HelpMeFind Roses, Clematis and Peonies
Roses, Clematis and Peonies
and everything gardening related.
Search PostsPosts By CategoryRecent Posts 
Questions, Answers and Comments by Category
Discussion id : 109-573
most recent yesterday HIDE POSTS
Initial post yesterday by Nola Z5
I am new to Help Me Find, but I saw on Rogue Valley Roses site that Cynthia Brooke is listed as zone 4.
Reply #1 of 1 posted yesterday by Patricia Routley
Thank you Nola Z5. We've changed 'Cynthia Brooke' to zone 4b.
(and may I say, it is wonderful to see that little red star above a new member's name. Enjoy the site - there is much to explore.)
Discussion id : 108-908
most recent yesterday SHOW ALL
Initial post 1 MAR by HubertG
A speculative question about Alexander Hill Gray:-
Reading the earliest descriptions for this rose, two things strike me as being discordant to the rose I've grown as AHG. Firstly the yellow colour is described as deepening as the flower develops (mine always fades) and secondly the tea fragrance is described as strong (mine is tea but very weak).
This rose because of it's fine form was understandably marketed as Yellow Maman Cochet. However another rose Mme Derepas-Matrat, introduced by Buatois in 1897 was also called Yellow Maman Cochet. This rose was thornless or nearly so, with little scent and sometimes flushed pink.
The rose I grow in Australia as AHG is nearly thornless with conspicuously smooth stems, a feature that is missing on the early descriptions of AHG.
I'm wondering if the rose grown in Australia as Alexander Hill Gray is really Mme Derepas-Matrat and has been mixed up due to both being called Yellow Maman Cochet.
Does anyone know the provenance of this rose as grown in Australia? Does anyone find the fragrance of AHG strong?
Reply #1 of 5 posted 1 MAR by Patricia Routley
Thornlessness is mentioned in the 2008 reference and I have added that characteristic to 'Alexander Hill Gray'. Thanks.
Do you have the book Tea Roses. Old Roses for Warm Gardens? Provenance of 'Alexander Hill Gray' is also mentioned on p79.
Reply #2 of 5 posted 1 MAR by HubertG
I googled it and found the reference to it being rediscovered. Thanks. It just seemed odd that when the early catalogues extol and almost exaggerate every virtue of a new rose that the thornless nature wasn't included in early descriptions, and that the other 'Yellow Cochet' was described as thornless. I thought that there might have been a mix up very early on in the 20th century.
My AHG sets hips by the way. Not many, but it does set hips.

The fragrance could never be described as strong though.
Reply #3 of 5 posted 2 days ago by HubertG
Just an additional note:
Both 'Alex Hill Gray' and 'Yellow Maman Cochet' are offered and described as separate rose varieties in the 1918 'Dingee Guide to Rose Culture' catalogue.

No reference to the 1897 Buatois rose is made as an alternative name for Yellow Maman Cochet, whereas 'Etoile de France' is given as the synonym for 'Crimson Maman Cochet', so it isn't clear whether the variety they offer as 'Yellow Maman Cochet' is really Mme Derepas-Metrat.
'Souvenir de Pierre Notting, the other rose sometimes called the Yellow Maman Cochet, is also listed separately in the Dingee guide, so that isn't their Yellow Cochet either.
Reply #4 of 5 posted 2 days ago by Margaret Furness
The Dingee catalogue has given you some fascinating research. One comment though: the early English-speaking rose-writers rarely commented on whether a rose had thorns - because they had gardeners to do the hands-on work. For the writers, thorns weren't important, compared to the rose's showbench potential.
Reply #5 of 5 posted yesterday by HubertG
I found in the "New Floral Guide, Autumn, 1913" from Conard & Jones Co. a listing for "Yellow Maman Cochet" which gives its original name as "Mlle Helena Gambier". Incidentally, it is listed under winter blooming roses.
It isn't clear from the Dingee catalogue if their Yellow MC is this same French rose, but it certainly does show that plenty of Yellow Maman Cochets sent out in America at that time weren't Alexander Hill Gray.

I'll enter the description of Conard's YMC under Mlle Helene Cambier.
Discussion id : 107-241
most recent yesterday SHOW ALL
Initial post 30 DEC by Michael Garhart
I'm pretty shocked this rose doesn't have any known descendants.
Reply #1 of 3 posted 30 DEC by Margaret Furness
Not an easy one for bees to access. The half-dozen green hips I've just cut open didn't have any seeds that looked viable; maybe Mme la Baronne is another one prone to phantom pregnancy, like (rose sold as) Mme Berkeley and Auguste Comte. Would it be worth trying to cross it with / to Lady Hillingdon, on the assumption that it may have difficult ploidy?
Reply #2 of 3 posted 1 JAN by Michael Garhart
Where there is a will, there's a way. I have found pollen in the most tricky blooms. Lullaby is a great example. I have sat for an hour or two each summer picking out a kernel of pollen from 50 or so blooms, so I would have enough to pollinate maybe 5 blooms on another rose. Most blooms produce none. A few blooms produce about 3 small grains. They produce ZERO if its cool or wet. But it was possible in time.

I mentioned this rose, because this lineage seems to have a high rate of passing on good BS resistance, and, well, the blooms are gorgeous, especially for its time.

I think an enterprising hybridizer could utilize a rose like this. The hardiness and habit would have to be improved or changed (like, changes the way Cecile Brunner became, for example), but I think its a line worth noting.
Reply #3 of 3 posted yesterday by Margaret Furness
My (small number of) crosses between Baronne HS and Lady Hillingdon, in either direction, all failed.
Discussion id : 101-134
most recent yesterday SHOW ALL
Initial post 21 JUN by Michael Garhart
Consistent yearly size, as a grafted plant in the Pacific NW, has been about 4.5' T x 3.5'W. It makes a large everblooming orb. Kind of like Bonica. Way bigger than I expected, but I love the rose, and so do visitors. Its a very happy rose.
Reply #1 of 4 posted 3 days ago by Mike Mulholland
Very useful as usual, Michael, especially for me due to our shared climate.

I confess that I am fond of singles anyway, but I think that they are inherently much better vehicles for showing off contrasting eyes than roses with more petals. That holds for this rose versus Bullseye and the Eyeconics, for example, but it also holds for pale eyes, such as in Cocktail, Hoot Owl, Crazy Dottie, and many of the Meidiland roses.

I was very interested in this rose when I was putting in a lot of roses at a previous house several years ago, but I couldn't find a source, and now I am in the same boat at a new house. Does anyone know a U.S source for this rose, preferably own root? It would have to be mail order unless in western OR or WA.

Also, has anyone grown the similar but considerably newer rose For Your Eyes Only, also by Chris Warner?
Reply #2 of 4 posted 3 days ago by Michael Garhart
Oddly enough, this one can be trained into a climber in our climate! I whack mine back every year to 4". The canes are very pliable.

Portland Rose finder says nada for it locally. Portland Nursery used to carry it, but it seems they're not doing CR roses this year. CR could potentially have it in Lowes or HD this summer, but you never know what will show up. Regans is already done for the year, but they were selling it via CR. Maybe you could call CR and see who online may distribute it.
Reply #3 of 4 posted yesterday by Mike Mulholland
Any idea how tall it would get as a climber? How do the flexible canes work as a shrub - just keep piling up on top of one another?
Reply #4 of 4 posted yesterday by Michael Garhart
The canes are super flexible. When I prune it to 4" every January, it reaches to my nose by november. I'm 6'3". That is a mature plant.

It has continuous growing tips, which would lend quite well to training. Just like it's parent, Summer Wine, but not quite as big. One would still have to prune any new shoots trying to grow wide at the base, however. But its not too much work, considering it doesn't need sprayed here.

The only caveat, other than side branches for that idea, I think, is that it has hooked prickles. So no at planting it somewhere near faces and eyes, if one was to train it.

Some Austins are grown like this, as well. I know Graham Thomas is a prime example, but it defoliates from BS here. Macy's Pride, as well.
© 2018