# Anyone seen Phrag Raymond Faroult..?



## Achamore (Nov 2, 2015)

Just wondering if anyone has ever seen Phrag Raymond Faroult..? Can't seem to find any photos on the web.

I have a plant with a bud just opening, very very slowly. Hope to photograph it in a day or two. But looking around the web I have found it surprisingly hard to see..!


November 6th: added 2 photos of it more or less fully opened.


----------



## NYEric (Nov 2, 2015)

What's the cross?


----------



## Achamore (Nov 2, 2015)

caricinum x Sedenii, registered in 1893.


----------



## NYEric (Nov 2, 2015)

OMG!!! I know somewhere there is an archival article about old crosses, but... . I will check Olaf Grus's book tonight


----------



## NYEric (Nov 2, 2015)

There is a photo of the cross in Olaf's book. I would scan ans post it here but, have you seen how big Olaf is!?!


----------



## Achamore (Nov 3, 2015)

Its ok. I'll have a photo of the fellow in a day or two, and then you can compare mine with the one in Olaf's book. A very useful ID check..!


----------



## Achamore (Nov 3, 2015)

Here's where is is at this morning. There was an attack of aphids last month, and to get at some of them I had to remove that leaf-sheath from around the bud. What's the technical name for that sheath..?


----------



## trdyl (Nov 3, 2015)

Looks like it will be a dark flower.



Achamore said:


> What's the technical name for that sheath..?



Bract


----------



## troy (Nov 3, 2015)

I love the dark color caricinum adds to a hybrid, very nice blooming!!!


----------



## phraggy (Nov 3, 2015)

Hope it turns out to be as good as it's looking at the moment Don.

Ed


----------



## Achamore (Nov 3, 2015)

phraggy said:


> Hope it turns out to be as good as it's looking at the moment Don.
> 
> Ed



Thanks Ed, fingers crossed. I'm just chuffed that this turns out to be so uncommonly seen. Malcolm Perry did tell me that when I bought it. I'm just astonished that I have not been able to find a pic of it online.


----------



## Achamore (Nov 5, 2015)

This is one slow bloomer. The dorsal sepal is taking a very long time to lift up. I get a sense of why this cross didn't set the orchid world on fire with excitement, and hence why it has become so rarely seen..!


----------



## Achamore (Nov 6, 2015)




----------



## trdyl (Nov 6, 2015)

Don, That is very nice!


----------



## Achamore (Nov 6, 2015)

It is lovely, isn't it? Has the colour of Ainsworthii, more or less.


----------



## trdyl (Nov 6, 2015)

Achamore said:


> It is lovely, isn't it? Has the colour of Ainsworthii, more or less.



Yes, it is.


----------



## NYEric (Nov 6, 2015)

Er, that's a lot of plant for so little bloom. Can you put it outside in season?


----------



## Achamore (Nov 6, 2015)

I've begun putting it outside lately. The previous owner had found it bloomed rarely, but her greenhouse was on a northern slope with trees above her, so she had a great amount of shade, and no direct light in the winter months. I suspect with more light I'll see it blooming more. 

On the other hand, the schlimii I got from her is about the same size or maybe a bit smaller, and is currently presenting 11 spikes. Only one has bloomed so far, but in another month or so should be pretty good. I suspect therefore that Raymond Faroult simply is not a prolific bloomer..!


----------



## NYEric (Nov 6, 2015)

Hmmmmm, sell it!


----------



## Achamore (Nov 6, 2015)

No, I'll be keeping it. I like the bloom, and can be patient. Maybe it just hasn't had the best chances so far. But I do understand why this cross isn't commonly grown!


----------



## Migrant13 (Nov 6, 2015)

I can just imagine how awesome that plant will be with about 10 flower spikes.


----------



## abax (Nov 8, 2015)

Don, the color is much better than on OSF and it is
gorgeous. I'd be keeping that beauty too! I wonder if
division at some future date plus better light might 
produce more blooms.


----------



## Achamore (Nov 8, 2015)

Angela, that could be a possibility...

Must admit my surprise that there is so little excitement about this being shown. It is lovely, and never been seen on the web before. It would seem a shame if we let these very early crosses fade into oblivion..!


----------



## NYEric (Nov 8, 2015)

I agree; but it must not be a great blooming plant. Phrag. Calurum is old (1883) and much much more popular.


----------



## abax (Nov 8, 2015)

What's the name of the website that has a photo of a
species Phrag. and beside it there's all the crosses made
with that species? I can't find it or think of the name and
it's driving me crazier than normal. I think a photo of this
cross belongs on that site.


----------



## Achamore (Nov 9, 2015)

NYEric said:


> I agree; but it must not be a great blooming plant. Phrag. Calurum is old (1883) and much much more popular.



Ainsworthii is even older (1979). I have both, and prefer Ainsworthii. At least with the Calurum I have, the colour is a bit garish. Ainsworthii has the lovelier, more subtle hues akin to Raymond Faroult. I know that Calurum and Ainsworthii are supposed to be more or less the same, but they aren't to my eye, at least with the specimens I have or have seen. Calurum is brighter, a bit more pink to it.


----------



## Achamore (Nov 9, 2015)

abax said:


> What's the name of the website that has a photo of a
> species Phrag. and beside it there's all the crosses made
> with that species? I can't find it or think of the name and
> it's driving me crazier than normal. I think a photo of this
> cross belongs on that site.



Hi Angela, that website is http://slipperorchids.info


----------



## NYEric (Nov 9, 2015)

Phragweb

BTW, there is a Calurum v. Candidulum that is much nicer. I killed mine.


----------



## Achamore (Nov 9, 2015)

Malcolm Perry told me a bit more about this specimen. I hope to get more details soon, but it seems it was rescued from a very old collection that was being sold off. He said in all his years growing and selling phrags, he has never encountered nor even heard of another specimen of this cross. So there is a challenge: has anyone heard of one of these growing in someone's collection out there somewhere? Surely this cannot be the only survivor of the breeding from decades ago that created it.


----------



## trdyl (Nov 9, 2015)

Achamore said:


> Surely this cannot be the only survivor of the breeding from decades ago that created it.



Sometimes you never know what some people have squirreled away. 

But, it could very well be lone survivor.


----------



## NYEric (Nov 9, 2015)

Yes, it could actually be a lone survivor. I was surprised when I asked a hybridizer and he said sometimes you only get a few plants from a cross, or that he had sold all and lost the one he kept for breeding!


----------



## phraggy (Nov 9, 2015)

Not the same colour as my Ainsworthii which is a deep red --- also classed as calurum.

Ed


----------



## Achamore (Nov 10, 2015)

Here it is today, so this is it fully open. The dorsal sepal doesn't go up any further.


----------



## Achamore (Nov 10, 2015)

phraggy said:


> Not the same colour as my Ainsworthii which is a deep red --- also classed as calurum.
> 
> Ed



Ed - I'd love to see a photo of that red Ainsworthii..!


----------



## SlipperFan (Nov 10, 2015)

I'd love to see a straight-on shot now that it is fully open.


----------



## Achamore (Nov 10, 2015)

Dot, it will be very very similar to this shot from 4 days ago. But I will take another shot tomorrow and post again. This shot was taken with the camera looking somewhat up at the bloom, in order to show something of the dorsal sepal's colour etc.


----------



## SlipperFan (Nov 10, 2015)

Yes -- that's why I wondered if it was any different.


----------



## Achamore (Nov 11, 2015)

Shot today Nov. 11th at about 10am. Camera was level with the height of the bloom.


----------



## SlipperFan (Nov 11, 2015)

Interesting that the petals droop more. It is lovely -- I need one like this!


----------



## Achamore (Nov 11, 2015)

I think its gorgeous Dot, and thanks to you asking me to photograph it again, I noticed the dots inside the pouch - hadn't seen them earlier! That is reminiscent of kovachii. I wonder how many have spots inside?

I was wondering if anyone has a list of all the 19th century-registered crosses?


----------



## trdyl (Nov 11, 2015)

Don, I think got quite lucky in finding this lovely piece of history. 

It would take some work to create such a list.


----------



## Achamore (Nov 11, 2015)

I could make a stab at it, but was hoping someone might say, oh yes, here is the list on so and so's site... It seems a kind of obviously desirable list.


----------



## trdyl (Nov 11, 2015)

Very true. If you have OrchidWiz, it will help narrow down the hybrids and species to genus. I took a quick look. There are currently 893 entries in the newest version. If you do not have it, I could take a crack at it in my spare time. Unless someone has one already.


----------



## Achamore (Nov 12, 2015)

I don't have OrchidWiz, as I seem to recall it is Windows-only, and I'm on a Mac. There are the obvious ones most of us know: Dominianum, Ainsworthii, Grande, etc. But its the one's that have more or less been forgotten that would take the time. Raymond Faroult is a case in point. I suspect nobody on this forum was aware of it as a 19th century cross.


----------



## trdyl (Nov 12, 2015)

Yes, OrchidWiz is a Windows based application. It can run on an Apple machine and is not a cheap piece of software. But I have found it to be quite worth the cost. I'll start working on putting the hybrids in a spreadsheet and let you know when it is done.


----------



## Achamore (Nov 12, 2015)

I've nearly compiled the list already, using Phragweb. It could well be incomplete. I can only use OrchidWiz if I install a program that converts my Mac into a Windows machine, and I just don't fancy doing that.

By my count, there are 50 crosses from before WW1. It seemed best to count any cross more than 100 years old, as it seems that the Great War was really much more of a marking point in the hybridising than simply the turning of the century. 50 is the count I got if you consider Ainsworthii and Calurum to be just one cross. If one wants to distinguish these sorts, then it is probably closer to 60. But a very interesting exercise..! Several that have never crossed my radar before, such as Phrag. Gottianum, or Hanischianum, or Elsteadianum; or Eva, or Baconis, Suave, Penelaus or L'Unique. There was so much activity before the War..! Then it all went away for over a generation more or less, and didn't get any head of steam again until besseae was discovered.


----------



## Rob Zuiderwijk (Nov 12, 2015)

Hello Don,

I just read this thread and was thinking I could see if I can create a query in the old PhragWeb database. The database is not up to date but as far as I know most of the old hybrids are in there.
But now I see you have done the same by hand. Must have been a hell of a job.

Let me know if I can still assist you in any way?

All the best,

Rob Z.


----------



## Rob Zuiderwijk (Nov 12, 2015)

I did a quick query in the PhragWeb database and found 71 names up to and including 1906. This includes synonyms. 
Than between 1906 and 1975 there where no registrations. After that there where a couple of hybrids registered. Then as Don mentioned after the discovery of_ Phrag. besseae _things got wild again and in 1991 the first hybrids with besseae where registered and the rest is history I guess.

Rob Z.


----------



## Achamore (Nov 12, 2015)

Hi Rob, great to see you here! It actually didn't take me that long, because you quickly learn who was registering in which period. So you can ignore all the EYOF and others doing so in our era. I reckon it took me 3 hours max. Kind of fun, frankly!


----------



## Achamore (Nov 12, 2015)

That is astonishing, that there were no phrag hybrids registered in that 69 year period.


----------



## eteson (Nov 12, 2015)

we made a graph some time ago.
http://www.slippertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=36425


----------



## Achamore (Nov 12, 2015)

Many thanks! Great to see that graph!


----------



## SlipperFan (Nov 12, 2015)

Yes, that graph was/is interesting. I can remember a time when I thought I could have every Phrag hybrid made. Hah!


----------



## trdyl (Nov 12, 2015)

SlipperFan said:


> Yes, that graph was/is interesting. I can remember a time when I thought I could have every Phrag hybrid made. Hah!



Dot, How empty and large is your greenhouse? oke:


----------



## Achamore (Nov 13, 2015)

So Dominianum is the very first Phrag hybrid, yes? Registered in 1870 by Veitch.


----------



## SlipperFan (Nov 13, 2015)

trdyl said:


> Dot, How empty and large is your greenhouse? oke:


I figured I had that thought back in 1998-99. I haven't had it since. :rollhappy:


----------



## NYEric (Nov 13, 2015)

SlipperFan said:


> I can remember a time when I thought I could have every Phrag hybrid made. Hah!


You can! :crazy:


----------



## Achamore (Nov 14, 2015)

A lesser yet also grand vision would be to have a collection that includes at least one of each of the pre-WWI crosses. Excluding the duplicate ones, it is only about 50 to find. That would be an interesting project, at least for someone in this forum..?


----------



## Achamore (Nov 14, 2015)

Much harder would be to get all the besseae crosses, I would imagine.


----------



## NYEric (Nov 15, 2015)

One problem is different hybridizers in different countries did different breeding lines. There are plant from growers, like Franz Glanz, or Allan Tetzlaff, or even EYOF, that we here will never get.


----------



## Achamore (Nov 15, 2015)

NYEric said:


> One problem is different hybridizers in different countries did different breeding lines. There are plant from growers, like Franz Glanz, or Allan Tetzlaff, or even EYOF, that we here will never get.



This is less of an issue with the pre1907 crosses though, so an added incentive to try to collect them...!


----------



## NYEric (Nov 15, 2015)

Um, the problem with that is they are "pre-1907", many of them no longer exist.


----------



## Achamore (Nov 15, 2015)

NYEric said:


> Um, the problem with that is they are "pre-1907", many of them no longer exist.



Not really. Most are primary hybrids, or at most secondary, so can be created again. Sedenii was one of the popular ones to use in the breeding, kind of the besseae of its day.

Learnt more about this Raymond Faroult. It was bought at auction from Keith Andrews in Dorset in 1987 by the woman (Sue) who sold it to me. She reckons he had most likely bought it in as part of a still older collection, as phrag hybridising wasn't really his thing. He made many crosses in other genera such as Odonts, Disas, Phals and also Paphs. So our surmise is that it is at least likely to be a pre-WW2 survivor at the very least. Recall that it was a mature plant when Sue bought it. I see from an article http://www.dorsetlife.co.uk/2015/02/the-orchid-man-keith-andrew/ that he was still alive in February, so I will try to make contact with him, to see if I can learn anything more.


----------



## Achamore (Nov 18, 2015)

Ok, I spoke with Keith Andrews, and he said he is certain that he did not breed this plant, but would have bought it from a man who liked to come round with plants he had picked up from the botanical garden collections in south Wales. The man in question was a hairdresser and drove a Jensen, but beyond that Keith was unable to recall details such as his name... But he said it would have been one of those plants that collections have which are a bother, if it lost its ID tag. So the hairdresser would come around from time to time and say, well, I know someone who would probably like that, I'll take it off your hands if you like... and so it ended up with Keith who sold it to Sue who sold it to me. Malcolm Perry reckons he sold two small divisions of Sue's plant to people in the UK over the years, and there is a rumour of one in the Midlands, so I will report back if I learn more. But increasingly we believe this plant must be a survivor from the 1890's or at least pre-WWI. 

The person who registered it was Victor Faroult, who was active in hybridising many types of blooming plants back in the 1890's. https://archive.org/stream/journaldelasoci16soci/journaldelasoci16soci_djvu.txt will give you more detail, if you can read French. We have at this point no knowledge of just who Raymond was, perhaps Victor's son..?


----------



## Achamore (Nov 23, 2015)

Ted Croot of the Sheffield Orchid Society has emailed me to say that he has a specimen of Raymond Faroult. I'm waiting to see if he has any photos of it. It seems that Olaf Gruss will be at the next meeting (in January) of the British Paph Society, and if so he should be able to give a decisive verdict on this.


----------



## SlipperFan (Nov 23, 2015)

Achamore said:


> Ted Croot of the Sheffield Orchid Society has emailed me to say that he has a specimen of Raymond Faroult. I'm waiting to see if he has any photos of it. It seems that Olaf Gruss will be at the next meeting (in January) of the British Paph Society, and if so he should be able to give a decisive verdict on this.



Good. It will be interesting to hear.


----------



## Achamore (Dec 9, 2015)

Haven't heard any further from Ted Croot yet. But in the meantime I have been fascinated to see the next bloom open up, the first one to open from bud since I brought the plant up from Bristol. Its a lot paler this time, and also the dorsal sepal is not drooping in such a pronounced way. Much more appealing this time around, but I am surprised by it going paler. Warmer conditions maybe?


----------



## trdyl (Dec 9, 2015)

Very nice!


----------



## NYEric (Dec 9, 2015)

I hope that you can get Olaf's Phrag book there.


----------



## Achamore (Dec 9, 2015)

Does our Raymond Faroult look like the one in Olaf's book?


----------



## Achamore (Dec 9, 2015)

NYEric said:


> I hope that you can get Olaf's Phrag book there.



Can you tell me the title of his book please?


----------



## NYEric (Dec 9, 2015)

"Lateinamerikanische Frauenschuhe"  It's in German but it has photos of most Phrag crosses.


----------



## Achamore (Dec 9, 2015)

Ok, I have ordered it via this website in Germany: http://www.koeltz.com/


----------



## NYEric (Dec 9, 2015)

If you like things like this, the Albine Paphiopedilum book is cool also.


----------



## Achamore (Dec 10, 2015)

Can't afford a 2nd such purchase at this time of year..!


----------



## NYEric (Dec 10, 2015)

If you were closer I'd let you borrow mine!


----------



## Achamore (Dec 10, 2015)

Can you describe the book a bit?


----------



## NYEric (Dec 10, 2015)

It's small and has photos of most of the album Paph species. The only one I don't think they have is that weird anitum v katerae, or whatever.


----------



## Achamore (Dec 24, 2015)

Just received Gruss's Phrag book, which is a tour de force. Worth every penny, despite it being pretty dear. And the good news is that yes, the Raymond Faroult shown in his book has the precise same form as the one I have and have posted here. (One cannot judge by colour very well from the book, as there are too many vagaries, especially in terms of White Balance when shooting, the CMYK conversion, and then the offset printing which changes many subtle hues. In any case, I have already seen quite a lot of variation in colour on just the two blooms of my plant. But the form is spot on.)


----------



## trdyl (Dec 24, 2015)

That is wonderful news.


----------



## Achamore (Dec 24, 2015)

Thanks Ted, yes, a small cause for celebrating..!


----------



## Achamore (Jan 3, 2016)

Now that I have had more time to peruse Olaf Gruss' book, I can certainly recommend it whole-heartedly to anyone who frequents this part of this forum. I find it incredibly helpful to have (for example) all the primary crosses (at the time of publishing) of kovachii shown in photos together in a few pages. Alfredo Manrique is given a definite pride of place, deservedly so. But it is simply a fascinating and very satisfying book, even if one doesn't read German, as it has an emphasis on photos.


----------



## NYEric (Jan 5, 2016)

Glad you got a copy. Get the Albine form book next!


----------



## Achamore (May 29, 2016)

I got some more info on this plant from Sue Adams just recently. Turns out that photo of it in Olaf Gruss' book was from Sue, who corresponded with Gruss about this plant. Also, the only other specimen also came from Wyld Court in England about the same time, so the plant I got from Sue was almost certainly a division of the same plant that is also in existence. So as far as I can ascertain, these 2 divisions of Raymond Faroult are the only ones in existence, and may well have survived from before WWI. In other words, they may well be surviving remnants from the original cross which was created in France. To the best of my ability to research the subject, nobody has ever re-made the cross.


----------



## abax (May 30, 2016)

All this history is fascinating concerning Phrags. In the
relatively short time I've been growing them, I've found
a great deal of variability regarding color of the same
plants related to season of bloom, temps. and amount
of light and humidity...especially temps. I find that very
interesting and I actually like the variations.

It occurred to me reading through this thread that most
of western Europe has been more or less constantly involved in one war right after another which can explain
the absence of experimentation with hybridization. World
War I begat WWII and several rather local wars in between. Wars kind of stiffle pursuits that don't involve
improvements in weaponry. The U.S. hasn't had much
in the way of carpet bombing that destroyed so much
of Europe during both world wars. I seem to remember
that an enormous and very famous greenhouse was destroyed during the blitz in England.

Anyway, I'm glad you found out about your Phrag. and
I think both variations in color of the blooms quite
beautiful.


----------

