I had read the comments from the Tea Bag ladies, but will go back to one of the first questions I asked about 'Francis Dubreuil', when this thread first began to drift from its original topic: Was the original 'Francis Dubreuil' a "true Tea", or was he a "Hybrid Tea"? Or was he that other thing, a "Tea hybrid"? The earliest descriptions of FD say his color was a dark red with pink or cerise or amaranth highlights. My assumption is that 'FD' was darker than other red Teas, but would not have looked terribly out of place hanging out with other reds such as 'Gen Gallieni', 'M. Tillier', 'Souv. de David d'Angers', 'Mlle Christine de Nouë', ''Corallina', 'Safrano a Fleurs Rouges', 'Princesse de Sagan', 'Bardou Job' and- of course- 'Souv de Therese Levet'. Here's a 1901 review from a German rose reviewer about Francis: "Francis Dubreuil (Dubreuil 1895) is not only one of the most excellent red Tea roses but also one of the best Tea roses of all. The flower is in fact only of medium size, and sometimes even small, but keeps extremely well. It lasts In bud form for a very long time, and is then at its most beautiful. The growth is vigorous and the crown is well branched. What I like most about this rose, is its capacity to produce solitary flowers on long, upright stems, I do not like roses in flower umbels (in clusters). Its floriferousness (flowering period) is very long, it lasts right up to the frosts." That mention of "solitary flowers on long, upright stems" makes me think we might find some HP ancestry in Francis' background, no? And it accords well with other early mentions of FD having "diffuse growth"... Here's an early discrepancy, though; the review above says 'FD' "lasts in bud form for a very long time, and is then at its most beautiful". Contrast that with an earlier British review- Francis "is described as full flower of a fine form, opening very readily, perhaps too much so"... So if Francis was dark red and had diffuse growth, he seems to be quacking like an early HT, and not a "pure Tea"? Was he classified as a Tea because of his fragrance? According to Guillot, 'FD' is descended from 'Souv de David d'Angers' (described as "deliciously fragrant" in 1864) who is in turn descended from 'Caroline', the Tea that may be synonymous with 'Bermuda Spice'. Some early reviews of 'FD' say he is fragrant, most say nothing, and at least one reviewer says "not fragrant". This assortment of varying opinions shouldn't be surprising, given humans' different capacities for smell, and given the way odors can vary according to temperature, time of day, etc. The scent of Tea roses seems to be especially elusive, and elicits a confusion of descriptions, so I'm inclined to believe that the original Francis probably had a Tea scent and was fragrant to some people and not to others. However, I think it's also possible that if there were an early confusion with at least one grower offering a different rose as 'Francis D', the differences in opinion about form and fragrance could stem from an early switcheroo. Just because there was a later mix-up with 'Barcelona' doesn't mean there wasn't also an earlier mix-up somewheres down the line. And if there were an earlier misidentification, this early imposter might be the rose that was later sent from Sangerhausen to Oz in 1981? Another question I have relates to size. The Tea rose grown by Mr Knight just outside of Sydney was a large rose bush. The roses grown in the U.S. and Oz as FD today both seem to be more compact and HT-like (although the Aussie plant that hails from Sangerhausen seems to have a earlier HT look than 'Barcelona' does?) I'm trying to get things straight in my own head, so if I'm off-course in my suppositions, please get me back on track. Virginia

Kim, I'm not convinced that the color was so rare- a search of Tea Roses at HMF shows quite a few that are called red or dark red, including FD's presumed ancestor, 'Souv. de David D'Angers'. The dark red color combined with the large flower probably was a real treat, though, and it sounds like the plant was a nice shape if grown in suitable conditions on suitable understock. I read the review below of 'Francis Dubreuil' from a 1906 issue of Gardening Illustrated Magazine, and felt that 'FD' was being praised for his beauty, but also subtly dismissed. The writer suggests that because 'FD' has a weak neck that the HT's 'Liberty', 'Warrior' and 'Richmond' are better choices for red flowered pot roses, and that 'Princesse de Sagan' is a better choice for mass planting of a red Tea in the garden. 'FD' is best grown as a standard for buttonhole flowers. Honestly, if I were in the market for a red Tea rose in 1906, I wouldn't have rushed out to buy 'FD' after reading this review... As for why 'FD' wasn't available in U.S. nurseries at the turn of the 20th Century, it may have been due to something fairly simple- poor marketing, problems with importation, plant losses due to weather/poor storage or some other factor(s) lost in the sands of time. Or you may be right to suspect that 'Francis Dubreuil' just wasn't a very good or useful rose, and American nurseries preferred to devote limited space to better/ more popular plants. Virginia Rose Francis Dubreuil Red Tea Roses appear very much out of place when mixed with other Tea-scented varieties at the exhibitions, but in the garden their value is justly appreciated. It is a question whether the Rose under notice of the variety Souvenir de Therese Levet is the better, but I think the place of honour is usually accorded to Francis Dubreuil. It is a lovely Rose, of exquisite shape in the bud, and of a rich dark amaranth-red colour, with a maroon shading. Its beauty is best displayed when grown in standard form. Here it will make a glorious head, if budded upon a thrifty Brier, and one may always be sure of a good button-hole flower from a tree of this sort. Neither this variety nor Souvenir de Therese Levet is seen to very great advantage as bush plants, their growth being rather too diffuse to be used as garden varieties, but upon a low wall they would be grand. Where highly-coloured flowers are appreciated several plants of Francis Dubreuil should be grown, considering the scarcity of good reds among the Hybrid Teas, and by good cultivation upon well-drained soil blossoms of great beauty may be obtained. Being a true Tea, it is as free flowering in autumn as in summer. The tropical weather of the last few weeks has been very favourable to this Rose, and I have been able to cut numbers of lovely blossoms. There is a beautiful reddish Rose named General Gallieni which is worth growing. It has a tinge of coppery-yellow at base of petals, and often pervading the centre petals, but its general effect is red. Betty Berkeley and Friquet are two other good crimson or...[bottom of the page is cut off]... but the best of all for general effect in the mass is Princesse de Sagan, which is as much a China as it is a Tea Rose. How effective are its velvety crimson blossoms, so quaintly twisted and so freely produced! Another Rose that has been splendid just lately is the Hybrid Tea Etoile de France. I have been inclined to condemn this Rose, but must hesitate in view of what I have lately seen. I am afraid that in a cool or wet season it would be a failure, but in seasons like the present it will be fine. As a pot-Rose Francis Dubreuil has one failing, and that is a peculiar weakness in the stalk, which causes the blooms to bend at the neck and appear on the plant quite distorted. Market growers have, for this reason, been obliged to discard the variety. Perhaps it is not wanted as a pot-Rose now that we have such beautiful reds as Liberty, Warrior, and Richmond. ROSA.

Morning! My super package arrived from Melody on Saturday. I can't believe HOW much she got into that box! In my amazing "California" box was: ~2 Japanese Balloons for the kids (so cute!) ~a California mix CD. Haven't listened to it yet, but can't wait!The note says these song remind Melody about California :) I Left My Heart in San Fransisco...I love this song! ~Plant stakes ~A Beautiful Flower hair clip. Taylor wore this to school today! Did you make this? It is SO pretty! ~Maxea Plant Food. This is a California Company ~A Cable Car Post Card ~California Note Cards. Printed in Del Monte Oaks, Monterey. ~Ghirardelli Chocolate...another California Company! YUMMY!! ~California Native Seeds: Poppy: Confetti Mix And more seeds! ~Viola: Sorbet Marina Babyface ~Salvia: Forest Fire ~Columbine: Mrs. Scott Elliot ~Nigella: Bridal Veil ~Crocomosia: Lucifer ~Nigella: Persian Violet ~Nigella: Mulberry Rose I really need to look some of these up. I bet they are just gorgeous! Melody, THANK YOU SO MUCH!! This was a most thoughtful and thought out package. Every single part was a special California touch :) Everything was wrapped with adorable fuzzy ribbon and labeled with cute little sayings. This was just so thoughtful! I can't thank you enough! And, I'm so happy to see that my box made it to you. I was hoping you didn't have that daylily already. It seemed fitting since I'm part of the "big apple", lol. :) Have a super day everyone! vina ps. I'm posting October right now. Who's ready for some spooky fun? pss. THANKS AGAIN MELODY!

GENERAL: Posted by: john_MO z5/6 on Thu, Jun 20, 02 "Native Trees, Shrubs, and Vines" by William Cullina. He is the horticulture director of Garden in the Woods in Framingham, MA. Like his Wildflowers book, it is a wonderful resource and fills a need that I have had for years. It fits nicely between the nice, but limited, regional guides available and the exhaustive and technical botanical tomes. Cullina's style is a wonderful combination of interesting anecdotes and down-to-earth practical advice. * Posted by: Sam_MD z7 MD on Sun, Jun 9, 02 ... "Growing and Propagating Wildflowers of the United States and Canada" by William Cullina. This is a beautifully illustrated guide from the NE Wildflower Society's Garden in the Woods, where the author works. It is published by Houghton Mifflin. This is an excellent reference. It provides many insights that only someone who works with plants can make. "The Native Plant Primer" by Carole Ottesen. Posted by: Doris_J Z8 WA on Sun, Apr 28, 02 ... "The American Horticultural Society A-Z Encyclopedia of Garden Plants". It is a great plant bible. Huge book but well worth it. I use it constantly. "Hortus 3rd" * Posted by: Treedoc66 6b on Sun, Aug 11, 02 "The Hillier Manual of Trees and Shrubs". * Posted by: david7a_ga z7a GA on Sat, Jun 8, 02 Maybe I have expensive tastes, but I like Allan Armitage's "Perennial Plants" and Michael Dirr's "Manual of Woody Landscape Plants". That's two big expensive volumes, and I don't even have anything to cover annuals yet! * Posted by: woodland_gardens z5 WI on Mon, Jul 15, 02. Dirr has quite a few good books out. Dirr's "Hardy Trees and Shrubs" is a good pictoral guide, and of course the manual. 5th edition is the newest, being only 3 or 4 years old. There's a similar book by Steven Still that is a manual of herbaceous plants. I dislike it as it leaves out many common (and more not so common) herbaceous plants, but it covers annuals, biennials, and perennials. A-Z encyclopedia is good. Good pics and good information.. Heightshoe has a good, but expensive, book out called "Native Trees and Shrubs for Urban or Suburban Landscapes" or something really long like that. Not many pics, but good illustrations showing structure. Posted by: NYC_Native z7aNY on Sun, Aug 11, 02 The Roger Tory Peterson book of NE w/f is a good one. I use mine a lot. Pictures go by color and flower type. Posted by: aris z5CT on Sat, Aug 10, 02 . I get a lot of information about native plants from keys that include detailed descriptions. My favorite is the "Manual of Vascular Plants of Northeastern United States and Adjacent Canada", Second Edition, by Gleason and Cronquist, a New York Boatnical Garden Publication, and the "Illustrated Companion to Gleason and Cronquist's Manual", by Holmgren, also a New York Botanical Garden publication. (Both expensive) Another favorite is the old "The Standard Cyclopedia of Horticulture", by L.H.Bailey, which was first published about 1900. Mine is a 1943 edition, 3 volumes, over 3600 pages, with wonderful essays on various garden topics and genera -- for example, there is a key and description of 48 species of Penstemon. For me, it has much more useful information that the later "Hortus 3rd". It seems to be readily available used. "Gardening With Native Wild Flowers" by Leonard E. Foote and Samuel B. Jones (paperback, but may be hard to find) "Noah's Garden : Restoring the Ecology of Our Own Back Yards" by Sarah Stein "Planting Noah's Garden : Further Adventures in Backyard Ecology" by Sarah Stein REGIONAL: * Posted by: TheMrAugie z6 NYon Sat, Aug 31, 02 New York's own Roger Tory Peterson has published a number of field guides. I've had "A Field Guide to Wildflowers of Northeastern and North-central North America" for 25 years. It has both natives and aliens. It's been everywhere and never lost a page despite difficult conditions. I just ordered the Fern guide in the series * Posted by: Sam_MD z7on Tue, Aug 27, 02 Following references contain the answers to many queries posted on this forum: "Herbaceous Plants of Maryland" by Brown & Brown "Woody Plants of Maryland" by Brown & Brown "Flora of West Virginia" by Strausbaugh & Core "Vascular Plants of the Washington-Baltimore Area" by Shetler "The Ferns and Fern-Allies of Maryland and Delaware including District of Columbia" by Reed Posted by: Donna_in_NC z7NC on Mon, Jul 29, 02 my favorite NC wildflower guide. It has great color photos (408 pics)& good descriptions & counties where plants are most often found: "Wild Flowers of North Carolina -also covering VA,SC,TN,KY,WV,MD, & DE" by William S.Justice & C.Ritchie Bell. Published by the University of North Carolina Press P.O. Box 2288 Chapel Hill, NC 27515-2288 Posted by: esh_ga z7 GA on Sat, Aug 24, 02 For my area, I like "Southeastern Wildflowers" by Jan Midgley. In addition to the information it provides on specific plants, there is also helpful information on plant communities and cultivation. * Posted by: Bullnettle z8b TX on Fri, Sep 6, 02 Texas: "Native Texas Plants" by Wasowski and Wasowski - an excellent resource for native Texas plants for use in the home landscape that contains only natives to Texas. "How to Grow Native Plants of Texas and the Southwest" by Jill Nokes: excellent resource on propagating 155 native plants. "Texas Wildscapes, Gardening for Wildlife" by Damude and Bender: fairly comprehensive but few pictures. "The National Wildflower Research Center's Wildflower Handbook": resources for buying native plants and seeds, bibliographies for various areas of the country, and general information about growing native wildflowers, wildscapes, etc. "The Useful Wild Plants of Texas and the Southeastern and Southwestern Unitied States, the Southern Plans, and Northern Mexico" by Cheatham and Johnston: extremely comprehensive, a 12 volume work in progress. Currently two volumes have been published, through canavalia. Best one going, but expensive ($125 per volume) and, as yet, incomplete. Well worth the money in my opinion. I'm currently saving for the next volume, due out next year, I think. * Posted by: Neil_allen z5/6 Wed, Aug 28, 02 Voss's three-volume "Michigan Flora" is useful and at $18/volume reasonably priced. It's obviously no field guide, but it's comprehensive, contains distribution maps for each species and notes on non-natives growing without cultivation in the state -- when did they first appear, are they European, American "adventives" along railroad lines, etc. Voss's specialty is taxonomy, and there's a a fair amount of discussion about correct botanical names. A lot of technical terminology throughout, although he does include a glossary. There are a few pages of multi-pictured color plates in each volume and line drawings of selected plants or parts of plants every ten pages or so, but this won't help you unless you've already got a good idea of what you're looking for. But whereas, say, the Peterson Field Guide might show three trilliums and indicate that there are 10 more that aren't shown, Voss will key out every plant. Once you've got a general idea of what you might be dealing with, this is a good place to look to nail down your identification, sort out subspecies, etc. Between the two peninsulas, the state covers a lot of east-west territory, and also goes far enough north to include a number of "circumpolar" species, so this is useful for more than just Michigan plants. Posted by: woodland_gardens z5 WI on Mon, Jul 15, 02 Anyone in WI and into natives should pick up "The Native Vegetation of Wisconsin" by Curtis. Posted by: lycopus z5 IL on Fri, Aug 23, 02. My favorite reference is "Plants of the Chicago Region" by Swink and Wilhelm, published by the Indiana Academy of Science. It has descriptions for 2530 species known to grow in the region. * Posted by: john_MO z5/6 on Wed, Aug 28, 02 "Missouri Wildlflowers", by Edgar Denison "Shrubs and woody vines of Missouri", by Don Kurz both published by Missouri Department of Conservation * Posted by: forest_MN z4 on Wed, Aug 28, 02 "Northland Wildflowers: The Comprehensive Guide to the Minnesota Region". by John B. Moyle and Evelyn W. Moyle. U. of MN Press 1997, 2001. Wonderfully illustrated with color photos by John Gregor. An excellent Guide to MN wildflowers which include both eastern forest species and tall grass prairie species "Tall Grass Prairie Wildflowers". by Doug Ladd. Photos by Frank Oberle. Published by Falcon Press, Helena and Billings MT in cooperation with the Nature Conservancy. This is THE BEST guide I have found to prairie wildflowers and is illustrated by the best photography.