. It is very vigorous, quite smooth in the wood; it comes out a good colour, but immediately commences to fade; on the second day is quite dingy, and dies off into a very poor slaty thing- such at any rate is my experience of it."
And in the same magazine, in 1961:
"But there is one Rose which was lauded up as the best Rose of the season- Reine des Violettes- which, I believe, will be found to be not worth growing. Triomphe d'Amiens, on the contrary, is a very novel flower- of good substance, and very singularly mottled and barred with deep crimson on a lighter crimson ground."
The same author, different magazine:
"I think those slaty colours are much more according to French than to English taste."
It looks like it had its hater.
Now imagine this guy could see 'Minerva'.
Not sure what took Arthur Bell so long this year
Alnwick rose... candy pink in the shade, rich coral in the sunshine. I love it.
Pope John Paul II from Welling Roses. Very lemony scent... not one I like as it turns out. A bit like an antiseptic kitchen spray.
Sarah from C and K Jones, by contrast, has a wonderful sweet fragrance.
The Lady of Shalott is stooping to hobnob with Gruss an Aachen. Fabulous glowing orange at the moment... almost too bright to look at in the sunshine.
A volunteer sweetpea from last year... think it was from a Royals mix
Kathryn from RV Roger
Forever Royal from RV Roger, first bloom peeping out.... yet another attributable to Marlorena's influence! It is a bit darker in real life.