'Mrs. Conway Jones' rose reviews and comments

	Description		Photos		Lineage		Awards		References		Member Ratings		Member Comments		Member Journals		Cuttings		Gardens		Buy From

'Mrs. Conway Jones' rose Reviews & Comments

My HMF:

☐ POST COMMENT

Discussion id : 90-791 most recent 25 MAR 16 SHOW ALL

Initial post 8 FEB 16 by HMF supporting member

scvirginia

After reading through these references, I am convinced that there are two different Dickson HT's represented by one record. The trouble is that 'Mamie' was originally exhibited before its release as 'Mrs Conway Jones'. A few years later, in 1904 or 1905, the Dicksons released a different HT called, again, 'Mrs. Conway Jones'.

'Mamie' is carmine-pink, while 'MCJ' is creamy white with salmon accents. 'Mamie' was released- according to the Dickson's own timeline*- in 1901, while 'Mrs C Jones' was released in 1904 or 1905, so references to 'Mrs Conway Jones' prior to 1904 are almost certainly meant to describe the rose that was re-named 'Mamie'.

Thanks,
Virginia

*see J. des Roses, Aug. 1905 references which quote Dickson's recent catalogue of Pedigree Seedling Roses.

Reply #1 of 5 posted 9 FEB 16 by HMF supporting member

Patricia Routley

I think you are right. But having two roses from the same breeder with the same name within a short time frame is difficult. Should we separate them, or just do a Notation on the main page for the moment, something like:

This file seems to contain two hybrid teas:
1900. Mrs. Conway Jones (Syn 'Mamie') Carmine-rose with yellow base. Taller.
1904. Mrs. Conway Jones Creamy white with salmon pink. Lower.

Reply #2 of 5 posted 9 FEB 16 by HMF supporting member

billy teabag

Reply #4 of 5 posted 9 FEB 16 by HMF supporting member

scvirginia

How cool to have a Hawlmark catalog, even if it's a bit too late to feature 'Mrs. Conway Jones'. It doesn't surprise me that 'Mrs. Conway Jones' didn't stick around very long... lots of buyers must've asumed they already had it if they had 'Mamie'. Virginia	REPLY

Reply #3 of 5 posted 9 FEB 16 by HMF supporting member

scvirginia

I don't think the Dicksons released two different roses as 'Mrs Conway Jones'; as far as I can tell when the 1900 rose was exhibited it was called 'Mrs Conway Jones', but by the time it was released (in 1901), it was 'Mamie'.

My inclination would be to separate them with a notation for 'Mamie' that it was exhibited prior to its official release as 'MCJ', and that the same breeders released a different HT a few years later as 'MCJ'.

If you think it's less confusing to keep them together, I can see the logic of it... it's not like either rose is still in commerce; they're probably both extinct, and as far as I know, there aren't even any illustrations for either.

Virginia

Reply #5 of 5 posted 25 MAR 16 by HMF supporting member

jedmar

The colouring is quite distinct: one is rosy carmine, the other creamy white. It seems we have 2 roses	REPLY