Book  (1994)  Page(s) 289.  
 
T. x polliniana Spreng. (= R. arvensis x R. gallica). Habit like R. arvensis, stems glaucous, prickles small, scattered, hooked; leaflets 5-7, small, rather leathery, glaucuous above, slightly puberulent beneath; flowers solitary or 2 together, on long, articulate, glandular-hispid pedicels, white with pink hue, single to 6 cm./ 2.4 in. across, scented; fruits rarely formed. 2n=21. ...Found initially in N. Italy, cultivated before 1800.

Book  (1988)  Page(s) 136.  
 
Hazel Le Rougetel says this rose grows at Castle Howard Rose Garden.

Book  (1988)  Page(s) 167.  
 
location 81a, 146/6, R. x polliniana Spreng. (R. arvensis x R. gallica), SYNSTYLAE, found in northern Italy, in culture since 1800, light pink-white, single, fragrant, medium size, solitary or cluster-flowered, floriferous, vigorous, upright, 1-3 m, few prickles, matte green medium size matte leathery foliage, 5-7 leaflets, green-orange medium size matte-glossy pear-shaped fruit, reflexed petals, fall off singly, moderate amount of hips

Book  (1937)  Page(s) 76.  
 
Polliniana Spreng. (arvensis x gallica)

Book  (15 Jan 1912)  Page(s) Vol. III, Part XVII, t.113.  Includes photo(s).
 
111 — ROSA POLLINIANA Sprengel
(GALLICA X ARVENSIS)
Rosa Polliniana : caule viridi, patulo ; aculeis inaequalibus, sparsis, valde falcatis ; foliolis 5 vel 7, parvis, oblongis, obtusis, duplicato dentatis, facie glabris, dorso leviter pubescentibus ; rhachi glandulosa ; stipulis angustis, margine glandulosis, adnatis, apicibus liberis, parvis; floribus 1 vel 2 ; pedunculis aciculatis, glandulosis ; calycis tubo turbinato ; lobis ovato-acuminatis, simplicibus vel leviter compositis, dorso nudis ; petalis magnitudine mediocribus, albis vel rubellis ; stylis villosis, valde protrusis, in columnam laxam coalitis.

R. Polliniana Sprengel, Pl. Min. Cogn. Pug. Sec. p. 66 (1815). —Déséglise in Bull. Soc. Bot. Belg. vol. xv. p. 240 (Cat. Rais. Ros. p. 71 [1877]) (1876). —Nyman, Conspect. FI. Europ. p. 231 (1878).
R. hybrida Schleicher, Cat. Pl. Helv. p. 24 ( nomen nudum) (1815).—Grenier & Godron, Fl. France, vol. i. p. 553 (1848).—Boreau, Fl. Cent. France, ed. 3, vol. ii. p. 219 (1857).—Crépin in Bull. Soc. Bot. Belg. vol. xi. p. 45 (Primit. Monogr. Ros. fasc. ii. p. 1 61) (1872).—Déséglise in Bull. Soc. Bot. Belg. vol. xv. p. 239 (Cat. Rais. Ros. p. 70 [1877]) (1876).
R. geminata Rau, Enum. Ros. pp. 98, 169 (1816). —Nyman, Conspect. Fl. Europ. p. 231 (1878).
R. Pollinii Pollini, Viag. al Lago di Garda, p. 128 (1816).
R. arvensis, var. hybrida Lindley, Ros. Monogr. p. 113 (1820).
R. pumila, var. Pollinii Pollini, Fl. Veron. vol. ii. p. 143, t. 1, fig. 3 (1822).
R. arvensis x gallica Crepin in Bull. Soc. Bot. Belg. vol. xviii. p. 347 (Primit. Monogr. Ros. fasc. v. p. 593 [1880]) (1879); vol. xxxiii. p. 80 (1894). —Keller in Ascherson & Graebner, Syn. Mitteleur. Fl. vol. vi. p. 363 (1902).

Stem green, spreading ; prickles irregular, scattered, strongly hooked. Leaflets 5 or 7, small, oblong, obtuse, doubly toothed, glabrous on the upper surface, slightly pubescent beneath ; petioles glandular ; stipules narrow, gland-margined, adnate, with small free tips. Flowers 1 or 2 ; peduncles aciculate and glandular. Calyx-tube turbinate ; lobes ovate-acuminate, simple or slightly compound, naked on the back. Petals middle-sized, white or pink. Styles villous, much protruded, cohering loosely in a column.

This Rose was first distinguished by Sprengel, and was described by him from specimens collected at the foot of Mount Baldo in northern Italy. Its flowers are pale pink or white tinted with rose, but rarely red, solitary or in pairs, occasionally as many as five on astern. It is a beautiful and very free-flowering Rose.
Wild hybrids between Rosa gallica L. and Rosa arvensis Huds. are common in France and Switzerland, and they have given rise to many forms which have been distinguished by botanists and described under specific names. This spontaneous variation is not surprising when it is remembered that both Rosa gallica and Rosa arvensis are extremely variable plants. Many of these Roses are so beautiful and distinct in appearance that the natural desire would be to retain them as species. It would indeed be easy to increase their number almost indefinitely, but it is more practical to reduce than to augment, and botanists are now generally agreed to regard them as sub-varieties, or even in some cases to refer them back to their type, although neither of these courses would be regarded with favour by the authors of the specific names. I have seen these Roses in their natural habitat, and have cultivated them in my own gardens in England and in France, and after careful observation I have found that the characters upon which the species were established are far from constant. Even the specimens distributed by their authors do not agree with one another. The whole subject is fully discussed by Crépin in his observations upon Rosa gallica L. and its hybrids.¹ Déséglise was criticised for making his Rosa Polliniana too comprehensive, and it is more than probable that exception may be taken to my referring it here to Rosa incarnata Déséglise {non Miller). This is the Rosa incarnata figured in the Botanical Magazine ² and mistaken by Sir J. D. Hooker for Miller’s Rosa incarnata, which is the well-known Maiden’s Blush Rose.
he drawing in this work was made from a plant collected by the Abbé Boullu at Charbonnieres (Rhone) and now growing in my garden at Tresserve. He describes it in Cariot’s Etudes des Fleurs as a small bush with slightly spreading branches, flowering in June and July on the outskirts of woods at Limouset, Dardilly, and Charbonnieres.

1 Bull. Soc. Bot. Belg. vol. xviii. p. 343 (Primit. Monogr. Ros. fasc. v. p. 589 [1880]) (1879).
2 Vol. cxv. t. 7035 (1889).