You've pretty much hit that nail square on the head, Ingrid. When considering European older moderns, we forget most were introduced and have always been offered there as budded plants. Own root just wasn't a major propagation method there during the last century, and still isn't. Unless you are considering Mediterranean climates, there just isn't enough heat, sun nor length of growing season to produce a suitable product own root. These roses didn't have to be great without a strong root stock.

I Zingari will root, but never amount to a whole lot that way. Budded, it isn't as vigorous, nor large as Meilland's Fantastique. Both were considered HTs, but mini floras to floribunda would be probable better choices if they were introduced today. (I Zingari would not be introduced today, it just isn't strong or healthy enough.) Saturnia grew acceptably own root, but when I budded it on Dr. Huey, it was as large, vigorous and ever flowering as anything introduced half a century later. Its "thirty minute flowers" seemed to last longer and were definitely of much better color on Dr. Huey.

You've focused on one of my longest held loves, the older Modern roses. There has been enough of a preservation effort to save the older garden rose classes. As long as there are any specialty growers around, I think the best of the best will remain safe. We forget the late Nineteenth to mid Twentieth Century moderns ARE tomorrow's "OGRs". Just as with the traditional OGR classes, none of the early moderns are perfect everywhere. They all have their faults and foibles.

I had to give up growing anything too closely related to La France. The papery thin petals refuse to open with the amount of marine influence we get here in the hills of Encino and without regular spraying, the rust was legion. Neither of which were as chronic problems in the much more arid Santa Clarita Valley of the 1980s, 90s and early 2000s.

The oldest HTs I now grow here are Cecil (1926), still the most satisfying yellow rose I've grown; Snowbird (1936), very OGR looking with its Tea type growth and full, fragrant white blooms; Mrs. Oakley Fisher (1921), a real "sturdy woman" of a rose in an arid climate, with her lovely, single apricot blooms full of clove fragrance; Polly (1926), an "old flame" with her wonderful fragrance and feminine charms. She really requires budding, being a fairly miserable plant own root; Grey Pearl (1945), one of the worst plants of any type ever foisted on the public, even budded, with some of the most amazing shades and tints possible in living flower petals; and Mrs. Charles Bell (1917), truly, as McFarland praised the Radiance clan, "A world rose, able to be grown anywhere man can comfortably live."

If you would like to browse the older HTs I once grew, please feel free to look at the list of them which passed through the old Newhall garden during its 18 year life. It was a wonderful place! Thanks for starting this thread. We've needed one like it! Kim

Here is a link that might be useful: A Hidden Sanctuary

I have a Sutter's Gold which was in our garden, courtesy of my DH's grandfather. I love it for its gorgeous blooms and strong scent. I have to baby it - planted it in a huge pot in full sun where I walk by it every day to check on it. I even spray it with fungicide - special care for a family heirloom! I think it is from the early/mid 20th century.

However, I have a way older HT, which is from the 19th century, Cl Mme Caroline Testout, which is healthy, grows happily on its own roots, and is a real survivor (survived in the yard of a vacant house with no care at all for 7 years). Not all old HTs are wimpy! I do think MCT likes heat - I have planted it on the South side of our house on the chimney in a protected corner, and it is as happy as can be. Here is a pic:

Jackie

When we first moved here, the local historic estate had a fairly large garden of period HTs. At that time, you could still get grafted plants of things like Crimson Glory from J&P. About 15 years ago, they decided to redo that garden. So they pulled all the old plants, which were probably close to 20 years old at that time, and replaced them with the same cultivars own-root. At least three-quarters of those didn't survive the first winter, and all were dead after the second.

That garden is currently grass.

I strongly believe that if people are serious about the preservation of these roses, they have to ensure that members of the general public can get them as budded plants FROM SOMEWHERE. The alternative is for them to be a niche plant among niche plants for the few who are in a suitable enough climate, and possess enough patience to deal with them.

Right now I am selecting varieties for what should be a historic HT display garden. It isn't going to be.

No, Jackie, not all of them are wimpy. Particularly when you're considering the climbing sports, which are by nature, significantly more vigorous, sometimes too much so. Mme. Caroline definitely prefers milder temps than great heat. For many decades, she was a common street planting all around Portland, Oregon. Judging from old photos I've seen of her, she was quite spectacular there.

I agree, for large areas of the country, budding them is going to be the only way to permit people outside of "rose heaven" to preserve them. Unfortunately, that is often going to mean preserving primarily the basic dozen. They're the ones which sell most, have the most widely known names and reputations and whose parents and grand parents knew the names of. Kim

I grow very few HTs, the oldest are Gruss an Aachen (which I think counts as an HT?), Radiance, and Mme Caroline Testout. Rose Gaujard, Sutter's Gold and Princesse are from the fifties and early sixties so not very old. Gruss an Aachen is doing best of them so far, but I have great hopes for Radiance, still new but promising. All are budded except Radiance which I imported from the US as an own root plant, quite unheard of for HT's here.

Thank you for the link, Kim; it was so nice to be able to view each rose with the click of a button.

I'm hoping that Vintage will have available some more of the old hybrid teas so that I can try to grow them. Not too many of us have the right climate and I almost feel a responsibility to do what I can to help them survive. Another good thing is that they won't grow as large as most of my roses will with time, so they shouldn't take up a huge amount of space. I'm sure there are some that deserve to sink into oblivion, but who's to say what treasures I might also find.

Ingrid

Marianne, as somebody who has been in the the kill for more than 100 own-root Radiances, find somebody who can bud. With luck, it will make it through the first winter, but really, it needs a rootstock in a cold, cool summer, climate.

I have a few early hybrid teas: Crimson Glory and Mirandy, both get fried in the heat with thinner petals. Their repeat is fast, but they become single-petal in the heat. I have Firefighter and Sweet Promise 2007 - two new hybrid teas - they are own-root, but much bigger and vigorous than the older HTs that I used to grow: Angel Face, Peace, Double-Delight, a yellow one, Kordes Perfecta...

Both Firefighter and Sweet Promise 2007 bloom well in 90-100 degrees heat, and their thick petals don't get scorched like Mirandy and Crimson Glory. The new ones last longer in the vase, up to 5 days - versus 2 days for Mirandy and Crimson Glory.

I still grow older hybrid teas for their unique scent alone: Crimson glory smells like fresh clean soap. Mirandy smells heavenly. They look great in cool and wet spring/fall, but their thin petals fry in the summer heat. These older HTs will need extra-winter protection zone 5a. I don't need to winter-protect Firefighter and Sweet Promise 2007, they are tall and vigorous. I don't spray my roses - they are all healthy in my soil rich in dolomitic lime, so I can't compare disease-resistance.

I'm glad you enjoyed them, Ingrid. Some of the most elegant roses I've ever grown have been some of the early, single HTs. Lulu, the 1919, Walter Easlea HT, has some of the most elegant, fluted buds. Fully expanded, they sort of resemble Lady Ann Kidwell's shape, but while still scrolled in their slender "tubes", they are wonderful. I find it rather remarkable Ralph Moore was able to coax Pink Powderpuff from crossing it with his hybrid Bracteata, Muriel, itself half older HT. Irish Elegance and Fireflame also have gorgeous buds. Kim

My experience with old HTs on their own roots thus far is that some are wimpy, some are healthy-as-horses, and others are in between.

Gruss an Coburg, Gruss an Aachen, Ophelia, Mrs. Oakley Fisher, Mrs. Herbert Stevens, and Diamond Jubillee (1947, so "older", if not old) are all good growers own-root. In fact, Diamond Jubilee is 5'x 3' and a blooming fool hardly more than two years from being a band; same for Gruss an Coburg.

On the other hand, Duquesa de la Penaranda, Mrs. Lovell Swisher, Mrs. Wakefield Christie-Miller and Sir Henry Seagrave, seem much slower and Lady Mary Fitzwilliam, Hoag House Cream, and Fred Howard are somewhere in the middle, thus far.

I also have J. Otto Thilow, Mirandy (oh that scent) and Burnaby own-root and looking likely to grow well, but they are still in gallons.

Older HTs seem to me to have more graceful bushes than the modern ones, by and large, and the flower colors are, for sure, gentler on the eyes and nerves

Debbie

'Maman Lyly' (Soupert & Notting, 1911) is a wonderful early HT. As the bud starts opening out, the flower is sherbet orange; it then goes to an unexpectedly pure pink; and then it finishes up pretty close to white. The HMF pix don't show the orange at all. The form is beautiful, the size large, the scent wonderfully delicious. The leaves are lush and attractive, though perhaps not as profuse as one might like; and, once it gets settled, it grows vigorously (in spurts) to about five feet. I never spray anymore; once the plant matured, it got perhaps a bit of mildew in the spring, but that was all. A fine rose!

Thanks for the tip about Maman Lyly, odinthor - that sounds like a great rose! I like them scented, too.

I forgot to mention Cl Crimson Glory, which is the strongest scented rose I have, and is healthy, and happy on its own roots in my Mediterranean climate. Here is a pic:

Jackie

Kim:

I'm going off-topic here, but your above link to A Hidden Sanctuary is a reminder of how informative and useful those archived inventory lists of long-gone nurseries and collections can be.

How do the administrators at HMF decide which archives to maintain? I wonder, for instance, why HMF does not provide archived lists of such major collections as those once maintained by Mike Lowe (Lowe's Roses) and Paul Zimmerman (Ashdown). Each of those gentlemen (and perhaps especially Mike) was responsible for importing many roses that were never before available to American gardeners -- and some of those roses remain quite rare and virtually unattainable even now. Until their nurseries closed, the lists of roses grown by Mike and Paul were available at HMF. Not to have a permanent record of those collections is a huge loss to all who are interested in the history and provenance of the roses they grow.

A secondary loss is the well-designed and easy-to-navigate "encyclopedia" of roses that was an important feature of Ashdown's website. It was maintained for a while at Paul's new website, but is now apparently gone forever.

Pardon my off-topic meander, Kim, but since you seem to be very knowledgeable about HMF and acquainted with some of the folks there, I thought you would be a good person to ask.

Kay, own root plants are generally considered safer in our climate because even if the top freezes, the roots live. I say "generally" because my own experience with own root roses are only a few Canadian roses from Finland where they are firm believers in own root roses, Geschwind roses from the only Swedish own root nursery and pass along plants. All were proven hardy already before they went own root, so you make me very nervous about Radiance, unknown here. My plant may be one of the few grown in Europe outside rosariums. I know it's lost in the Gothenburg rosarium, two latitudes south of me. Is it a very tender rose? If it is, it is doomed after this summer, the coldest and wettest in decades. I don't know anybody who can bud it for me.

I'm interested in some of the early HT's also. My Cl Snowbird is a monster in my garden. I had to build a small arbor type structure to hold it. The blooms are gorgeous. I also have Cl Mme Jule Bouche and she is an equally large girl here. She's been in the ground 2-3 years, but not many blooms yet. But, I wait.

As far as the bush form of these roses, I am growing a few:

Duchess of Albany: she's been in the ground a little more than a year, and I love her. Very healthy and some lovely bloom so far. We'll see how she does long term.
Captain Christy: weak grower so far but holding on. We'll see.
Mme Abel Chateney: fairly healthy, no blooms so far, but I have hopes for her.

I wonder if anyone grows 1929 almost thornless "Talisman" rose, unique scarlet-orange color bloom. See the link below. Thanks for any info. on if it likes alkaline soil, reblooming, and fragrance.

Here is a link that might be useful: Talisman 1929 Hybrid Tea - almost thornless

Marianne, 20 years ago, people were saying the same thing around here. Then I started getting first hand knowledge of how own-root roses really work. It isn't that they are more tender, it is that they just don't grow. So the first winter, they typically die back to the snowline, maybe about 4 inches, then they struggle to put out a couple of spindly, weak branches that produce a flower or two. Then the next year the same thing happens, until the rose just gives up.

Then you read descriptions of the same roses budded, and maybe even get to see them grown that way, and they are real plants.

La France is one of my favorites of the old Hybrid Teas, a real winner here on its own roots. It's a gorgeous small shrub 3 feet tall and wide.

Radiance is a reliable rose for me here on its own roots, although it's small at 18-24 inches tall. It blooms well, however, and tolerates winter well.

Gruss an Aachen is so beautiful and hardy. I grow mine where it does not get all day sun, very sturdy rose. Mine is budded; this is a rose that I can imagine doing well own root.

I grow the roses organically and I think that helps to bring out their best strengths.

I have a little group from the 30's to the 50's, including Dairy Maid, Dusky Maiden, Mrs OF, Dainty Bess, Lilac Charm, Lagoon and a little pale yellow which name escapes me.....but they are not very HT like as they are all singles (I love this form of rose and these would be the only HTs I could see myself ever having). They are the only roses I have which I am prepared to ignore both shape and foliage (and they are a pretty iffy bunch, compared to the usual robust shrubs I usually get) although they also live in large pots (not in the chaos of the allotment, but nicely pampered at home). I love them a lot, but I don't think I would be getting any more......

I forgot to mention Leonie's Appoline which has very beautiful blooms at its best but often they're a muddled, balled up mess, more gray than cerise. I hope this rose will outgrow this stage since I would be very reluctant to ditch this rather rare rose.

Ingrid

windeaux

I just got a call from Kim and he told me that his Internet connection is down and may be down for several days. He asked me to let you know that he will respond to your post as soon as he can get online again.

Smiles,
Lyn

I grow Mme Antoine Mari. I've had it in a bed for about 16 years, own root, and it's very happy there. It will get very large!

Radiance, its sport Red Radiance, Crimson Glory did great for me as own-roots (Chamblees) in a hot muggy climate. (Lost them all in a hurricane but really want to replace them)

I ordered Curly Pink from RU this spring & so far it is doing fine. (forget whether their stock is own-root, but all plants were very good looking & haven't had a single casualty during a brutal year)

I begged, begged, the sweet lady from Greenmantle to send me a Talisman which she felt was too small to guarantee. She even sent it WITH a refund check & an apology. Of course I didn't cash it--I was so grateful to find anyone with this sentimental favorite. So it's another own-root & it is about 2' now & looks very well.

I really want another Radiance--& CG, as it is one of the lushest scented HTs I've had.

I have a big-box store Chrysler Imperial (grafted) that has done very well with much neglect. Bloomed throughout the miserable summer. Fine scent & lovely color

Hi Windeaux, I apologize for taking so long to reply to your questions. We had a three and a half hour, unexpected power outage in the neighborhood yesterday which fouled up the ever-wonderful Time-Warner service until about an hour ago. I went out and bought a new modem and fixed it myself. The "caring customer service representative" at Time-Warner stated last night that since I still have TV and telephone, "you are not a priority repair, so it will not be until September 5 that repair can be there."

To answer your questions, HMF and its Administrators don't actually have a policy concerning archived collections and gardens. They are primarily concerned with the moderation, development and maintenance of the site, which is actually rather expensive, both in time and money.

ALL of the information you find on HMF has mainly been added to the site by volunteers who have selected and added the content. If the information found in the REFERENCES conflict with each other or with patent information, they take the time to point out both that there may be an error in rose literature or even in the patent. The owners are completely open to suggestions as to content, but a number of the archived "collections" are there because I found them interesting; I collected the information and I put them there. (I, too, am a HMF volunteer, but only work on the site when I have time and on projects which interest ME).

When I proposed adding archive nursery listings to the Admins, there was a very real concern the archive listings might confuse HMF site users into thinking the lists represented viable, current sources for roses. The roses listed in the archives under the nursery's name still show up on the BUY FROM tab, but on the rose page, they are not listed as commercially available unless another nursery has included the rose in their inventory .... too much programming time was involved in excluding the nursery from the BUY FROM tab. Once we hashed out how to prevent that issue, I was thanked and told to run with it. I am always on the lookout for old catalogs and nursery listings to flush out the history of roses in America.

The main concern was not having these archives show up in searches where they may confuse users that the archives represented available business with available stock. There is always the concern about not running up server space (which gets quite expensive), clogging the system and putting unnecessary demands on the programming. All of which gets quite expensive, particularly for a site which has to completely rely upon donations and the incredibly small number of premium members.

It amazes me how so many people resent the $2 a month requested support for such a tremendous resource. I guess many believe that anything on line should be completely free because they are unaware of how quickly the costs of server space, programming, moderation and maintenance run up!

Many would also be quite surprised if the on line "attacks" from all over the world were publicized. Spammers, thieves and trolls attempt to breach the programmed security very frequently and that takes time and skill to prevent. All of which adds to the already strained resources. I'm amazed how inexpensive HMF has remained when I learned about the skill, resources and cost required just to keep the site open, much less develop and add features and content. btw ... do you support HMF with a premium membership ?

Do you have the list of roses Mike Lowe grew in his garden and nursery? If you do, I'll be happy to add an archive documenting his collection, when I have time. I am already working on several projects for the site. If you could/would please send me any such lists as either Word or Excel files, I'll be happy to create and upload them to archive pages.

Catalog lists are great, but how much more could be archived from garden lists! A private collection can be many times larger and more interesting than just what was propagated in a given year. I haven't gotten around to adding the information from the Ashdown catalogs yet. It can be QUITE time consuming. I received some major eye-rolling and annoyance over the time it required to study that many ROYAT catalogs and compile the list of over 700 varieties they contained. Compiling and uploading these archives is exactly the same process that is required for a nursery (who already HAS the information, often in forms necessary to upload) to create, update and maintain their nursery listings.

It's distressing to me AND the many volunteers who work on HMF how many nurseries can't/won't/aren't able to create and maintain their own nursery inventory lists. There really are many more varieties available than are shown, and from quite a few more sources. I know it requires effort and time, both of which are sorely lacking in many of the nurseries, but someone has to make the time and generate the energy to accomplish it. It behooves the businesses to put the information there and maintain it as it has been proven that an up-to-date inventory on HMF can/does result in increased sales and is very efficient, low cost advertising.

We volunteers cannot maintain the nursery listings as much as we would like to do on HMF simply because there are too many listing nurseries, and too many other projects being worked on. HMF needs to have the nurseries participate in maintaining their inventories, both due to the time involved as well as to insure their accuracy. Some users want to help by posting this or that rose is available at a particular nursery, and that is appreciated, but it doesn't help. There is one European nursery who still doesn't maintain their list. From the many "available from" posts to the Q&A, in just a few seasons, this nursery's availability list exceeded 900 varieties! No one removed what WASN'T available, new ones just kept being added from the helpful "available from" posts. You can't maintain the accuracy of a database that way!

Lyn G., RoseBlush1 on GW, has spent time fixing problems in content like no one would believe! It's taken her several years of evenings to correct misinformation and mis entries, adding references, not to mention her efforts to keep up with new introductions and registrations. Those are things we all expect to be accurate and simply to be there, but if it had been accomplished by a "paid employee", the cost of the site would be prohibitive.

I will be happy to look in to whether the information remains on the server about the Ashdown and Lowe collections as well as Cliff's from Euro Desert. I agree with you the information is invaluable, particularly when attempting to determine whether a variety was ever commercially available here. That can make a tremendous difference when trying to identify a found rose.

Archiving Paul's encyclopedia of roses on HMF, I believe, would require some pretty heavy programming incorporate into HMF. That is not only time consuming, but potentially quite expensive. If it was simple and cheap, it would already be archived and accessible elsewhere. Someone has to pay for keeping it available and useable.

Based upon how difficult it has been to get people to support HMF, I can imagine what it would probably be like to get support for his encyclopedia. If you know of someone with the disposable resources and who would be willing to support such a project, please get them with HMF to see if it may be something possible to accomplish. Also, the current volunteers all have their own long "to-do" lists, so if you can also find someone who understands the working of a complex database to do the work, that would make it more feasible.

HMF is open to anything which may make the site more valuable and useful as a resource. There is a tremendous level of pride for the site, but it genuinely boils down to costs. Someone has to pay for the costs required to accomplish and maintain the requested additions. If they can be accommodated within the current budget and it can be shown to be a beneficial change, the people at HMF are completely agreeable to accommodating the improvements.

I'm not aware of any suggestions which have been refused out right. I do know of many which have been put on the "to do" lists and will very likely appear once there are sufficient resources available to put them in place. I'm extremely pleased the only "agenda" I have found is to make the site as complete, useful, accurate and interesting a resource as can be created while keeping it as efficient and cost effective as it must remain.

I, for one, am proud that I have had the opportunity to view HMF as it has evolved from its early days to what we see today and have loved participating as a volunteer on the site. I honestly believe that the part I have played over the years has enriched my own rose life and I can now interact with rose lovers from around the world. Kim

My time available for these forums has become extremely limited, but I want to comment on madgallica's specific report about her "local historic estate."

As a gardener and as one of the few writers here who endorses own root roses I say the destruction of an existing healthy productive mature garden or individual plant is never to be encouraged.

I have come to realize that conservation is counterintuitive to the general public and that what to conserve is always subjectively biased.

I have observed that generally new owners inevitably change their properties either actively, as in this case, or passively by not providing care, for example.

And while true gardeners, a very rare breed, should theoretically be reliable in such matters, EVEN our good judgment is subjective and potentially contentious amongst ourselves and particularly amongst the less informed - not to mention the contentiousness of change itself.

What madgallica observed has less to do with "own roots" and more to do with subjective judgment. This sort of thing occurs all the time. My sister had a collection of camellias at least 25 years old - proud exquisite specimens. After her death, the new mistress had them ALL taken out. When I moved to Florida, my friends called to tell me that my garden that they loved had been completely removed and transformed to lawn.

It would seem that human nature is more inclined to destructiveness than nurture, but in essence these events are best seen as evidence of the power to control personal or collective environments as deemed desirable by their owners. And that is a freedom which I endorse and hold dear. Otherwise, gardens could not be created.

For about four years, I grew an early HT, 'Betty' 1905, and it was lovely. Some of you on the forum probably remember my posting about it. It was own-root, and it did very well for several years in a VERY challenging situation. It had good-sized blooms of a warm light pink streaked subtly with cream, and a truly lovely Tea fragrance, light but delicious. I believe that if I had had a real garden in which to plant this rose, it would have been wonderful. But this year, the challenging situation became even more so, and even I had to admit that it was now a case of saving my doomed roses by giving them away. A friend of mine took them to grow in a retirement center garden, and I know they will be happy there. The other two were Mlle. Cecile Brunner, the well-known Poly, and Mlle. Jeanne Phillipe, a small yellow Tea. Of them all, MJP was the most valiant, still blooming away and very graceful-looking. I have no regrets, and would recommend 'Betty' to anyone in a Tea-friendly climate. One of the authors of the Australian Tea rose book has some lovely photos of 'Betty' on HMF. They show the bush that my rose would have grown into had I had a decent home for it! By the way, I got it from Vintage Gardens. I believe they still have it, but under "custom root" status.
Laura

I'm gowing a number of them. Some are quite vigorous in my climate. Others need a bit of nursing. Some just don't make it. Some I've decided to grow in pots. I have a beautiful garden on my deck. I grow minis there along with pretty petunias and other things. I'm growing Fantastique in a pot and Madame Louis Lapierre. These are lovely grown this way. If some of the less stronger growing ones are placed properly like at the front of a bed I find it works for me too.

Ingrid, I was just thinking about this today and then saw your post. Interesting.

I only have a few early HTs.

My favorite of the group is Grace Darling (1884), followed closely by Madame Pierre Euler (1907). I had Radiance but rabbits got it. I'm going to try Red Radiance in its place.

Other own root HTs that I've tried are either completely wimpy (Baronne Edmond de Rothschild--but when it does bloom, wow!) or didn't make it (Eminence and Legacy of Elizabeth Moore--not sure of year on this last one).

I was just looking at BEdR and thinking, "maybe it's not worth it" but your post has me thinking that I just need to coddle them bit more and keep waiting. True, some of these might not make it but I won't know which ones will do well until I try them.

Ingrid: You might like to take a look at the Pernetiana HTs on Vintage Gardens website. I don't know if they are still available, but there are several that I would really have loved to grow. That is, 'Golden Sastago', 'Irene Churucca', 'Pilar Landecho', and 'Colette Clement'. I also don't know how they would do in your climate (or for that matter, in mine - I'm just a sucker for a pretty face!).

Laura

Laura, the stronger growing Pernetianas are pretty good plants in warm, arid areas. They'll have healthy foliage with decent growth. As a class, they are as Dr. J.H. Nicholas described them, "Thirty minute roses", as with exposure to heat and brilliant light, those "pretty faces" fade and blow rather quickly. As with any other group, there are weak, spindly growers; through the OK ones to the overly vigorous types. Of course, the weaker growers, like the weaklings of all other types, are best budded. Collette Clement grew quite well own root in Newhall and flowered like a floribunda. That brilliant color quickly faded and the individual flowers lasted only a day or two, but it was healthy and productive. Yellow Sasatago wasn't quite as vigorous as traditional Sastago, which was a good thing as it didn't seem as semi climbing. The flowers tried to be a brighter yellow, but were usually pale. President Herbert Hoover and the Hoover sports and anything closely related to Talisman were generally good growers there, but probably one of the most wonderful was Saturnia. Mark Sullivan is a little later, but one of the good growers and marvelously fragrant. I grew him for several years before a particularly cool, damp spring produced the old gold with crimson veining he was supposed to show. Most often, he was buff.

As long as you know what to expect from the class and genes, you can look for them to produce the exciting colors. Just keep your eyes tuned for "museum piece" and view them through 1920 - 1940 eyes and I think you'll enjoy them. For climates where rust and black spot are real problems, get ready to spray most of them, as they'll likely need it. Kim