Here's another photo from a little further away. I don't think the foliage looks much like an alba.

What do you imagine alba foliage looking like? I could certainly be wrong (I'd love a picture of the shrub as a whole), but I think this looks a lot like Rosa x alba semi-plena, aka the White Rose of York. The flowers actually open a pale peachy pink and then turn milk white over the next day or two. The flowers are large, about 3" wide, with petals that are a bit floppy and have notches at the petal apices. The fragrance is both strong and distinctly sweet. While the scent is nowhere near as strong as Rosa multiflora's, you can still notice the fragrance downwind somewhat when the shrub is in full bloom.

The shrub is large and semi-open in growth habit. The canes get about 6' high and then arch out, making the shrub about 10' or 12' wide.

The York rose's foliage isn't blue-green (like Maiden's Blush), but more of a lead-green.

I agree it could be an Alba. Digital cameras are often set to show "vivid" color, which oversaturates. Bright sunlight can also oversaturate.

Thanks so much for taking a look! York_rose, I thought all albas were supposed to have foliage with a blueish cast to it . . . that's what I meant by saying it didn't look like alba foliage. Berndoodle, the color in the photo is not oversaturated . . . the flowers really ARE a definite peachy color . . . but we have been having unusually cool weather, which might have kept the flowers from fading to white if it is normal for it to do that. The photos I had found of Rosa x alba semi-plena always showed it as completely white, and I had no idea it doesn't always start out that way! I really appreciate the comments!

I can't send a photo of the whole shrub, unfortunately, because it is surrounded on all sides by other roses. It has some growing room, but I can't get more than about three feet away from it to take a photo. (I actually broke off a sprinkler head when I squeezed back in there to take this photo, oops!!!) The shrub probably is about six feet tall, but has only a few canes (perhaps three?) with a lot of air space between each one. Of course, I don't think it has gotten much care back in there, or it might be larger & fuller.

This rose definitely does have notched petals. I'm not sure whether you can tell from the photos, but some of the center petals (the ones that make it a semi-double, I suppose) are very narrow and slightly twisted, only partial petals, in a sense. Is this typical of rosa x alba semi-plena?

I am no judge of fragrance because I have a "smelling handicap" and can't even detect fragrance in roses at all unless it is exceptionally heavy. Maybe that's why I'm fond of old roses in the first place . . . they're the only ones that I can sometimes actually smell!

York_rose, you sound as if you are pretty familiar with rosa x alba semi-plena. If you think this rose is probably that, I may just go ahead and have it labelled on the basis of your opinion. Are you okay with that? :) Or is there still too little basis to make a definite decision?

I went back to the IBG today, after the temperature was in the mid-90's yesterday, and found that even the oldest flowers (by now very floppy and about ready to drop), still had a faint peachy tint to them . . . not true white, but almost. New buds that were opening were very definitely peach-colored.

I have also noticed that on the HMF photos, Rosa x alba semi-plena and suaveolens have buds with long sepals that extend past the bud itself. The buds are also white (but then, so are the flowers).

Tried to take this shot of a cane as well (but had a really hard time getting my camera to focus on it!):

I tend to think it's not Alba Semi-Plena, will do some research, see if i can come up with any ideas.

Boise,
Please don't take my observation as criticsm of your photography or even a comment on the apricot coloring of the bloom. I am passably knowledgable about the problems of displaying color in digital images on monitors, and it is not a simple proposition. Each computer application that encounters your digital image processes the color a bit differently - operating systems, printers, and and monitors all handle color differently. Small differences cause major problems. If you're trying to capture the slight grey-blue cast of an Alba or the subtle copper of Mutabilis and assure that it's visible to others online, then color-indexing and color management matters.

Here is a link that might be useful: Color managed browsers

berndoodle, not to worry, I wasn't offended by your comments! I realize that the photo I see on my Mac with Safari may be different from what other people see on their own computers, although how to adjust that would probably require more technological savvy than I have. I just wanted to clarify that these flowers really do have a definite peach tint. That is what makes me uneasy about confirming this rose as Rosa x alba semi-plena. It just doesn't fit my idea of what this rose should look like.

In my top photo above, a different alba rose is directly behind the one that I'm trying to identify, and its leaves definitely have that grey-blue cast that I had expected from an alba. In fact, the color difference is the only way to tell, in the photo, where that rose ends and the one that I'm trying to identify begins. The one I'm "featuring" has leaves that are just plain green. I wish photos were a bit more 3-D!

The leaves, stems and thorns (and to some extent, the blooms) remind me of a hybrid musk of the Pemberton persuasion - a la 'Felicia' and 'Penelope'. But I just don't know beyond that, which is somewhat a shot in the dark.

Guessing here... : )

My first impulse was to suggest Peach Blossom, which is an Austin Rose, but it has been awhile since I've seen that rose...

Then I quickly moved to hybrid musks, also thinking it reminded me of Penelope but remembering Penelope as having more petals, my Felecia surely has more petals than the photo shows.

I'll keep thinking. Does it rebloom?

Here is a link that might be useful: Peach Blossom HMF

You know, 'Peach Blossom' is a very reasonable guess, since this garden was originally planted in 1990 or 1991, and contained quite a few of the earlier Austins. (Several have died out over time, leaving the garden with many thriving specimens of r. canina!)

Do you know whether 'Peach Blossom' had (has) large flowers? [Some names are so easy to Google, but ones like 'Peach Blossom' and 'Indigo' are a pain!]

I'm planning to go down to the garden every so often this summer to see whether this one (and some of the others that I am trying to identify) rebloom. Perhaps some roses that I have down as once-bloomers are actually blooming again when no one is specifically taking note of it.

How exicting that a possible ID may be closer. : ) Austin roses often find their way into Heirloom gardens.

I can't recall the bloom size, but I'm sure if you posted asking for specifics on peach blossom, you could get more info.

Linked below is more info on PB from Heirloom Roses' website. PB supposedly sets a lot of hips which may help you w/ your ID.

Good luck!

Here is a link that might be useful: More info

hi -

well, i have the benefit of having been pointed in the right direction by stefan and jennifer. additionally, i have both pblossom and penelope in my gardens.

given these advantages, combined w/ info on plant form, the leaves and thorns, i strongly suspect that this rose is the hmusk penelope.

if you could post a close-up of the leaf and stipule, as well as new growth, i might be even more positive. well, as positive as anyone ever is :)

christie

I grew Peach Blossom. I'm not sure that's the right rose. I think Peach Blossom has more petals, and the basals were viciously thorny. I don't have a shot of the open bloom, but here's the foliage.

Here is a link that might be useful:

I grew Penelope at a former home and I would guess that is the rose in your photos, for what it's worth.

After checking the helpmefind photos, I had decided that Peach Blossom does, in fact, have a few too many petals to be this "mystery rose" . . . and Berndoodle's photos confirm this.

I'm fairly certain that it's not Penelope, either. There are a couple of Penelope plants at the IBG, and I have one at home. The flowers are smaller (the flowers on this "mystery rose" are large, probably four inches across!), and Penelope has slightly, um, duller (??) color tones in its flowers. Sort of a creamy ivory, but not with any pink or apricot tones at all.

The flowers on this plant are gone now (and it's supposed to be 107 here today!), but I'll check on it throughout the summer to see whether it reblooms, and what kind of hips (if any) it sets. I'll try to get some closeups of the foliage, as well.

By the way, thanks, everyone, for taking the time to help out . . . I really appreciate it!

Perhaps the rose is Sally Holmes? Or has SH too few petals?

Here is a link that might be useful: SH at HMF

'Penelope' is more modern-looking with branching clusters, fewer thorns, different leaves etc. - a sort of pre-Floribunda, as are many hybrid musks. 'Sally Holmes' is also quite different, with clusters of large single flowers and pointed leaves.

I grow both Sally Holmes and Penelope and I would agree that this 'mystery' rose isn't either one. Pretty though!

OK, apologies for dropping out of the conversation. I'd like to add my perspective. When I purchased my York rose I was fully expecting white flowers, just like I always saw in any picture I'd ever seen of the flower.

Imagine my surprise when in my cool June temps. oceanside garden (it doesn't usually really get past 80 here until July) the flowers opened peachy pink and then stayed that way for several days (fading, but still pink until maybe four days later, at which point the look was white, but not a pure white, like Rosa rugosa alba, or Iceberg, or most other "whites")!! There's something vaguely, slightly apricot about my York's color even when fully developed. That's what I meant about calling it "milk white".

Yes, the innermost petal or two is small and twists. The flower size is about 3"-4" when fully open, and as I said, the flower petals are notched at the apex and the petals are floppy, more so as they age.

The canes are thorny, but only somewhat, especially as the cane ages. The image of the cane is consistent with my (now apparently dead) rose's canes.

The leaves are just fine for York rose. As I said, the leaf color of York rose (& also Rosa x alba maxima - the Jacobite rose) is NOT the classic "blue-green" generally associated with Albas (such as Great Maiden's Blush). It's a leaden-green color instead. Graham Stuart Thomas mentioned that in his book on the old roses.

If your rose is not York Rose, I'll be surprised. If it reblooms it's not York rose (and also not an Alba).

Pay attention to the hips as they develop. You should have nice ones by Halloween or Thanksgiving.

I would hesitate to have a botanical garden label something based upon my say-so, but if you have a local rose society you really should take this up with them. I'd be thunderstruck to find no one around you (in such a club) who knew of no way to get this properly identified. It would be a shame for a botanical garden to lack a label when there ought to be a "proper" way to get that done!

York_rose, thanks so much for "dropping back in." Your comments are very convincing! I went back out to look at this rose a couple of weeks ago, and it is beginning to set hips. So far, no sign of rebloom.

I couldn't help chuckling when I read your suggestion to take this up with the local rose society. Prepare to be "thunderstruck." :) I was a member of the local rose society for a few years. It is a group of very nice people, mostly old ladies who have enjoyed one another's company for many years. They get together weekly to help deadhead the hybrid teas at a local park, and sell minis as a fundraiser every year, but they have no interest WHATSOEVER (or expertise!) in old roses. Most had a personal quarrel of some kind with the IBG as well; I'm not sure exactly why, since whatever caused it took place many years ago. I think it may have had to do with the Garden's not allowing them free admission for holding meetings.

One year, though, a leading member of the rose society (a lady who frequently holds community ed. classes about growing roses) was kind enough to get together a group of volunteers to prune the roses at the IBG. They pruned them exactly like hybrid teas, and we had very few flowers that year, although it didn't hurt the roses in the longterm.