'Mlle Cécile Brunner, Cl.' rose Reviews & Comments
HelpMeFind's future is in your hands - Please do not take this unique resource for granted.
Your support of HelpMeFind is urgently needed. HelpMeFind, like all websites, needs funding to survive. We have set a premium-membership yearly subscription amount as low as possible to make user-community funding viable.
We are grateful to the many members who have signed up so far, but the number of premium-membership members remains too small for us to sustain the current support and development level. If you value HelpMeFind and want to see it continue we need your support too.
Yearly membership is only $2.00 per month and adds a host of additional features, and numerous planned enhancements, to take full advantage of the power and convenience of HelpMeFind. Click here to start your premium membership..
We of course also welcome donations of any amount. Click here to make a donation. Donations of $24 or more receive a thank-you gift of a 1-year premium membership.
As far as we have come, we feel HelpMeFind is still in its infancy. With your support we have so much more to accomplish.
Am I right in thinking that there are two climbing sports of Cecile Brunner, one of which, the California sport of 1894, blooms only in summer, and another, the one often confused with 'Bloomfield Abundance' (would that be the Australian sport, or yet another one) which is remontant?
I did grow a Cl. Cecile Brunner in CA in the 1990s which did bloom in summer only.
I grow the 1894 'Cecile Brunner Climbing' (spring only and really tall) on its own roots across the path, perhaps 10 metres from 'Spray Cecile Brunner' (repeat flowering and not quite so tall) also on its own roots. Here the climber always flowers exactly four weeks earlier than 'Spray Cecile Brunner'. This last rose, SCB, used to be known incorrectly as 'Bloomfield Abundance'.
Because I live in Australia, I presumed that my plant was the 1894 Richard Ardagh's sport. However, note this was a presumption only. There are photos of my plant in that file which show the more-or-less single bloom style of spring-flowering, rather than the massive spray inflorescence of the repeat flowering 'Spray Cecile Brunner'. As more than a century has passed since the climber was discovered in Australia by Richard Ardagh, and the Cecile Brunner tribe were fairly unstable in the first place, I don't think we shall ever know the difference between Hosp's (American, 1894) and Ardagh's (Australian, 1904) sports.
Probably not. It does seem that there are least two climbing sports still, or recently, in commerce, one of which blooms once and the other of which is remontant.
Harkness has it that the American sport blooms once, so I assumed it was the American one which I had. I think mine bloomed in mid to late June, as I recall.
From my earlier comment: Here the climber [Cecile Brunner Cl.] always flowers exactly four weeks earlier than 'Spray Cecile Brunner'.
My experience of the timing with the climber is apparently the same with the bush 'Mlle. Cecile Brunner'.
1979 New Zealand Rose Annual p45. Old Timer. Roses of the Past. 'Bloomfield Abundance'' is sometimes confused with this rose ['Cecile Brunner']. Though some say this is a sport of 'Cecile Brunner' there are several signficant differences including a totally different flowering season, the initial flush of 'Bloomfield Abundance' being a month later than that of 'Cecile Brunner'.
FWIW, my Climbing Cecile B. has been blooming sporadically over the summer- it has flowers on it now, but they are rather petite in the heat... I expect to see more and larger flowers if it ever gets cooler. I do not know the provenance of my clone; I took cuttings from a friend's rose several years ago. I seem to recall that Kim Rupert said that one of the California gardens (the Huntington?) had (has?) a large climber that blooms most of the year. Mine could be related, or Mlle Cécile may have sported remontant climbers more than once. I also have Spray Cécile; the buds, bracts and foliage are somewhat different from the climbing form, but the flowers are alike. Both of these roses are still young, so I have no first-hand information about ultimate size, although I understand that both forms will get quite large in a congenial situation. Somehow, I do not have the original bush form. Virginia
No, my Spray Cecile is still quite young- she has put on some growth this year, but this past spring, I didn't get much bloomage. Next spring, I might remember to check that out. Virginia
Do recall the source of your C. CB? Mine was a cutting from a friend's yard, probably purchased at a retail nursery and not from a specialty mail order vendor.
Mine was also a cutting from a friend whose late wife collected old roses. I have no idea if it's a rose she rustled locally, or where it came from, sorry.
I doubt it could flourish where I live now. I do intend to be trying some polyanthas which are reputed to be hardy to zone 5. My 'Anna Vena' grew back and bloomed this year but we did have a fairly mild winter last year.
Hopefully, a mild winter (or two) will be enough of a foundation for Alice V. to survive colder winters there.
Climbing Cecile is a tough old thing, but I don't know how hardy she'd be. I wonder if the once-bloomer would be hardier; I do suspect that she's more inclined to assume monstrous proportions than her ever-blooming counterpart?
There are definitely different clones of "climbing" Cecil Brunner out there. The one I most often see planted is a house swallower -- it will grow easily up and over a two story house. It flowers magnificently in the spring, but only produces the odd flower thereafter, putting all its energy into making huge new canes. Then there are the other clones that don't seem nearly so rampant, growing only to 15', though definitely a "climbing" CB. These seem to flower almost continuously, though the spring flush is definitely the most spectacular. Perhaps this is the "Everblooming Climbing Cecil Brunner" that I see available at some nurseries. In any case, Cecil Brunner has produced a multitude of sports that vary in growth habit not flowers. Some of them have been given separate names (Bloomfield Abundance) but most of them have not be so recognized. I think it would make an interesting study to round up all these seemingly different clones, grow them side by side, and see just how many there really are.
How much does it need to be pruned? I'm really asking whether the plant is too large for its location or whether you think it needs to be pruned for the health of the plant.
Since it doesn't repeat well, it is best to prune after the spring flush, if you can wait. That way you won't be pruning off this year's bloom. If the rose is too large for it's location and if it is already well-established, you can surely prune it out of the way. I strongly suggest you study the plant and start by removing the oldest, least productive wood. It's tempting to only cut back the vigorous new shoots that are in the way, but that only assures that your rose will eventually be working on ever older and older canes. Take off the oldest, least productive wood first and then shape what remains.
If the plant isn't in the way, the only pruning it really needs is the removal of old, dead or damaged canes. Since a very large rose like this builds on top of itself, that can be a real challenge!
Reply
#2 posted
5 MAY 08 by
Unregistered Guest
Thank you so much for your answer--it was very easy to understand, with enough detail so I could figure out how it applies to my rose.
