The third one looks like a Buck rose to me.

The way I go about IDing a rose is to take a glance at the flower, then zoom in and concentrate on the canes and leaves. It's the canes and leaves that are going to tell you what the rose really is. Unfortunately, the canes on band roses are often immature, and not necessarily typical of what the rose is going to be like when it is grown up. There are roses where canes acquire thorns over time, and roses where the canes lose thorns over time.

Good point about the fragrance as well as the canes on roses being different when immature than when mature, Christopher and MG. I'll go out and check my Mme Caroline Testout tonight, Christopher, and see if the canes and leaves look similar. You're right that those big full blooms do look like hers, though of course mine isn't blooming yet. I agree MG that the flower form reminds me of Buck roses like Country Dancer, but I can't reconcile the absolute thornlessness of this one with a Buck rose at this point. The first rose has at least a hint of thorns here and there, but this last one is smooth as a baby's bottom. Still, you're right that it could develop more thorns over time.

Thanks for the help - any further guesses on these?

Cynthia

First off, I'm hopeless at IDing roses but I do grow Therese Bugnet & her leaves do not appear rugose at all to me, they look like yours in the photo. BUT my flowers look different & only the new growth is thornless, old canes are thickly prickled. Hope this has some value for you.

Jane

Jane - thanks for the tip about Therese Bugnet. Mine bloomed for the first time this year, and they look a good bit different from mystery #3. I checked and to my surprise, the canes are pretty smooth throughout the length, which I'd never noticed before. Here's a sample Therese bloom - she is nicely fragrant but she seems too double to be #3 and too dark pink to be #1, not to mention that little stripe on the petals:

I do have an additional photo of pink rose #2, which is my biggest puzzle. It is looking very double with Austin-like clustering and cupping of petals. Sorry the picture is a bit blurred, but you can see how double it is, and it's more of a carnation pink than the hot pink of the others.

It's looking like a dead ringer for Blessed Child if it had more fragrance, though Emmanuela de Mouchy is a possible one though it looks a little darker pink especially on the reverse, and it's supposed to be fragrant too. If it is an Austin, Geoff Hamilton is a definite possibility, but it's supposed to be thornless and this is the one with thorns. If it had more fragrance, I could go with Mme. Ernest Calvat, but this mystery one is pretty dead to my nose. Radio Times would also be an option, if it had more fragrance. So my best guesses would all be fragrant or thornless from the Rogue Valley roses so far, and that doesn't yet fit this rose. Of course, I might not be able to smell the fragrance, but I'm usually pretty good with Austins and Hybrid Perpetuals and Bourbons.

I think my working guess is Blessed Child with fragrance I can't detect, but I'd welcome other ideas!

Cynthia

Oh I forgot to mention about Christopher's comment about Mme. Carolyn Testout. Now that this bloom is open, I don't get the curling back that Carolyn's petals do, but more cupping the other direction. Still, it's a possibility, and she doesn't have much fragrance.

Cynthia

I too think that #3 is ZD. Is it virtually thornless? ZD doesn't have many thorns. The last picture you put up certainly looks like a tea of some sort. I was able to ID my latest RV mystery rose as Gilbert Nabonnad.

Yep, #3 is entirely thornless and I'm agreeing with you that ZD is the best working theory for that one. I did look up Gilbert Nabonnand and some of the bloom pictures on HMF look quite close to this one. However, he's not only fragrant he's supposed to be mostly thornless, and this is the one with thorns. I'll have to look at some of the other teas though - I appreciate the tip. The only other tea in stock that looks close is Clementina Carbonieri, but this one doesn't have the yellow cast. Too bad, as that's a rose I really wanted to try in my fussy-pants tea bed.

I appreciate the help - I'm still stumped on #2.

Cynthia

Third rose is definitely Zephirine Droughin. Don't have a clue about the other two.

Cynthia you are right #2 is not Emmanuella de Mouchy which is so distinctive it would knock your socks off.

Thanks ProfessorRoush - I'm pretty confident about #3 and dithering between climbing Pinkie and Pink-a-boo for #1. Sheila, it's great to be able to officially cross Emmanuella de Mouchy off the list for #3, as that field still needs narrowing.

Thanks for chiming in!

Cynthia