Thats a good point, I myself plant so called “old” roses together with so called “modern” ones.
Also in breedings I take “old” and modern ones - and wild roses too.
Just as it does make sense to me. Perhaps thats shocking for some people, but I made good experiencies in doing that.
Planting & arranging like this can also increase health in a rose garden.
If some problematic varieties are planted together with those that show good health.
So, I planted even Albas next to modern roses, - no problem in my view!
That may be right, I will read that mentioned thread as deeply as possible.
But for now, - as I startet and you did answer, I will at least answer your kind postings here.
Jim, you said: “Though (…) the main goals would seem to endure time and not change that much, the order in which we place our priorities will have an effect on outcomes.”
Yes, well formulated. The main goals vary only in their ranking and they are spread over slightly different gene pools, in time.
I would agree with you in that point.
And this together with some “unusually” species or certain typical forms of hybrids, that might be crossed, this will perhaps give the mentioned outcomes, - that then could be surprisingly different from the roses bred & known before.
E.g., I think of the first complexer bracteata hybrids, I saw in the internet a few years ago. …
And in Sangerhausen they have Schneezwerg x R. bracteata from Luis Lens, well it survives outside, at least.
Or of the hulthemia efforts, you and some few others are trying to bring into life.
In Germany, otherwise, the so called “English Roses” from Austin seem to “peak” at the moment, as they are not always healthy and their heads often look sadly to the ground (that may come from thinking always of the English weather forecasts, I think ).
But one thing is interesting and also connected to these topics. - Some breeders over a long timeline have i something in common, in doing very similar things, and thats what I would remark as very interesting at the moment.
Breedings, that come into my mind and are done by Rudolf Geschwind from Austria, Wilhelm Kordes II from Germany and Louis Lens from Belgium - as also some of the breedings of some less known breeders like, e.g. Dr. Schmadlack from Eastern Germany, they all are done by crossings with Hybrids into wild roses.
So. Perhaps thats really an important thing, - giving way to some more richness of the genomes that are joyning the genepool of our garden roses, in the future.
“HT x HT = HT = O.K.” - that would be the opposite of what I mean, and I think nearly everybody here is smiling a little bit, on that meager formular, once thrown out for commercial breedings … .
When I saw ome of the later Louis Lens Hybrids - some of them without names - I began to think about these topics.
And then I read about Geschwind and talked about him with some experts.
Maybe he is my idol, - I don’t know, maybe its louis Lens.
The idea is nearly the same: Looking whats needed, the Rose Family is like a great Shopping Mall - everything is there and you are out there and have got the credit card of someone who has forgotten about it!
Greetings to you from Germany!
- And now & the next days I will read first, whats already written in your mentioned thread.
I am looking forward to it, allthogh it may take a little time, thanks!