Maybe I need to be high to understand the parentage. I realize its what the references say but it seems so... odd. I have a feeling there was an omission way back when, and then the clerical error was repeated through history. Another to file under: we'll never truly know.
I have to wonder if the Rosa foetida bicolor used in Germany at that time just happened to be a seedling from R. foetida bicolor with a chance pollen parent of an HP or HT which didn't show up in an obvious way in the phenotype, because 'Gustav Grünerwald' is another rose with a similar parentage which doesn't really make sense on face value.
Also, Kiese himself provided the 1913 Rosenzeitung reference and gives the parentage as simply "Kaiserin x Jaune Bicolor", and not specifically 'Kaiserin Augusta Viktoria', although he might have implied that. Perhaps his 'Kaiserin' was the hybrid rugosa 'Kaiserin des Nordens' which might explain the colour of 'Paula Clegg' and cold hardiness. There was an old rose by Paul from the 1870s called 'Empress' but that had small white flowers.
Maybe some bee beat Kiese to his K.A.V. before his pollen brush did.
I agree, that's more than likely. I see now that K.A.V. was supposed to have sported a carmine flower in 'Queen Madge' so perhaps K.A.V. can give dark pink progeny, but then 'Queen Madge' is also described as a hybrid rubiginosa, so who knows what's going on ...
