|
|
'Esmeralda' rose Reviews & Comments
-
-
|
I hear growers of Riethmuller roses are having trouble telling his 'Esmeralda' apart from Lambert's 'Gartendirektor Otto Linne'. 'Esmeralda' is a floppy, low plant; GDOL is a stiffly erect one. 'Esmeralda' flowers start off magenta, not pink. But also, the leaves are quite different. I've put up a photo of GDOL I received from Trewallyn Nursery in Bundaberg, Queensland. No Riethmuller Lambertiana has leaves anything like as glossy; GDOL's are are close to those of a 1950s Kordesii hybrid.
The photo in the middle is of a well-authenticated 'Esmeralda' in the Victoria State Rose Garden. To the right, an authentic 'Spring Song' showing furrowed leaves and little gloss unlike either of the others.
|
REPLY
|
|
Eric - is there any sign of the "flowers flecked white" as mentioned in the Esmeralda' 1999 reference?
|
REPLY
|
|
I didn't see any, Patricia. But the flecking only appears after the flowers have been open several days anyway. Werribee have the very same plant on which I first noticed it — now it's in the ground.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Since I uploaded the earlier photos I've noticed that Esmeralda does have a white eye. It only emerges on day three along with white radial lines on the petals. So the early reference is right, though not about the flower being single.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
The oldest of the references for 'Esmeralda' is the Australian Rose Annual for 1956. "Rich carmine single blooms with a white eye and a lighter reverse." This has raised doubts about the authenticity of the later references and plants currently sold as 'Esmeralda' with a lighter reverse but with double blooms lacking a white eye.
These doubts should now be laid to rest. Woman's Day, 25 May 1959 page 43 has five photos of Riethmuller roses taken under Riethmuller's own supervision. In fact he himself appears in the photo of a bowl of 'Titian' on his mantelpiece. A fine head of 'Esmeralda' flowers is shown, unmistakably double, with pale yellow stamens, no white eye but light pink reverses to the petals. The caption reads: "ESMERALDA. Mr Riethmuller's hybrid polyantha, has handsome heads of flowers with a distinctive perfume."
My guess is the writer in the ARA nodded. His description fits Riethmuller's 'Gay Vista' (1955) exactly.
|
REPLY
|
|
The writer in the 1956 Australian Rose Annual was Harry Hazlewood who very rarely made a mistake. It is interesting that on the same page he covers ‘Esmeralda’. Galah’ and ‘Gay Vista’. I cannot see any reference to ‘Esmeralda’ in his later catalogues that I have (1958, 1961, 1963 and 1964) where he may have corrected the 1956 reference of “single”. But because the 1958 Modern Roses 5 carried the word “double”; and the 1959 Woman’s Day photo you have found, I think we can certainly assume the original rose was double, and not single as per the 1956 reference.
|
REPLY
|
|
Thanks, Patricia. You are kind and judicious as always.
Perhaps I should have added that the Woman's Day photo looks identical to the plant of 'Esmeralda' I bought from Phillip Sutherland at Golden Vale Nursery in 2010. There are so few examples around, and it looks as though mine will be the source of budwood for both Werribee Park and Renmark.
Eric
|
REPLY
|
|
Good to hear that the right one is still around.
Margaret
|
REPLY
|
|
