|
|
"Thomasville Lamarque" rose Reviews & Comments
HelpMeFind's future is in your hands - Please do not take this unique resource for granted.
Your support of HelpMeFind is urgently needed. HelpMeFind, like all websites, needs funding to survive. We have set a premium-membership yearly subscription amount as low as possible to make user-community funding viable.
We are grateful to the many members who have signed up so far, but the number of premium-membership members remains too small for us to sustain the current support and development level. If you value HelpMeFind and want to see it continue we need your support too.
Yearly membership is only $2.00 per month and adds a host of additional features, and numerous planned enhancements, to take full advantage of the power and convenience of HelpMeFind. Click here to start your premium membership..
We of course also welcome donations of any amount. Click here to make a donation. Donations of $24 or more receive a thank-you gift of a 1-year premium membership.
As far as we have come, we feel HelpMeFind is still in its infancy. With your support we have so much more to accomplish.
-
-
Initial post
19 APR 12 by
 Patricia Routley
|
Should 'Thomasville Lamarque' be merged with 'Lamarque' and treated as a synonym of 'Lamarque'
Or should it be retained as a foundling "Thomasville Lamarque" and have the breeder deleted.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 2 posted
19 APR 12 by
Nastarana
|
They do seem to be two separate roses. I had hoped to grow both, along with Brightside Cream, for comparison, but had to move to a much colder climate, where Noisettes won't survive the winters.
H. B. Ellwanger, the American author and rosarian, gave a list of what he was pleased to term too much alike roses. This, mind you, at the turn of the 20th century! Among the too much alikes, he listed "Lamarque and Jeanne d'Arc". That last would clearly not be the Noisette shrub which is at present known as Jeanne d'Arc. I have wondered if one of the two slightly different Lamarques might not be the original Jeanne d'Arc. Sheer speculation, of course. Also in the mix, so to speak, are some interesting, Lamarque-like foundlings, Brightside Cream, the Florez St. House Eater, and one other also found in Texas. I don't know if anyone has ever tried growing them all side by side. A huge wall would be needed.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 2 posted
1 AUG 17 by
John Hook
|
In my opinion this should be merged with 'Étendard de Jeanne d'Arc' . I have been growing the two for several years now and can detect no differences
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Initial post
29 JAN 15 by
John Hook
|
After comparing this to 'Etendard de Jeanne d'Arc' (Origin L'Hay) for some time now I think 'Nasturana' may be correct, no difference between the two except the l'Hay clone is sickly
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Initial post
9 SEP 14 by
John Hook
|
This rose is what I would expect 'Etendard de Jeanne d'Arc' to look like., cluster flowered somewhat climbing and a strong affinity to Gloire de Dijon. Unfortunately I have 'Etendard de Jeanne d'Arc' (ex L'Hay) from Loubert which seems probably correct this behaves like many of the Gloire de Dijon offspring, ie it's sickly with no vigor, unlike TL.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Initial post
27 APR 14 by
John Hook
|
seems to differ from our Lamarque in having flatter flowers (in the Souv. de la malmaison type) and rounder leaves.
|
REPLY
|
|
