HELPMEFIND PLANTS COMMERCIAL NON-COMMERCIAL RESOURCES EVENTS PEOPLE RATINGS
|
|
|
'Spray Cécile Brunner' rose Reviews & Comments
-
-
Initial post
29 JAN 21 by
Nadene
|
Hi,
Is anyone able to help me with identification for this rose please. Records for the Rex Hazlewood Garden in Canberra label the location as "Cecile Brunner, White". Volunteers in the garden recall that the original rose had died many years ago and had been replaced. The rose there now stands around 2.5m high with healthy growth. It is similar to another rose in the garden which had originally been labelled as Bloomfield Abundance. It is quite possible it has been an incorrect replacement because it does not fit into the theme for that particular garden bed.
|
REPLY
|
|
Perhaps ‘Spray Cecile Brunner’ (which used to known incorrectly as ‘Bloomfield Abundance’).
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 13 posted
29 JAN 21 by
Nadene
|
Thanks Patricia,
I forgot to mention in the previous post that the rose labelled Bloomfield Abundance I have changed to Spray Cecile Brunner. With this rose looking similar I had thoughts of it being Spray Cecile Brunner too.
Thankyou.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 13 posted
30 JAN 21 by
Duchesse
|
apparently Bloomfield Abundance has the five brothers story about the sepals. Two bearded, two not, one half and half. I'm not sure but I think I can see them in the picture. Just had the pleasure of seeing this TREE in Bonita's garden. Over 2m tall, on a single tree trunk of a stem.
|
REPLY
|
|
Duchesse, the original Bloomfield Abundance’ bred by Captain George C. Thomas (United States, 1920) was a floribunda. It was lost for many years but found in California in 2012 by Judy Dean and Fred Boutin. (Read the comments in Bloomfield Abundance for a better understanding).
That great big bush that we had been incorrectly calling ‘Bloomfield Abundance’ has been determined to be ‘’Spray Cecile Brunner’. (See the 2004 reference in ‘Spray Cecile Brunner’). 2m tall is about normal for ‘Spray Cecile Brunner’,
That five brothers story about the sepals.......closely look at the sepals of a few roses - that is how most are arranged. The beards are in various sizes so you need to look closely. Actually, I just went out into the midday sun to check a few blooms. I wasn’t very scientific about it (too hot) but there was a white rugosa that didn’t seem to have any beards, Maman Cochet just a whisker, and “Kew Cemetery Pink” quite visible. Interesting.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#5 of 13 posted
30 JAN 21 by
Nadene
|
Hi all,
I had returned to the Rex Hazlewood Garden to have another look at the flower buds and sepals etc after reading the last post. Interestingly I came across this mutation. I have seen flower bud distortions before but this is the first time I have seen it where another full flower bud has formed. I noticed it in both the Spray Cecile Brunner plants in the two different sections of the garden. Is this something this rose is known to do? Or perhaps I was just in the right place at the right time. Is it of any interest that I may post it on the main rose page / photos?
|
REPLY
|
|
See RESOURCES / GLOSSARY / PROLIFERATION.
It is also of interest to look at RESOURCES / Q&A FORUM /and type in...proliferation.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#7 of 13 posted
31 JAN 21 by
Nadene
|
Spray Cecile Brunner is an absolute champion at this - you see it reasonably often. I've heard it referred to as 'steepling' too.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#9 of 13 posted
5 MAR 21 by
Duchesse
|
Given that Bonita had travelled to the USA and knows her roses, I would stick to the belief that hers is a true Bloomfield Abundunce.
|
REPLY
|
|
Abundance....dance, not dunce. Although......
|
REPLY
|
|
The likelihood that anyone in Aus has a true Bloomfield Abundance, labelled as such, is minimal. It might be still here and lost its name, of course.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#12 of 13 posted
28 MAY 21 by
Duchesse
|
don't pick on spellings Patricia. It's really petty.
|
REPLY
|
|
I am of an old school and I think spelling is extremely important.
I don’t always get it right either, but know well the value of the EDIT POST button.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Could the name 'Climbing Cecile Brunner' possibly be added to the description page as an alternative name to 'Spray Cecile Brunner' please? I'm sure this is simply an oversight, especially as it appears to be the original name.
|
REPLY
|
|
I would be most reluctant to even consider that. It seems rather retrograde and would certainly lead to confusion. The rose was originally called a climber, but even as early as 1906 and 1915 they realised that it was a big shrub.
(There is actually a hidden synonym in this ‘Spray Cecile Brunner’ file of Cécile Brunner, Cl. (climbing polyantha, Ardagh, 1902), but it doesn’t seem to be effective for me.)
|
REPLY
|
|
I would see the Climber and the Spray form as two different roses. The Spray one has long sepals, and in the Adelaide Hills starts flowering later.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 4 posted
2 FEB 21 by
 HubertG
|
OK, but was it (to quote the description page) really "Introduced in Australia by C. H. Halstead in 1904 as 'Spray Cécile Brunner'."?
|
REPLY
|
|
Obviously not. HelpMeFind’s capacity is not that sophisticated.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
1978 New Zealand Rose Annual
p94. For Hybridisers. Are you short of stock for budding those promising seedlings on to? A tip advocated in The Journal of Agriculture some years ago was to bud on to a cane of Climbing Cecile Brunner. When the bud has taken the cane is cut off and a cutting (or cuttings) is made of the portion containing the budwood. This is then planted in a suitable corner. The bark lifts easily on this cultivar and it roots very easily.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Continuing the thread from ‘Other’, April 10, 2009
[in passing.... the 1922 reference for the Ardagh sport is most interesting] – Patricia Routley
From the descriptions in the reference section on Ardagh's Cecile Brunner it sounds more like 'Spray Cecile Brunner'. Large shrub,suitable for hedging etc. The early Australian references that I have also describe C.B.Climbing in a similar manner. Is it possible that the Australian version was 'Spray Cecile Brunner'? – Sandie Maclean
Hello Sandie,
That’s what I found most interesting about the 1922 reference too. I think that with this rose, anything is possible. Because the official ‘Spray Cecile Brunner’ didn’t hit the market until 1941, I think the answer has to be that Cecile was genetically unstable to start with. If you have a look at the first generation descendants from it, you will see lots of similar roses (Helpmefind, it would be great to see the sports designated somehow in the descendant listing), One most visible sign of that unstableness is the way it sometimes produces a flower from the middle of an existing flower.
You mentioned elsewhere that you had received four 'Spray Cecile Brunner's when ordering 'Climbing Cecile Brunner'. Do you still have room? Would you like some cuttings of my climber (provenance: the Pinjarra Heritage Rose Garden, bed 2, site 1). I’ve had ‘Cecile Brunner Climbing’ now for 12 years and it flowers weeks before ‘Spray Cecile Brunner’ in spring, but not too much at all after that. Both roses are on opposite sides of the path so the obvious differences in habit between the two plants is quite plain to see.
Patricia
|
REPLY
|
|
Even though the official 'Spray Cecile Brunner' didn't turn up until 1941 I am inclined
towards thinking that Ardagh's version was also the 'Spray' version.
As mentioned before-quite a few Australian Nurseries sell the 'Spray' version as the climber.
Interesting what you say about the tendancy to proliferation with 'Spray Cecile Brunner"-I actually used photos of one of the flowers to demonstrate proliferation on
a website.I also used a photo of a flower from the same bush to demonstrate fasciation.
A very obliging rose for showing anomalies. :)
I would love the REAL climbing C.B.-thanks for the offer.
|
REPLY
|
|
I've just chanced on another Australian reference to "Climbing Cecile Brunner" that definitely sounds like the spray form and not the climber.
It's from a book by Harry Hazlewood's brother, Walter, published in 1968 and reads:
"That gem, Cecile Brunner, seems to be in a class of its own. It is not a Wichuraiana or a Polyantha. There is a dwarf form and a so-called climber. The dwarf grows to 3 or 4 feet high. The climber sends out long shoots, but is not a climber in the ordinary sense of the term. It is mostly grown as a tall bush and the long shoots are tipped back. Sprays of bloom about 2 feet long or more can be had from the climber and it is a great favourite with the florists. A good clean foliage is another thing in its favour."
I've added this ref to the Cecile Brunner and Clg Cecile Brunner (Ardagh) entries.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 7 posted
11 APR 09 by
Cass
|
Where does Kerschaw fit in with yet another Climbing Cécile Brunner? Nomenclature de tous les noms de roses connus shows Kerschaw, 1904, for Cl. Cécile Brunner. I cannot find Journal des roses 1905 online, but the little I can read in google reports "Kerschaw, horiticulteur à Melbourne."
|
REPLY
|
|
Cass, That spelling of Kerschaw is a little wrong I think.
All I have been able to find on the man and any connection with 'Cl. Cecile Brunner' is as follows:
1933 Australian Rose Annual
p24. Harry H. Hazlewood. Rose Stock Experiments. Climbing Cecil Brunner was used experimentally by the late Mr. G. W. Kershaw and good results were obtained.
1999. Peter Cox Australian Roses
p30. Although mentioned in Modern Roses 8, we have no other details concerning G. W. Kershaw.
2002 Richard Aitken & Michael Looker Oxford Companion to Australian Gardens
p431. The National Rose Society of New South Wales (1913) was founded by .....with commercial growers George Wilkinson Kershaw (1861-1924) and......
Brent C. Dickerson Old Roses: The Master List 2nd ed.
p463 ‘Mrs. G. W. Kershaw’ (dark rose pink. HT. A. Dickson, 1906.
Patricia
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#4 of 7 posted
12 APR 09 by
Cass
|
Thanks, Patricia. Brent Dickerson also mentions Kershaw in connection with Cl. Cécile Brunner. What I'm looking for is a link between Kershaw and Ardagh, one perhaps the discoverer, the other the introducer.
|
REPLY
|
|
Brent has also picked up that mis-spelling of Kerschaw (Old Roses: The Master List 2nd ed. p131.
The only link to date is that they both lived in Australia and were rosarians.
Ardagh lived in Victoria and Kershaw in New South Wales.
Ardagh had his own nursery so it seems unlikely he would have given 'Cl. Cecile Brunner' to Kershaw to introduce.
|
REPLY
|
|
Yet another clear description (and an earlier date) that indicates that Richard Ardagh's plant was what we now know as 'Spray Cecile Brunner':
1915 W E. Lippiatt’s General catalogue.
p27. Climbing Cecil Brunner (R. Ardah, 1902). A sport of extraordinary vigour, carrying the flowers sometimes 18in. to 20in. above the foliage; blossoms are produced both singly and in large trusses, but no larger in flower than the dwarf. Lasts in flower a long time (Climbing Fairy.) Not exactly a true climber, but makes a very large bush.
|
REPLY
|
|
|
