HELPMEFIND PLANTS COMMERCIAL NON-COMMERCIAL RESOURCES EVENTS PEOPLE RATINGS
|
|
|
'Mr. Feast's No. 1' rose Reviews & Comments
-
-
|
In References for 'Queen of the Prairies', a source lists The New American Orchardist (1845), but when the title is clicked on, the year given is 1835. That may be a slip of the finger. (If one wishes to buy the book from Forgotten Books, that site lists its publication as 1842, as does the title page of the book itself.)
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 2 posted
15 DEC 20 by
 jedmar
|
I think there are several imprints of this book. In the Biodiversity Library, they have the 1842 issue which you mention. This one, however, does not include any reference to 'Queen of the Prairies'. On Google you can find 1835, 1841, 1844, 1848. Hathi Trust also lists 1833, 1842 and 1846. The reference is on p. 395 of the 1844 issue. If you look at the plants listed under this book, you will see that some are dated 1835, some 1845. So, multiple editions under one heading. This is usually the case with magazine listings, too.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 2 posted
15 DEC 20 by
Darrell
|
Thank you, Bechet, for the clarification.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
There are either pictures of de la grifferaie or geschwind’ s orden for this Entry
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Magazine of Horticulture 8: 134-135 (April 1842)
Art. IV. Some notice of a new variety of the Michigan Rose, (Rosa rubifolia)
By An Amateur
Three years ago, I received from Mr. Samuel Feast, of Baltimore, a small lot of roses. One of them was a seedling of our superb native, Rosa rubifolia, (the Detroit or Michigan rose.) The terms in which Mr. Feast mentioned it, were not such as to excite very high expectations; being, however, a variety of a species that I greatly admired, it was planted in a good situation, and its period of flowering looked forward to with some anxiety.
The first year it did nothing—gave no indications of excellence. But by the second spring, it had become well established, and then it fully vindicated its parentage—it indeed proved to be a variety of surpassing beauty.
It is distinguished, like its parent, for luxuriance of growth, and, like it, produces its flowers in large clusters. The flower is very double, and of an exquisite form, being perfectly symmetrical and deeply cupped, with petals of a camellia-like appearance. Its color is a fine pink, with slight variations of brilliancy in the flowers of the same cluster; and it possesses the property most unusual in a rose, of retaining its beauty unaffected by our scorching suns, for several days.
I have bloomed some of the best varieties of the Ayrshire, and several other fine running roses; but though they are very beautiful, this seedling is superior to any of them. Mr. Feast calls it the Beauty of the Prairies.
|
REPLY
|
|
Could this be a possible identity of the 'Arcata Pink Globe' ? Description of the flower, both as to color and form, sounds like what I have growing. I am not quite sure about "deeply cupped", but "fine pink, with slight variations of brilliancy" sounds very like.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Magazine of Horticulture 3(7): 246-248 (July 1837)
Art. II. Roses—new Varieties.
By An Amateur. (Gideon B. Smith, Esq.)
But to return to Mr. Feast's roses. ... The double prairie rose was produced from the seed of a plant raised from the seed of the wild rose of the western prairies. It is decidedly one of the most beautiful roses I ever saw. It is of the richest possible crimson, of the cabbage form, and when fully open forms a perfect goblet, the petals forming a cup so close and compact that it will hold water. In the centre there are a few imperfect petals, beautifully striped with white and yellow. It is altogether a most valuable addition to our gardens.
|
REPLY
|
|
|
