HELPMEFIND PLANTS COMMERCIAL NON-COMMERCIAL RESOURCES EVENTS PEOPLE RATINGS
|
|
|
-
-
|
If You like this-one, You might like 'Heinrich Conrad Söth' too.
|
REPLY
|
|
You know, I have a wishlist of about two dozen roses I love but don't have room for in the garden. We have to move!
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Can anybody help me with identifying these roses?
No. 1 seems to be a species rose which I found growing wild in my garden. I tend to think it's R. arvensis, from its habit (it's creeping all over the ground, although it's also sending up vertical shoots) and from the flower, but then how would I know R. arvensis from R. canina? The flowers seem nearly white, but not completely so.
No. 2 is something I found by the roadside in a Hamburg street, so it will be either a species rose (the city of Hamburg tends to plant R. rugosa and R. pimpinellifolia / spinosissima along roads) or something else simple and hardy. I took cuttings last year and they all rooted and are doing just fine. I first thought it might be R. gallica, but now it does look rather too fancy to me to be that. An advanced search of the HMF database for the characteristics of this rose didn't turn up a lot that looked similar except one rambler rose with similar flowers, but this is most decidedly not a rambler but something rather short in stature.
Edit: It does look a bit like Bingo / Carefree Delight (Meilland 1994), maybe?
Any comments would be most appreciated.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 7 posted
1 JUN 12 by
 jedmar
|
The colour is a bit like 'Red Carefree Spirit' but the petal shape seems different. I thought 'Bukavu', but I am not convinced of that either.
|
REPLY
|
|
Thank you. Bukavu--yes, the flowers are very similar. The leaves are different though, they are pointed, these are are rather rounded and not quite as glossy, maybe also smaller. Also, my rose is rather short in stature, Bukavu seems a large shrub. I guess I might be settling for No. 2 being Bingo.
|
REPLY
|
|
Its not Bukavu, which is not hand-painted, and does not have male parts of that color. The rose in the photo is from a hand-painted line.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#4 of 7 posted
19 OCT 15 by
styrax
|
The species is mosly likely arvensis, the very tight bunch of stigmas are sysntylae (or however it's spelt), canina does not have that.
|
REPLY
|
|
I missed this comment earlier. Thank you! However, with the help of this guide (https://atrampinthewoods.wordpress.com/tag/rosa-canina/), and considering the photos I have since posted of this rose which definitely show free styles and pink buds, I have definitely identified my rose as r. canina (alba, if you like, for the open flowers are almost perfectly white).
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#5 of 7 posted
20 OCT 15 by
Jay-Jay
|
The second rose, I found too in my town along a bike-road, growing between other bushes.
I propagated it. Called it "Roos Fietspad" as a study-name.
|
REPLY
|
|
The leaves and growth habit are very different to Rosa canina.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
So this can happen? I have never actually seen red hips on my Sympathie. Too eager dead-heading I suppose.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 4 posted
13 DEC 12 by
jedmar
|
If the rose in Budapest is not mislabeled. See also my photo from Volcji Potok. Try if you can get hips, too.
|
REPLY
|
|
Yes, it works. See my newest photo. (This year I was too busy to deadhead my roses very frequently. A lot showed hips on which I had never before seen any.)
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 4 posted
26 NOV 16 by
jedmar
|
Will be interesting to see if you can get any seedlings from this hip
|
REPLY
|
|
If I just knew where to put even a single new rose ...
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
I understand in our region (nothern Germany) this was very popular climber around the 1970s (when our house was built). To be sure, the flowers are plentiful and beautiful: velvety dark red with a slightly crimson touch, and a fine though very nice scent.
As a plant however it leaves a lot to be desired, compared to modern expectations of what a rose should be. It's consistently leggy, very sparsely leaved, and has a marked tendency to suffer from blackspot. I still keep it out of respect for its age, but it's not the kind of rose I would plant again.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 4 posted
14 JUN 15 by
Jay-Jay
|
And it doesn't thrive in partial shady relatively dry spots.
|
REPLY
|
|
True, the conditions may be less than ideal. Though I have roses that do rather well under similar conditions. Anyway, the flowers ARE beautiful.
|
REPLY
|
|
The pictures here on HMF from San Jose show an impressive free-standing, robust, HUGE Sympathie. The photos from Europe show a spindly, sad Sympathie trained along a wall. My guess would be: It needs sunshine. Lots of sunshine. And heat. So, if you love it, why not give it a spot where it gets all the sunshine it can get?
|
REPLY
|
|
Wish I could! Very small garden, and most of it faces northwest, so it gets only very late sun and only during the summer. Besides, even if I had the space I probably wouldn't dare move a 40-year-old rose.
|
REPLY
|
|
|
