|
|
'Lady Curzon' rose Reviews & Comments
-
-
Initial post
30 JAN by
 Callimarcio
|
This rose is very similar to another hybrid rugosa x gallica from the same epoch, I mean 'Rugosa Repens Rosea' (Smith, 1904). Is there any difference between those two varieties or is it the same rose ?
It could exists a mixing among collections/nurseries, so it could be great if a reliable expert could enlighten us..
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 1 posted
today by
fenriz
|
I‘m just a grower of Lady Curzon, the flower petals on the other one look less crinkled sometimes and posses a more salmon-like pink when freshly opened. By their disclosed parentage they should be similar somehow, that they are when comparing those few photos of the other rose. Real closure could only be provided by genetic analysis i guess. But i would rather grow a lady…
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Initial post
3 days ago by
fenriz
|
may the height be corrected? it grows more than 2 meters. i don’t know it’s solitary height as this is a climbing rose. but the commercial information checks this as well.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 1 posted
yesterday by
jedmar
|
Height modified, thank you!
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Initial post
10 FEB 19 by
rikuhelin
|
Does well in zone 3B/4A Canadian Prairie garden
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Initial post
12 FEB 17 by
Nastarana
|
"Lady Curzon' is also being sold this year, 1917, by Old Market Farm, in upstate New York., USA.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 3 posted
13 FEB 17 by
Jay-Jay
|
You mean 1917... or 2017 as this year?
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 3 posted
13 FEB 17 by
Nastarana
|
2017! Sorry about that. I never have been much of a typist.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 3 posted
13 FEB 17 by
Jay-Jay
|
I just was a bit confused, because this rose was born just a few years before the one You mentioned.
Me too still sometimes forget that we live in the twenty-first century.
I once heard someone say as she spoke about the millennium: The year nineteen two-thousand.
|
REPLY
|
|
