Thanks for chiming in and helping out with this! Mendocino Rose - I think the color in this picture captures what it looks like to my eye, but it's a first bloom and those can be notoriously variable from the eventual bloom of the plant. The bloom form is probably a better characteristic to judge, and if that doesn't match the ones you grow it's helpful to rule them out. Too bad Fellemberg and Alexander Girault don't look like a good match - I was looking forward to a monster pink OGR to put head-to-head against Madame Alfred Carriere (though what I'd do with three of them is another question). Nastarana - thanks for the feedback about Etude. Somehow the petals didn't look right, and the thornless canes have been a puzzle. One of the other mystery roses that I think is the same variety has mostly thornless canes with two normal-sized thorns at random locations but it doesn't look like the canes will grow into their thorns over time. It's just the variability of "mostly thornless" I suspect. I appreciate the help and any other suggestions folks may have! Cynthia

Cynthia, I think you might get more response over on Antiques. They're really good at IDs even if it's a modern rose.

It seems I haven't taken many pics of my 'Napoleon' -- probably because it's in an unfinished area. But, in any case, here they are. As a newly-repotted band back in 2013. One year later, ravaged by sawfly larvae. Also last year, far left corner of this pic, which was taken more to show the coreopsis. These two were taken this year, during the first flush in late May. Note that the petals are very light in the centers, darker at the outside. As the season progressed and the intensity of the sun increased, they turned darker pink and had something of the quilled form shown in your earlier pic. The difference with mine is that the stamens become clearly visible. This may be because my plant is in a south-facing full-sun spot, and perhaps your plant is being shaded until it fills out more. Also note that there's very little sawfly larvae damage. It took a year for the pests to find the roses, and another year for the beneficials to find the pests. I haven't (yet) resorted to pesticides, so things sorted themselves out. I didn't manage to capture the prickles very well, but in your pics, they look very much like what I find on my 'Napoleon'. They are stout, hooked, and numerous enough to catch you. And if you were wondering, mine came from Vintage Gardens. :-) ~Christopher

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