Magazine  (2021)  Page(s) 15. Vol 43, No. 4.  
 
Deane Ross. Mlle Cecile Brunner and her Entourage.....
Maureen Ross, Adelaide Region continues:  
Since Deane's article was published, discussion has followed about Bloomfield Abundance amongst members of Heritage Roses in Australia. I discussed Deane’s research with the late Roy Rumsey (well known Australian nurseryman and rose authority) and he agrees that the [Captain George C.] Thomas Bloomfield Abundance 1920 is definitely NOT the Australian'“Bloomfield'. 

Modern Roses 10 comments that "... the original 'Bloomfield Abundance' is apparently lost. The rose distributed under this name is a sport of 'Cécile Brunner', probably 'Spray Cécile Brunner..."

Editor.  Update. 4. The question of the identity of Spray Cécile Brunner/Bloomfield Abundance was investigated utilizing Randomly Amplified Polymorphic DNA (RAPD) Analysis by Florida Southern College, indicating that the plant currently grown under both names is truly a sport of Cécile Brunner and should be called Spray Cécile Brunner.

Editor:  Climbing Cécile Brunner was discovered by Hosp in the USA in 1894, and by Ardagh in Australia in 1902. The former is a vigorous climber with very little repeat after the main flush of flowers. The Ardagh discovery was released by Halstead in 1904 and early descriptions of it as a large everblooming bush, hedge or pillar rose, indicate it is the same rose we know today as Spray Cécile Brunner.

Magazine  (2019)  Page(s) 51. Vol 41, No. 1.  
 
Margaret Furness.  Tea, Noisette and China Mislabels in Australia.
Poly-Teas and Chinas
The rose I grew up with as Bloomfield Abundance is incorrect, and is now called Spray Cécile Brünner. DNA testing indicates that it is a sport of Mlle Cécile Brünner.

Website/Catalog  (2017)  Page(s) 50.  Includes photo(s).
 
Shrub Cecile Brunner .....Also known as Bloomfield Abundance.

Book  (2007)  Page(s) 131.  
 
Climbing Cécile Brunner (Kerschaw, 1904). Pol. Spt. ‘Mlle Cécile Brunner;’ (Pol). lt pink.

Article (magazine)  (2004)  
 
[RAPD-PCR analysis was used to answer questions regarding the identity of certain varieties of roses.
The question of the identity of ‘Spray Cecile Brunner’/‘Bloomfield Abundance’ was investigated, indicating that the plant currently grown under both names is truly a sport of ‘Cecile Brunner’, and should be classified as ‘Spray Cecile Brunner’.]

The predominantly American view has been that there are three forms of ‘Cécile Brunner’: ‘Cécile Brunner’, a small growing shrub in the Polyantha class cultivated since 1881 (Cairns, 1993); ‘Spray Cécile Brunner’, a much larger growing rose with huge sprays of flowers that repeats well; and ‘Climbing Cécile Brunner’, an even larger rose that usually is once-flowering in the spring. The British consider the ‘Spray’ form actually to be ‘Bloomfield Abundance’, a hybrid of ‘Sylvia’ and ‘Dorothy Page-Roberts’ made by Thomas in 1920 (Cairns, 1993) and classified as a Floribunda. If this view is correct then the DNA profiles of ‘Bloomfield Abundance’ should be dramatically different from the ‘Cécile Brunner’ varieties, as they would be totally different classes of roses (Floribunda versus Polyantha). The RAPD profiles of these varieties show tremendous similarities between the shrub and the climbing form (Fig. 3B). Examination of the profile of ‘Spray Cécile Brunner’/‘Bloomfield Abundance’ shows an almost identical profile to the shrub variety (Fig. 3B). Therefore ‘Spray Cécile Brunner’ is most likely a sport of ‘Cécile Brunner’ and is probably unrelated to ‘Sylvia’ and ‘Dorothy Page-Roberts’.

Complete article is available online – see publication listing for URL

Book  (2 Nov 2003)  Page(s) 20.  
 
Barbara May and Jane Zammit.  Rookwood Cemetery Roses.  
The following roses have been identified at Rookwood, primarily in the old and Heritage listed areas. Bloomfield Abundance

Book  (1999)  Page(s) 132.  
 
Sam Gough, Victoria.  Parentage And All That.
In the case of 'Bloomfield Abundance', it has been suggested that it is either a sport of 'Cecile Brunner' or a cross with this rose as one parent. It is also suggested that the two roses can be differentiated by the sepals, one having foliated the opposite type of sepals regularly occurring. When I raised a number of selfed seedlings from 'Bloomfield Abundance'  all of them were very similar in colour, size and shape of bloom. The style of growth was also similar but in each there was sufficient difference to separate the plants. From these plants I formed the opinion that this variety is the closest to a true breeding rose that I have seen and is the result of the rose 'Cecile Brunner' being selfed, not crossed.

Magazine  (1997)  Page(s) 24-25. Vol 19, No. 1.  
 
Hillary Merrifield. The Many Faces of Mlle. Cécile Brunner.
Though my promised article on the Cécile Brunner group of roses is almost complete, I still need some further information. Perhaps HRA members can help me with the following.
1 It is known that the so-called Bloomfield Abundance (which I feel is a tall shrub form of Cécile Brunner) has been grown in Australia and elsewhere in the world since at least the 1930s. If possible, I would like to hear of examples whose age can be documented or estimated fairly accurately.
2 Just when the name Bloomfield Abundance was wrongly applied to the above rose is uncertain, though I have previously expressed the opinion that it did not come into general usage until the 1960s ( HRA Journal, Vol 18, No 4, p 32). The original Bloomfield Abundance was a 1920 Hybrid Tea, now presumed lost. In my own case, in 1963 I moved into a turn of the century house in Guildford (Perth) which had a garden where none of the roses was dated later than 1930. There was a huge bush of what I thought was Cécile Brunner and I can remember being somewhat surprised to be told a few years later by a rosarian friend that it should be called Bloomfield Abundance. I would be grateful if members could tell me when they first heard that Bloomfield Abundance was the name for this shrub rose.
3 Cécile Brunner has a number of acknowledged sports including a very vigorous climber; Spray Cécile Brunner, which seems to be very like what we have been calling Bloomfield Abundance; white forms of the bush and the climber, and the peach-coloured Mme Jules Thibaud. However, Deane Ross felt that the latter was more likely to be a sport of Perle d’Or than Cécile Brunner (HRA Journal, Vol 15, No 2, pp 24-25).
I suspect that the original low-growing Cécile Brunner may have been a chimera, ie a plant which contains two or more genetically different body tissues. Without going into technicalities here, it is possible for hidden mutations in chimeras to emerge during propagation. In this instance the mutations may have involved increased vigour and modification of sepal shape. Consequently, I would be very interested to hear from any nurserymen and rose growers who have struck cuttings or made bud grafts of Cécile Brunner which have produced unexpected results, including the so-called Bloomfield Abundance form. There are unconfirmed reports in the literature suggesting this changeover occurs, but they are usually written off as growers using the wrong rose in the first place. There are no reports of the vigorous Bloomfield Abundance producing Cécile Brunner during propagation [there are now HM, 2003], though Nancy Steen once observed the equally vigorous Climbing Cécile Brunner putting out low-growing branches at the base of the plant ( The Charm of Old Roses.l987.p72). If you have any information which you think may help unravel the fascinating Cécile Brunner / so-called Bloomfield Abundance mystery please contact me at xxxxxx . All information received will be acknowledged in the article.

Magazine  (Dec 1996)  Page(s) 31-33. Vol 18, No. 4.  
 
Hillary Merrifield. The Real Bloomfield Abundance Stands Up.
.....The first reference I can find to the name Bloomfield Abundance being applied to a rose which sounds like Cecile Brunner with giant sprays of flowers, is in Fairbrother (1965) and G. S.Thomas (1967), both of which were originally written in the late 1950s. The changeover could have occurred some time between 1943 and the late 1950s, possibly at the time when rose breeding and distribution started up again after World War Two. Records, labels and stock may have been lost and, as we all know, memory is not the most reliable guide in naming roses. However, Peter Beales (1992) says that he grew the so-called Bloomfield Abundance when working in E. B. Le Grice's Norfolk nursery in the early 1950s and that Le Grice had grown this rose under the Bloomfield Abundance name in the 1930s. Yet if Mansfield is correct, the original Bloomfield Abundance was still alive and well in England in the 1930s. Is it just possible that Le Grice was one of the sources of the name change, either in the 1930s, or more likely, after the war when he began to rebuild his nursery which is known to have suffered badly during the war years. (Raban, 1971). So - given that the name Bloomfield Abundance belonged to a Hybrid Tea, what is the rose which bears its name today? In another article I intend to look at the Cecile Brunner group and its various forms, and to give cultivation and genetic reasons why I think that the rose in question is a shrub form of Cecile Brunner.

Book  (1994)  Page(s) 55.  
 
Deane Ross. Mlle Cecile Brunner and her Entourage.....
Maureen Ross continues:  
This article was published by the Royal National Rose Society Historic Roses Journal 1993 and since then discussion has followed about 'Bloomfield Abundance' amongst members of Heritage Roses Australia. I discussed Deane’s research with Roy Rumsey (well known Australian nurseryman and rose authority) and he agrees that the [Captain George C.]  THOMAS 'Bloomfield Abundance' 1920 is definitely NOT the Australian'“Bloomfield'. 

Modern Roses 10 comments that "... the original 'Bloomfield Abundance' is apparently lost. The rose distributed under this name is a sport of 'Cécile Brunner', probably 'Spray Cécile Brunner...".  

Deane and I saw 'Spray Cecile Brunner' at the Huntington Collection in Los Angeles USA and it is NOT the Australian 'Bloomfield' as it was deeper pink and larger flower, totally different.    Graham Stuart Thomas of UK, a world authority on roses, describes 'Bloomfield' in Shrub Roses of Today (page 142) in precise detail and this is the rose variety we all know so well, but we also now know it is not the correct name. So what do we have? As Deane said it is an interesting line of research.
[Note - this last para omitted from the reprint of this article in HRiA 2021]