Sally Holmes is not classed as a classic shrub. It is classed as a modern shrub. All the ARS publications show it that way. The CRL also shows S as the official class. The HMsk in parenthesis simply means the editor is of the opinion it should be called a HMsk, but it is officially a modern shrub. If you look through any of the ARS publications you will see either an S after a shrub name, which means it is a modern shrub, or one of the classes such as HMsk, HRg, HMoy or HKor which shows it is a classic shrub. If the rose doesn't have one of the four classic shrub designations listed above after its name, it is not a classic shrub. You should always rely upon ARS publications for this information, since they are the official source. The CRL is only an official source if none of the ARS publications list a given rose.

A species rose such as R. roxburghii cannot be entered in two classes, Species and OGR, if the show is following ARS show rules. If the Species class is part of the show, all species roses must be entered there. If there is no separate species class, then it can be entered in the appropriate OGR class (look for the date of the species rose to see which class it should be entered in - there are some with dates after 1867). At least that is the way it is supposed to work according to ARS Rules and Guidelines. Shows should not be allowing species roses to be entered in the Dowager and Victorian classes if they have a species class.

Thank you for a clear reply! On page 15 of the small 2005 ARS Handbook, there is a short list of top shrubs and it illustrates what you said, with Dortmund (HKor), Henry Hudson (HRg), and Ballerina (HMsk) as examples of classic shrubs.

This is a Rose Show that is stronger in HT's and they are trying to open up. That is a good thing and one would not want to discourage their effort.

In the past, they had Dowager OGR, Victorian OGR, and (catch-all) shrub. Now, they still have Dowager and Victorian, but they broke shrub into classic and modern and they also broke out species roses. I think they copied the old wording for Dowager, that Dowager category includes species before 1867. The new species category would be species before 1867, plus any of 1867, and those afterward. (Not too many afterward - r. hugonis is 1899 and r. sericea pteracantha is 1890, per page 12 of 2005 ARS Handbook, plus a few more.)

If there is an error, and all species ought to be in the species category -- perhaps the Show mgt can make a correction? This will probably affect only about a half dozen entries, so perhaps they can make an announcement the morning of the show, as exhibitors are getting ready? And put something in writing at the registration desk. Kathy

The ones to watch are R. gallica officianallis, and R. gallica versicolor. Those are species, not Dowager, and should be labelled using those names and not Apothecary Rose and Rosa Mundi. They will also probably win Genesis.

Kathy, feel free to copy my response to your original post and give it to them as backup, if necessary, when you suggest they need to change the wording on exhibiting species roses. They probably won't know who I am, and whether my explanation matters, but at least it is worth a try to get your show schedule up to date. You will probably have to take the bull by the horns and make the initial contact with them, but I think it is worth it.