HELPMEFIND PLANTS COMMERCIAL NON-COMMERCIAL RESOURCES EVENTS PEOPLE RATINGS
|
|
|
Recent Questions, Answers and Comments
-
-
|
Hi HMF,
The picture of MEIgandor posted by HunneeBunnie is not MEIgandor, but Meiptorius bought through the production of garden cut flowers from Alexandra Farm.
Cheers
Matthias
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 3 posted
yesterday by
 jedmar
|
Photo reassigned. Do you have a photo of MEIgandor?
|
REPLY
|
|
Not really, the variety was only cut flower production during the 80's, and had a small life. So unless someones find a catalog from this era of a cut flower production, I don't see how ;)
Cheers
Matthias
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 3 posted
today by
jedmar
|
Photo from Plant patent added
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
The missing line of the 1851 Horticulturalist quote is:
Roses, and for the past year encouraged a vi
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 1 posted
today by
jedmar
|
Quote completed, best thanks!
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
The Setigera ‘Mary Washington’ (also called 'Washington') was “grown as Estella (or Esther) Pradel in Florida, but we know that that is not the correct name” [Annual Catalog, Royal Palm Nurseries, 1899, p. 51].
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 9 posted
2 days ago by
jedmar
|
'Mary Washington' mislabeled as 'Esther Pradel'?
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 9 posted
yesterday by
odinthor
|
I'm only relaying the quote!
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 9 posted
yesterday by
jedmar
|
Just to make sure I understood the quote correctly!
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#4 of 9 posted
yesterday by
odinthor
|
Yes, that's indeed what they're saying. And, when one goes through looks at the various literature (not necessarily here) about 'Esther Pradel' (or 'Estelle Pradel') over the decades, one indeed finds as time goes on a series of them (descriptions) describing a pure white vigorous, even rampant, one, which is obviously distinct from those about the chamois tinted dwarf original 'Esther Pradel'. How this came to be is mysterious (but mystery is our everyday provender in Old Roses).
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#5 of 9 posted
yesterday by
HubertG
|
I'm pretty certain I've seen a photo of a spray Esther or Estelle Pradel in an American catalogue though I can't remember which one, but if my memory serves me correctly it was one from the South and was early 20th century. It might be worth you hunting for it.
Edited to add; it's in the 1905 Glen Saint Mary catalogue on page 45 as 'Estelle Pradel' ... but I'm in bed ;-)
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#6 of 9 posted
yesterday by
jedmar
|
Photo and references added, thank you!
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#7 of 9 posted
yesterday by
HubertG
|
You're welcome, jedmar, but thank you!
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#8 of 9 posted
yesterday by
jedmar
|
Here's what might have happened: The noisette 'Euphrosine' by Goubault was available in USA from the 1850s. An article in JdR of 1880 compares this to 'Esther Pradel' - both having fawn and pink double blooms. The found rose "Mary Washington" is described both as a Noisette or a Setigera. Clearly, the latter rose cannot be from George Washington, there were neither Noisettes nor Setigeras in his time. So, do we have 'Euphrosine' morphed into 'Mary Washington' and 'Estelle Pradel'?
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#9 of 9 posted
yesterday by
odinthor
|
That's a good and reasonable scenario! Thanks.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Initial post
12 JUL 10 by
kev
|
the rose pictured here is pink.Duc de Fitzjames is not this colour.It is a deep violet/purple and dark crimson red.
|
REPLY
|
|
The 'Vintage Book of Roses' says that there are two plants in commerce called 'Duc de Fitzjames', one darker than the other. Mine is lilac pink, similar to the flowers I see in the photos. My plant came from 'La Campanella' in Italy, but I don't know where they got their mother plant. According to Vintage the darker-flowered variety is likelier to be the correct one.
|
REPLY
|
|
Interesting, thanks for taking the time to sharing this insight with HelpMeFind. Just what HMF is all about - a tool to collect and disseminate gardening information to a participating online community.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 7 posted
31 JUL 18 by
jedmar
|
La Campanella has many of their Gallicas from Cour de Commer - the collection of François Joyaux. 'Duc de Fitzjames' in commerce is often 'Mme Lauriol de Barny', a Bourbon rose.
|
REPLY
|
|
I don't have 'Mme. Lauriol de Barny' in the garden and haven't seen it, at least not identified as such. I took a look at the newest page of photos of this variety on HMF, and, though I haven't made a careful comparison, right now I wouldn't swear that the rose I see in the photos isn't my 'Duc de Fitzjames'. My rose is a good tough variety with opulent blooms, coming easily from cuttings, has never reflowered later in the season, and gets some fungal disease after blooming, though not enough to do it any harm. Lanky in growth; thorny. I'm fond of it, mainly because of the very handsome blooms combined with the ability to flourish in quite poor conditions.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#5 of 7 posted
4 AUG 18 by
jedmar
|
Melissa, it would be very helpful if you could post some photos of your 'Duc de Fitzjames' on HMF.
|
REPLY
|
|
I'm a reluctant photographer (and this isn't the season anyway). I wanted to add to my description that my 'Duc de Fitzjames' sets hips, which are rounded oval, about 2cm wide and slightly longer, and smooth, the orifice not wide, sepals not persistent. They haven't matured yet so I don't know their color. A final note: my rose has long-lived canes, and suckers out, slowly and not aggressively.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#7 of 7 posted
yesterday by
Emily W.
|
I came here to check on the color of this rose because last year it was a medium to light pink and this year it's quite dark with violet undertones. Would anyone know what would change the color.
|
REPLY
|
|
|
