|
|
'Comtesse Risa du Parc' rose Reviews & Comments
-
-
|
Am I mistaken, or do the photos here not match the descriptions in the references very well?
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 11 posted
23 FEB 10 by
 Cass
|
You're right. The descriptions of the photos often clearly state that the posters do not believe the rose in commerce as Comtesse Riza du Parc is accurately named. That's why they describe the rose as "Not Comtesse Riza du Parc."
|
REPLY
|
|
You're quite correct, Cass. I should have read all the notes on the photos.
Obviously there are a number of roses traded and sold under the wrong name, and I don't have an easy solution to how HMF can deal with this. Perhaps something in the description page saying "The rose sold as Comtesse Riza du Parc is another other variety. The photos on HMF are of that variety referred to as 'Not Comtesse Riza du Parc'. " Or something to that end. At least there could be something as clear as is indicated in the Sombreuil description page.
Perhaps the true identity of 'Not Comtesse Riza du Parc' will come to light. Certainly HMF is one place that can help make that possible.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 11 posted
23 FEB 10 by
Cass
|
The soft whitish salmon-pink rose should be on its own page, and photos of that rose can also remain here. The challenge is to make HMF valuable both to the cognoscenti and to casual rose growers who rely on the name on the label of the roses they buy.
|
REPLY
|
|
All the photos posted (as opposed to the old illustrations) were taken in Australia, and are presumably of the same cultivar, whoever she is. There are a couple more posted on the Ruston's Garden page.
|
REPLY
|
|
This rose is also sold by some nurseries as Mme Charles ("What we have grown as 'Comtesse Riza du Parc' for some years is the same." 'Mme Charles' entry, Vintage Gardens Book of Roses, 2003, p 87.)
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#6 of 11 posted
25 FEB 10 by
Cass
|
Aha! I thought that was a possibility. So HMF could combine "Mme Charles (In commerce as in USA)" and "Comtesse Riza du Parc (In commerce as in Australia)." I will sort out my photos and the Australian Comtesse Riza du Parc to this new rose.
|
REPLY
|
|
Thanks Cass.
I'll load any future images to this new listing.
Should I remove my photos from the original Comtesse Riza du Parc entry and re-load them to the [in commerce as] page, or can you transfer them easily from your end?
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#8 of 11 posted
26 FEB 10 by
Cass
|
I can transfer them, Billy.
|
REPLY
|
|
Thanks Cass.
I've just uploaded some more photos, showing some of the features and colour range.
I am not certain how many different roses are sold under the name Mme Charles in the USA and world wide.
The rose thought to be Papillon (also sold as Duke of York etc) was widely distributed under the name Mme Charles a while back and is still in some nurseries. This one is sufficiently different in plant habit and flower form to be easily distinguished from the various apricot or apricot blend Teas.
We know that the VG Mme Charles is the same as "the rose sold as Comtesse Riza du Parc" but is it known whether any of the other Tea roses seen under the name Mme Charles in European gardens have found their way into commerce in the USA?
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#10 of 11 posted
7 MAR 10 by
jedmar
|
We have added a description by Joseph Schwartz himself.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#11 of 11 posted
8 MAR 10 by
Cass
|
The image and description also describe the rose in commence in the USA as Mme Lambard.
|
REPLY
|
|
