Vintage Gardens, to me, is more trusted with the identity of their antiques because they continue to investigate what they have, compare to old records, and have no problem issuing their identification as tentative by placing the name in double quotes. Tammy posted pics of hers, and that is the "thornless RdV" I remember from another nursery -- dull green color to the stems, leaves wider and more rounded, tapering suddenly. Tammy first said hers had thorns, then took the pics and came back saying what she thought were thorns were merely small bumps. My band is just as prickly as a typical Gallica -- no one seeing it would remark about its "smooth canes" because they're not. That's not what I would call the same "a few thorns" as found on Tammy's band -- I can't put my finger on the stem without touching a prickle. The first reference on HMF for RdV is clearly a translation from the French (as noted by both the French title and the text's awkward English). I would much prefer to read the original and translate it myself. It's very likely that the "also the prickles of the branches" which follows a semicolon (which denotes a separation of the second clause from the first, such that it could be its own sentence if grammatically correct, and that the translation isn't makes me wonder about the accuracy of the translation) is not connected to the comment about "red stipules..." It could very well be that missing from the translation is a negative, turning that last bit into a comment about "also the lack of prickles of the branches" which is less awkward of a clause than "also the prickles of the branches." But I can't tell for sure without reading the original French. Be careful about taking an awkward translation as gospel just because it's the oldest. If several descriptions beginning merely a year later describe the plant as without (or almost without) prickles, I'd take that over the claim that the first description (as translated on HMF) is noting "red prickles" which I really don't get even in that awkward translation -- the semicolon would not be used if the "prickles of the branches" were red like the stipules. A comma would be. Also remember that considering the time for a book to come out in print during those years that close together, it's very likely that both authors were writing without seeing the works of the others. Thus the descriptions are better trusted to be based upon actual inspection, rather than copy-and-paste from other authors -- because there wouldn't have been time to read the first description and write it again in a book coming out a year or two later. Ultimately, RdV has had notes in her description over the years about her relative thornlessness. The band which I received would not be called "thornless" any more than many other roses I've seen which never acquired that adjective in their description. Sure, my plant isn't overly thorny, and its prickles are small, but they are not sparse enough for me (or anyone else seeing it for the first time) to say "my, that rose is thornless." But others seeing the real RdV over the years have. That's why I don't think this one is the "real" one, and the one I grew previously (and gave as a gift) was. :-) ~Christopher

Hmmmm. Not sure what is going on. One of the 3 is excellent. Leafing out totally no prob (Marchessa Boccella). The 2nd (Paul Neyron) is okay, the majority is not suffering from dieback and is leafing out, but is having some dieback. Mind you - these were the 2 that got in the ground first. The last, Reine De Violettes, is really dying back. I've cut it all the way down with about an inch or two sticking out of the ground. Pure sticks. It seemed to happen very quickly by the way (that surprises me). It definitely took a turn for worst after planting in the ground. Weird. It was stressed or something. So I don't think it was underwatered. If anything it was wetter then - but I just don't think it was over or underwatered. I was watching my roses carefully. Perhaps too much rain. I will contact ARE but was hoping to give it some time. Maybe I'll give ARE a heads up so they know (so I don't miss the 6 month mark if too much more time passes, plus don't they stop sending roses soon?). The flowers did make the trip to CA from TX - maybe it got stressed? They had to go thru some plant immigration thing (as I call it) :-) Stasi

Of the ones on this list, I only have a handy picture of Comte de Chambord. I have had Reine des Violettes in the past and also have Mme. Pierre Oger. In general, I would say that these groups of roses, the hybrid perpetuals, Bourbons, and Portlands all benefit from a cold period for rest. If you do not have a cold period, then you would be better served by the hybrid chinas, teas, and Noisettes. Most of the old garden roses on your lists do have a nice smell. Comte de Chambord has a good fragrance to it, and so does Mme Pierre Oger. A picture of Comte de Chambord: I hope this helps a bit.

I agree with Folly that, if your conditions are alkaline, Reine des Violettes is not for you. WONDERFUL rose -- but not for those of us with alkaline conditions. The rose I like a LOT better than RdV, in that same color range, is the Found rose, "Forest Ranch Pom-Pom," or "Forest Ranch Purple Pom-Pom." It's not in commerce, but it is in the Sacramento City Cemetery, and I am hopeful they will be propagating it for sale this April. In heat (just like RdV) it can be pink, but in my cool climate, it is almost always poiple. AND it is never bothered by my alkaline conditions. Clean foliage, too! When ours finishes its first spring flush for 2013, I'll remind DH to propagate it. Jeri