Last one. And I apologise for the single pictures, my phone won't load multiple pictures at one time.

It looks a lot like what I (unprofessionally) ID as Caroline when walking around Portland. Carol

You are planning on taking cuttings, right? For the rest, no opinion (and Paul has spoken), but it looks like a great rose.

Caroline seems to be in full bloom right now! I passed a gorgeous one in late spring flush in the Hawthorne neighborhood of Portland while walking from my car to a restaurant. She is planted next to a bungalow front porch. Carol

Brandon, the shots and the rose itself, are beautiful! Thank you! Whether a rose was called a Hybrid Tea or a Hybrid Perpetual depended upon what the introducer or breeder felt would sell. Very much the same as it is today. There have been many which, simply by virtue of breeding, ARE Hybrid Teas, but were classed as Hybrid Perpetuals. Look at Symphony (Weigand, 1935). It was classed as a Hybrid Perpetual, in spited of being bred from an HP X HT, making it, at least, a Tea Hybrid, if not a Hybrid Tea. But, it looks like an HP and would likely have flopped if introduced as an HT.

What a beautiful rose and photos.

roseseek, that's very interesting. I believe I read once that some consider 'La France', generally labeled as the first hybrid tea, to be a hybrid perpetual. I've always been confused about it, what's your opinion? Do we know what roses were used to breed it?

Hi vesfl, reports of La France's parentage remain speculation, from "seedling found in seed bed", to "suspected seedling of Mme Falcot" and "possible seedling of Mme. Victor Verdier X Mme Bravy". This opens that old Pandora's Box of how a rose should be classified. Should it be by breeding or how it appears or performs, what someone should realistically expect from it? Where do those lines begin? Using Weigand's Symphony as an example, from breeding (HP X HT), it should be a Hybrid Tea as they were generally accepted as Hybrid Perpetual X Tea or HT, but if you bought it, expecting a Hybrid Tea, you would be disappointed as it doesn't LOOK like nor perform/grow like one. How about Lady Hillingdon? It's generally accepted to be more cold hardy than the average "Tea" and it strongly resembles the "Tea look". 1910 is quite late for a Tea to be bred and released, but if you bought it expecting a Hybrid Tea, you would probably be disappointed because it LOOKS more Tea-like. Charlotte Armstrong and many of her descendants looked more Tea-like. Compare how Lemon Spice and Lady Hillingdon look and grow and you see strong similarities between them, as well as strong differences. Had Lemon Spice appeared half a century earlier, it may have been introduced as a Tea because it doesn't "look" like the post Peace HTs. Peace, for that matter, reintroduced more of the Hybrid Perpetual look into Hybrid Teas. I propose had it been introduced forty years earlier, it could well have been marketed as the long sought after yellow HP.

How about Sally Holmes? It is a floribunda crossed with what we call a Hybrid Musk, but the Hybrid Musk (Ballerina) in question is by all appearances a Hybrid Multiflora, as the vast majority of them have been and are. We call Sally a shrub or climber, depending upon how she responds to where and how she is grown, but in strictly breeding lines, she should be a Hybrid Musk or Hybrid Multiflora. The same is true of Iceberg. Robin Hood (hybrid musk/shrub, but also from performance in many places, simply a polyantha) X Virgo (Hybrid Tea). Breeding should have it called a Hybrid Musk, but if you bought one expecting that type of rose, would you be satisfied?

La France looked and performed differently from what came before it, therefore it was something "new". Many other HP X Tea or HT crosses had been raised and a number released before it, but nothing else LOOKED differently, looked like La France, therefore La France was the "first". Guillot reportedly considered it a "Hybrid Bourbon". There is always that bleed over when different lines of anything, from plants, through animals (including Humans) are inter bred. The accepted "breeding" traits of an organism may or may not express themselves in a generation under scrutiny and may not for a number of generations. That fouls up our practice of classifying or pigeon-holing what ever it is into groups so we can figure out what to expect from them. Pragmatically, La France "quacks like a duck"... so if you want a Hybrid Tea appearance and performance, you buy it as a Hybrid Tea. If you want something that looks and performs like a Hybrid Perpetual, you buy Symphony.

HMF says that Madame Caroline Testout is a HT, and I have never seen anyone call it a HP, but of course the discussion above is correct that what breeders called roses was very variable.

Yours certainly looks like MCT to me - I love that rose. Here are a couple of pics of my climbing one, peeking in the window of our porch, and scrambling sideways to visit the banksiae lutea.

Jackie

That was an interesting read, Kim! Given that scientific classification systems are created to assist humans in our various endeavors, it makes sense that there should be multiple kinds of charts and labels which categorize the same entities.

Rose people would benefit from at least two major rose classification systems: one which documents genetic lines for botanical and horticultural research and breeding and one which sorts roses by purpose and cultivation expectations for design and trade use. Each would serve a particular niche. The latter is much more concerned with quacking ducks. When you have a pond, your bird must be able to swim. Peacocks are lovely, but they will sink like a rocks! When you're breeding or studying diseases, genetics are so much more informative than quacks, shrieks, waddles and tail display. Carol

Thank you, Carol! I LOVE your "when you have a pond, your bird must be able to swim. Peacocks are lovely, but they will sink like rocks!" Too much! LOL! That's one of the things I love about Help Me Find...being able to look up the breeding, or what is known and reported about it. That can tell you MUCH, though it's not infallible. I know pretty much anything too closely related to Playboy is GOING to rust for me, yet Gina's Rose (half Playboy) never does. It's a strong enough correlation that I avoid Playboy's offspring and almost never use any of them for breeding. Imagine the confusion should someone not sufficiently aware of the uses and meanings of the two systems become aware of them. Multiple classification entries on HMF are often enough to cause head spin. As Kelly Bundy said, "The mind wobbles!".

Roseseek, many thanks for your thoughtful discussion. Quite a few things that confused me before make sense now. I couldn't understand how the rose of an unclear crossing was decided to be a hybrid tea. Now I see the point about the look and how much that matters too. From a vantage point of someone who loves to grow roses but also to know their history, I think Carol is right on mark: I'd love to know the type of the rose I'm getting in terms of its genetics rather than its designation for commercial reasons. Very, very interesting. Thank you for taking your time to explain it.

Why, thank you! You are most welcome! Believe me, I completely understand what you mean and I see both sides clearly. There are certain traits, "looks" to each artificial class in our minds and they definitely help us determine whether the plant in question is one which we should find useful and attractive. But, there are also points to consider you can't know without knowing "what's IN there".