|
|
'Souvenir d'Alphonse Lavallée' rose Reviews & Comments
-
-
|
Three years ago I ordered Souvenir d'Alphonse Lavallée from Lens Roses in Flanders, Belgium. I planted her against an Obelisk. As soon as the shrub started to grow in spring I knew this wasn't an Hybrid Perpetual. It made slender, flexible long branches which I could lead around the obelisk. The few blooms she had the first year didn't look like "very close to Souvenir de docteur Jamain". They looked like deep red to mauve/purple, quartered Gallica like flowers with a good strong old rose fragrance. I started to search on the internet and also on this site. This led me to look at Erinnerung an Brod from Geschwind and BINGO! That was my rose. I contacted Ann from Lens and she told me there was lots of confusion about Lavallée. I said she was selling Erinnerung an Brod. The next two years my Brod kept getting stronger and bigger covering the entire obelisk. Last year in 2022 she already was fantastic and bloomed for weeks but last summer in 2023 she was a magnificent display with dozens of purple jewels and she kept blooming till late June so well over four to five weeks in hot dry weather. I love my Erinnerung an Brod and I'm glad they gave me the wrong Lavallée. This fall I again wrapped several new branches around the obelisk and it's completely full now. May 2024 promises to be a wonderful Erinnerung an Brod year! PS: After a cold spring the first flowers suffer from proliferation but I don't mind as later blooms are perfect. Highly recommended rose
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Initial post
28 AUG 23
|
* Posted by unregistered site guest: Pending HMF administrative review. *
|
|
-
-
|
What colour IS the real Souvenir d'Alphonse Lavalee? Is it the deep, dark, almost violet burgundy red of Erinnerung an Brod or Souvenir du Dr. Jamain,or is it the lighter red that I am seeing in John Hook's photos? Red is such a difficult colour to photograph, and different cameras and lighting influence the tones so much; I'd be very grateful if someone could give me a verbal description as well...
|
REPLY
|
|
Niels Plougmann says that this one, photo 65187 is correct: it's the same plant as was photographed by the late James Young for a book, but it hasn't survived changes of ownership of Ruston's. Presumably the one at Thomas for Roses (also in South Australia) was the same, but I don't know whether it survived the bushfire of a year ago. I can't help with a description.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 8 posted
25 JAN 21 by
eihblin
|
Thank you, Margaret, but I don't see any numbers on the photos,so I can't tell to which one you refer!
|
REPLY
|
|
If you click on a photo to enlarge it, the number appears beneath it. It's one that I posted.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#4 of 8 posted
25 JAN 21 by
eihblin
|
Thank you for your patience, Margaret. Alas, on my browser I can only see one photo of yours numbered 343005,and it only shows hips, no flowers.
|
REPLY
|
|
This one. There's a way of finding the photo by the number, but I've forgotten how.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#6 of 8 posted
25 JAN 21 by
eihblin
|
O, Margaret, thank you so much! That is stupendous!
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#7 of 8 posted
25 JAN 21 by
 jedmar
|
Move the mouse cursor onto the photo and you will see the link with the photo number on the lower left corner
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#8 of 8 posted
21 MAR 22 by
bibi
|
Thank you. Mine is quite similar to the one of Labenz rosenpark.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Another question about this rose: here, on this site, the blooms are described as "small to medium, medium to large"...which is correct?
|
REPLY
|
|
I am sure medium to large is correct as the 1885, 1901 and 1936 references all say large. That seemed to be a technical glitch as small to medium was not selected. However deleting the large and then reselecting it, seemed to work. I’ll notify Admin notwithstanding. Thanks Eihblin.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 5 posted
30 JAN 21 by
jedmar
|
That happens when two non-identical listings are merged. You can see that also the colour description has two different texts. After merging it is necessary to open the file details and close again for the duplicates to disappear.
|
REPLY
|
|
Aha....of course. Thank you Jedmar.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#4 of 5 posted
21 MAR 22 by
bibi
|
I would like to believe that I posess the good variety. It is dark red, a little bit paler than Souvenir du Dr Jamain. Medium size flowers full of petals.
|
REPLY
|
|
Niels Plougmann told me that the one that was at Renmark was correct ( Photo Id: 65187, third from the start of the photos: the same plant was photographed for Botanica's Roses.) It was removed to make way for a more commercial rose planting.
|
REPLY
|
|
