NATURAL ce Ve AES Ce ee “4 2 q Z ” . i i a (4 °@ a 4 j = F- ty Stat : gif ; baat 2 ; ‘ * hd Ae. 2 B) ala enh, ; ur - F = 1 fat } e ray? . a) ee Maa ies ie ne a pe er) Fs aS Wan aad a ee ey >) @ at ° ise wits % ¢ - viet oan 2 : ral f 6 r : Z wy 5 ee e pny on ist See a 4 Se sites t- Fe pa are ; ie : ‘ haa hd 5 Ay aed . cn . Le i ' > a CAC IE Pa ren 1 be : ri ; iy : ¥ a)" » : ie ¢ an ress} J Pad Lat Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2010 with funding from University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign http://www.archive.org/details/rosarummonograph01 lind ROSARUM MONOGRAPHIA ; OR, FA Botantcal History OF ROSES. TO WHICH IS ADDED, An Appendtr, FOR THE USE OF CULTIVATORS, IN WHICH THE MOST REMARKABLE GARDEN VARIETIES ARE SYSTEMATICALLY ARRANGED. WITH NINETEEN PLATES. BY JOHN LINDLEY, F. L. 5. E guadagnar, se si potra, quel dono, Che stato dette u’¢, che Rose sono. Bernt. London: PRINTED FOR JAMES RIDGW AY, 159: PICCADELLY. 1820. ALAMO MUA 40% Hioeige Thun B cave ik FASE UE NE A aro Bi Mee ES NAR AAS THAW EM: Moen dik alt ARLE AMINA Ve AY ee + Ane high eid wen iy ie hea ae. uo a ; * ; ole pear | fig f Bo ceo? ae iene ey er tae , ‘f bee ni : ees tite ee TO CHARLES LYELL, ESQ. OF KINNORDY, NORTH BRITAIN, THE FOLLOWING MONOGRAPH OF ROSES, WHICH IS MUCH INDEBTED TO HIS LIBERALITY AND TO HIS INTIMATE KNOWLEDGE OF THE GENUS, IS INSCRIBED, WITH SINCERE ESTEEM, BY ’ HIS MUCH OBLIGED AND VERY GRATEFUL FRIEND, THE AUTHOR. Geox Saat! ea ni PARRA BEPAOW 1A siya Ath | as it ay A , eeibpegane i), ALAA Oi ie Oe Wit they Tener A ask tir, CUAL Vigne" A) ine hi i ane te wo ot nimaaiiendin mann m f “eta i putes kn ie) Ceee ABR UALS, BEL: bila a DN a a hy PREFACE. Ir is necessary, before I enter upon the imme- diate subject of the following pages, to give some explanation of the reasons which have in- duced me to intrude upon the attention of the public. Not because every one does so, but be- cause a fresh attempt to accomplish what has repeatedly and recently failed in the hands of far more experienced botanists than myself, would without it appear, to say the least of it, pre- sumptuous. Although the number of publications on the present subject is already too considerable, and their authors, in many instances, men of esta- blished reputation; yet nothing is more notorious than the almost inextricable confusion in which Roses are to this day involved. This however may perhaps be in some measure explained by a careful examination of the principal works, and of the circumstances under which they have been severally composed. Some of them are mere masses of figures, and those frequently not of the best kind, with- out any scientific pretensions, either to arrange- ment, or correctness of delineation. In other vill PREFACE. instances the examination of species has been partial, comprehending such only as are found in certain districts; the consideration of foreign Roses being altogether omitted. I may also venture to assert that whenever the study of extra European Roses has been combined with that of those peculiar to our own quarter of the globe, the ideas of their discriminative characters have never resulted from an intimate knowledge of the genus in a living state. On the contrary, incomplete notions have been formed of it from dried specimens only, which, in the present in- stance, are far from being of their ordinary im- portance. To this, in some measure, is to be at- tributed a disposition to increase the number of species beyond their natural limits, which has been no unfruitful source of error and confusion. The necessity then of a Monograph of Roses not ~composed under these disadvantages will scarcely be disputed. A considerable private collection of living plants has occupied my attention for several years ; and if to this be added the unlimited ac- cess to every thing in this country, at all con- nected with my design, which I am proud to say, has been conceded to me on every side in the most gratifying manner, my materials may fairly be considered to deserve some attention, if not the manner in which they have been employed. The plan I have pursued is too obvious to re- PREFACE. ix quire much explanation. As the synonymy is one of the most difficult and perhaps important parts of the subject, it has of course received particular attention. But I have rarely been very anxious about the synonyms of botanists of an earlier date than the time of Linneus, on ac- count of the extreme uncertainty of the precise plants which they intended. The work might have.been extended to a much greater length, had I not aimed at avoiding to repeat what has been previously said by others, except so far as was necessary to make myself intelligible. In marks and abbreviations the plan laid down by M. De Candolle, in his excellent Regni vegeta- bilis systema naturale has been my guide, but with some slight deviations. To the noble library and inexhaustible Bo- tanical treasures of the Right Honourable Sir JosepH Banks, with that unexampled liberality for which their illustrious possessor has been ever celebrated, I have been allowed the freest access. To these I am almost entirely indebted for the numerous and highly interesting species, either altogether new, or hitherto imperfectly known, from the hotter countries of Asia, Africa, and North America. The authentic specimens preserved there from Jacquin, Pallas, and others, with those of the Hortus Kewensis, have enabled me to determine many of their synonyms with precision. To the ee of Aylmer Bourke x PREFACE. Lambert, Esq. I am particularly indebted for the liberty of examining his fine collection, contain- ing, among other rarities, all that remains of Pallas’s Roses, specimens from Colonel Hard- wicke of the Attar tree of Ghizapore; fruit of R. multiflora, and flowers of R. hystrix, all which are in no other herbarium in this country. The materials which have resulted from the experience of twenty years’ perpetual observation of the most extensive collection of cultivated Roses in the world, have been submitted to my examination by Mr. Sabine their liberal proprietor. To Mr. Lyell, whose knowledge of the subject is only equalled by the readiness with which it is com- municated, I am under the most extensive obliga- tions. Nor must I omit to acknowledge the ma- terial assistance I have received from my friend Mr. Hooker, now Regius Professor of Botany in the university of Glasgow, whose Roses collected with the greatest care in Ireland, Switzerland and the South of France, with those of his numerous correspondents, have been placed in my hands. By them many doubtful synonyms of continental botanists have been ascertained. By the learned President of the Linnean society I have been al- lowed to examine the important herbarium of Linneus, and his own, which is not less valu- able. A multitude of other communications, too numerous to be acknowledged individually, are noticed in their proper places. PREFACE. xl With this mass of matter before me I have naturally felt strongly interested in making the attempt which is now produced. If I have in some measure succeeded ! shall have the satis- faction of knowing that the way for whomsoever may succeed me will be less impassable; if i have not, I am ready to throw myself on the in- dulgence of those who are best aware of the dif- ficulty of the subject. Lonpon, March 31st, 1820. b 2 iy leat pi ans oe i voy pec 5 iA 2 ft, rita aul ba B90 . Ly Sudbieaia: aking adntire: 4 “honda Hames, os ee Ltn “Hbjadlt to wimitn seo ong cule peng hie. popes Beet Aya a i Maas pe a aie € “wate 4 tier le Win rarer a wee pvt Cts is ts wae ac " Z vy A Bilin Ah alien aah. A ag ae | din phx aaa i «can ine ec wwe i aoegite che ao a. Na ieee Re ea ae a “oe Baier sade ee ne, pe EE Beacw. egprege gh away Abele 1a sola tig Wr wen iis: # shoo pe “si ee Pie ena ra Ns aay “ah hk mn i ii ; . L Se ‘haloth riage 7 I Meee ona ai ne Ao j | Pe, ae C ny ; ” ae ¢ tf we i wi nathan ill i a pada ea INTRODUCTION. A Genus more remarkable than the Rose could scarcely have been selected for illustration from the whole vegetable kingdom: on account of the lively interest its beauty has excited in the minds of mankind from the earliest ages of the world. To poets it is a mine which all their ingenuity has been insufficient to ex- haust. Volumes have been written upon its efficacy in Medicine; and one of the most earnest defenders of its powers has not hesitated to assure the world that the Pharmacopeia should be formed of Roses alone. It would be equally needless and tedious to mention all the stories which have been told about them; or all the customs to which they have given rise. But it would scarcely be judicious to pass these things over without any sort of notice. As the emblem of youth, the Rose was dedicated to Aurora; of love and beauty, to Venus; of danger and fugacity, to Cupid. It was given by the latter as a bribe to Harpocrates the god of silence; whence perhaps originated the custom, of which we are told by Rosenbergius, that obtained among the northern na- tions of Europe, of suspending a Rose from the ceiling, over the upper end of their tables, when it was intended that what passed at their entertainments should be se- cret. And this undoubtedly is the origin of the com- X1V INTRODUCTION. mon expression, “ Under the Rose.” The ancients tell us that Roses originally were white; but were changed to red by the blood of Venus, when her feet were lace- rated by their prickles in her attempt to protect Adonis from the rage of Mars. Theocritus and Bion however are of opinion that it was the blood of Adonis himself that altered their colour. Another tale relates that Cupid leading a dance in Heaven stumbled and overset a bowl of nectar, which falling upon the earth stained the Rose. Ausonius has made the Rose blush from the blood of Cupid (Tighe. 47.) Busbequius informs us that the Turks have a similar superstition upon the subject, and believe that Roses originated from the sweat of their prophet Mahomet. Nor has the inge- nuity of monkish writers been at a loss to stamp Roses in some measure with divinity, though in a dif- ferent manner. Marulus tells a story of an holy virgin named Dorothea, who suffered martyrdom in Czesarea, under the government of Fabricius; and who con- verted to Christianity a scribe named Theophilus, by sending him some Roses in the winter time out of Pa- radise. A golden Rose was considered so honourable a present, that none but crowned heads were thought worthy either to give or to receive it. Roses of this kind were sometimes consecrated by the Popes upon Good Friday, and given to such potentates as it was their particular interest or wish to load with favours ; the flower itself being an emblem of the mortality of the body, and the metal of which it was composed of the immortality of the soul. Boéthius says that Wil- liam King of Scotland received a present of this sort from Pope Alexander the third. And Henry the eighth is recorded to have had a similar gift from Alexander INTRODUCTION. xy the sixth. The seal of the famous Luther, which is well known to have been a Rose, may have been sym- bolical of the same things as the golden presents of the Popes. Roses were employed by the Roman emperors as a means of conferring honours upon their most fa- mous generals, whom they allowed to add a Rose to the ornaments of their shields ; a custom which conti- nued long after the Roman empire had ceased to exist, and the vestiges of which may yet be traced in the ar- morial bearings of many of the ancient noble families of Europe. As objects of cultivation they have always been eagerly sought after; and for the purpose of increasing their beauty, every means of causing the flowers to become double has been put in practice. Hence, in process of time, has sprung the multitude of indivi- duals now in every garden, whose beauty is only equalled by the extreme difficulty of tracing them to their original stock. But it is a mistake to suppose that double Roses are of somewhat modern origin ; since they are particularly mentioned by Herodotus, Athenzus, and Theophrastus; and more especially by Pliny, who enumerates several sorts, among which is a centifolia. It is remarkable that the latter should not mention the Rose of Pestum, nor any growing in that neighbourhood. ‘This omission makes it impossible even to guess at what was meant by the “ biferi Rosaria Pesti.”. The only Rose Mr. Woods found about Pees- tum was R. sempervirens. The name Rose is derived by De Theis from the Celtic rhodd or rhudd, signifying red, whence, he thinks, have originated the synonimous names ros in Armorican, 0d in Greek, and rosha in Sclayonian. xvi INTRODUCTION. It is the only genus of Jussieu’s second section of Rosacex®, and is distinguished from the succeeding sections of that order, by its fleshy urceolate calyx, and hairy, osseous pericarpia. From Pomace# there is no absolute mark of distinction, except its solitary suspended ovulum, and indefinite ovaria; for, however sufficient the distinction may at first sight appear, be- tween the fructus inferus of the latter and superus of Rosace#, it is almost entirely removed by Crategus glabra and arbutifolia; which differ essentially from the genus to which they have been referred, in having ovarium semisuperum and in the ripe fruit the pericar- pium almost entirely superior. With some unpublished species these form a very distinct genus which I have called Photinia. Our knowledge of European Roses has become, by the extraordinary attention they have received, so ex- tensive that it is impossible to doubt that limits be- tween what are called species do not exist. This was strongly suspected by Linnzeus when he said, “ Species limitibus difficillime circumscribuntur, et forte Natura non eos posuit,” but he had no means of satisfying himself. Gerard and others have asserted it; although Haller and most succeeding botanists have disputed the truth of the opinion. A partial, but satisfactory illus- tration of it may be given, without extending the exa- mination so far as to show every link which unites the European species with each other. R. canina and spi- nosissima may be considered to exhibit the extreme differences in structure and appearance. Let us begin with spinosissima. This is united with rubella through the variety melanocarpa of the latter. Its variety pi- losa connects it with R. involuta, which in a more vi- INTRODUCTION. XVii gorous state becomes R. Doniana of Woods, which is the intermediate state between it and Sabini. This passes into villosa through R. gracilis of Woods. By a partial return to its original appearance, that is to say, by again losing its hairs, but retaining its glands, R. involuta becomes R. myriacantha. Another branch from spinosissima is through rubella which passes into alpina by the dwarf alpine variety of the latter. A vigorous sort of spinosissima in two or three generations might produce R. hibernica, and this may be traced into Sabint without much difficulty. From R. Sabini having lost its setz proceeds R. tomentosa, whose va- riety mollis brings them together; and we are ac- quainted with every gradation from tomentosa to ca- nina. Before we proceed to consider how far these cir- cumstances may be allowed to affect the arrangement of the genus, it may be worth while to consider what is, or ought to be, understood by a species. Cuvier tells us it is “ the union of individuals descended from each other, or from common parents, and of those which resemble them as much as they resemble each other.” (Regne Animal 1. 19.) De Candolle defines a species to be “ the assemblage of all the individuals which resemble each other more than they resemble others; which can, by reciprocal foecundation, pro- duce fertile individuals ; and which reproduce them- selves, by generation, in such a manner that they may all by analogy be supposed to have descended originally from a single individual.” (Theorie ed. 2.193.) Now if these definitions, which are purely hypothetical, be the test by which a species is to be tried before it is ad- mitted as such, it results, from the illustrations I have c XViii INTRODUCTION. given, that all the European portion of the genus must be huddled together under one specific title; a measure, the absurdity of which is sufficiently obvious, because to adopt it would be only disputing about terms, since it would then be necessary to distinguish certain modi- fications ; and it is immaterial whether these be termed species or varieties: For why do we distinguish species among genera? except as the means of giving precision to our ideas, and consequently correctness to our lan- guage; by indicating certain modifications of structure considered to be of inferior importance to those which distinguish genera, and whose supposed limits are de- fined by what is called a specific character. By species then I wish to be understood here to mean, an assem- blage of individuals, differing in particular respects from the rest of the genus, but having more points of affinity among themselves than with others; their union being therefore natural. But if, as I have attempted to show, there are no limits to the species, it is impossible to give them ri- gorous definitions ; and with a firm conviction of the truth of this, have I set about a revision of the genus. Upon these principles I have proceeded throughout. On commencing an examination of the causes whence so much confusion has arisen, I was presently assured that no inconsiderable part of the difficulty might be removed by ceasing to insist on the trifling distinctions upon which a number of botanists have recently established their species. For it is evident that where only a few tolerably tangible characters are. to be obtained, no course is so certain to destroy their importance as that of frittering them away till they become confounded with one another. Nor is it suffi- INTRODUCTION. XIX cient to constitute a species, that it can be distin- guished, perhaps readily, by the experienced eye of a cultivator, from all other Roses; for if this were the case, most of the numerous varieties of the Apple, the Pear and the Plum which the practised gardener finds no difficulty in recognising, would have an equally just claim to specific distinction. A second source of confusion originated with Linnzeus himself, when he divided the species into two divisions, distinguishing them by their ovate and round fruit. A more variable character than this could scarcely have been fixed upon, and yet it has been adopted with a few exceptions, by the greater part of his followers. In some instances attempts have been made to alter this arrangement; but as the plans proposed instead have been scarcely better than Linnzeus’s, they have met with little atten- tion. So that in the most recent complete account of the genus which has hitherto appeared, from the pen of Sir James Smith in Rees’s Cyclopedia, the old mode of division is adhered to. Mr. Woods was the first who effectually broke through the prejudices in favour of this; and in an ex- cellent memoir on the Roses of Great Britain, arranged and defined them according to a methed of his-own. However much we may be at variance about the limits of species, there can be little or no difference of opi- nion between us respecting his primary divisions, be- cause they are natural. Many important characters were first noticed by him; among which the distinc- tion between setz and prickles more particularly de- serves to be noticed. It is with pleasure that I ac- knowledge the advantages I have derived from this method. And to show the great importance I attach c2 XX INTRODUCTION. to it, I have taken it as the basis of my own. It is true that the additions and alterations I have found it necessary to make, have been considerable, but they are such as Mr, Woods himself would probably have resorted to, had exotic specimens entered into his plan. His divisions however are confessedly made without reference to any but British Roses, and so far his ar- rangement is defective. In 1816, a year after Mr. Woods’s paper was read before the Linnzan society, Dr. Ambrosio Rau published his “ Enumeration of the Roses growing about Wurtzburg,” arranged according to anew method. The remarks attached to the species are useful and accurate, but the manner in which they are disposed is defective. It however deserves atten- tion for the care which the subject has evidently re- ceived from the author. These two are the only at- tempts to form a new arrangement of Roses which it is necessary to notice. In both, the species are too much multiplied, and consequently their characters are sometimes unsatisfactory. In the following disposition one of my principal ob- jects has been to make it natural. To effect this it was necessary to become acquainted with all the species, and then to submit them individually to careful analysis ; which enabled me to ascertain how far general exter- nal resemblance and structure go together. Of such characters which combined the species best, I selected the most remarkable. Whether this has been done with judgment it is for others to decide. I may how- ever take the opportunity of expressing my conviction that no one can understand Roses, unless well ac- quainted with them in a living state. That this incon- venience, which is undoubtedly great, may be in some INTRODUCTION. KAl measure obviated, I propose to offer a series of observa- tions on the respective permanence or disposition to vary, of the modifications of each particular organ. The habit of Roses, although not often of moment, may sometimes be employed with advantage, when its differences are caused by the manner in which the rootshoots grow. ‘Their being bent like a bow distin- guishes Canine and Rubiginose from Villose; in which they are quite erect. The flagelliform shoots of arvensis prevent its being confounded with systyla; and their being climbing separates sempervirens from pro- strata. Yet cinnamomea contains two plants, of which one has straight and the other curved rootshoots ; and the same remark is applicable to tomentosa. I have found it necessary to make a distinction between branches and branchlets, understanding by the latter term the lateral shoots which are produced in the Same season as those from which they spring. “Thus R. lutescens is readily known from spinosissima by the dense prickles of its branches, and the mere roughness of its branchlets. In R. daxa the latter are unarmed; in lucida, furnished with infrastipulary prickles. R. rubella is armed as far as its extremities; in the most nearly allied species, R. stricta, the branchlets are almost naked. R. hystrix has the latter covered all over with little rigid setze, while its branches are abso- lutely free from them. Arms is a term used to express the presence of sete and prickles mixed indiscriminately. Sete are little straight aculei tipped with a gland. They are known from real glands by their rigidity, greater length and tendency to pass into prickles. They exist at some period I believe in all species upon XXH INTRODUCTION. the rootshoots, where they are quickly changed into aculei by losing their gland. In general they are de- ciduous after the first year. On their presence on the branches depend some of my most natural Nee Fr Minis vt i seonciva ees hin on | Tai! venul ie Me do | loki By Diy. I. Simplicifolia. Folia simplicia exstipulata. (Re- ceptaculum impube Pall.) 1. ROSA berberifolia. R. simplicifolia Salish. hort. allert. 359. Parad. lond. 101. c. fig. Olivier voy. 5. 49. atl. t. 43. R. berberifolia. Pall. in nov. act. petr. 10. 379. t. 10. f.5. Willd. sp. 2. 1063. Ait. kew. ed. alt. 3. 258. Smith in Rees. inl. Redout. ros. 1. 27. t. 2. Hab. prope Amadan abundé solo salito, Michaux (Oli- vier); in campis infra jugum montium Elvind, (Olivier); deserto Songarico, (Sievers). (v. s. sp. herb. Banks.) Two or three feet high, (a foot high, Olivier,) very cesious. Branches slender, pubescent, covered with setze, which disappear on the branchlets; prickles slender, falcate, with a remarkably elongated base, slightly downy, sometimes compound; placed below the leaves, which are sessile, erect, simple, narrow, obovate, simply toothed towards the end, densely pu- bescent, unarmed, almost veinless; stipu/e none; flowers solitary, without bracteze, cupshaped (sweet- scented, Olivier); tube of the calyx downy, nearly round, and covered with needle-shaped, pale, unequal B 2 ROSA BERBERIFOLIA. prickles, extending up the sepals, which are densely downy and entire; petals deep yellow with a dark crimson spot at their base ; stamens few; styles villous. (Fruit crowned with the sepals, pale green, depressedly globose, armed with numerous unequal prickles: pe- ricarps 25, oblong, blackish. Padl.) Although Mr. Salisbury’s name for this highly cu- rious plant was published before Pallas’s, and, as Sir James Smith observes, is much the best; yet, as ber- berifolia has been almost universally adopted, I should scarcely be justified in giving up expediency to a right of priority, which, moreover, is supported only by the antecedency of a few months. Its whole appearance is remarkably unlike the rest of the genus. Indeed, the absence of stipule, which cannot be metamor- phosed into aculei, as has been conjectured by M. de Jussieu, would almost induce us to look for a generic difference ; especially if the receptacle be destitute of hairs, as Pallas asserts, but which we have no means of ascertaining. Perhaps, however, it is not impro- bable that the whole plant may be aphyllous, supposing the apparent leaves to be confluent stipulz. No other Rose has compound aculei. Certain districts in the North of Persia and the de- sert of Songari in Chinese Tartary are the only stations recorded as producing the present lovely plant. It was found by Olivier covering the plains near Amadan, and in many other places in the same neighbourhood. If we may judge from the fine figure of M. Redouté, French gardeners must have the art of managing it much more successfully than our own. Possibly the soil in which it grows wild being salt may afford a hint to those who may again have an opportunity of culti- vating it. It flowers in the spring. ROSA FEROX. 3 Div. II. Feroces. Rami tomento persistente vestiti. Fructus nudus. Plants with these characters form a very small but. strictly natural assemblage. They are low shrubs, losing their leaves early in the autumn, and are then remarkable for thick hoary branches bristly with numerous prickles. Their fruit, which never has any pubescence, readily distinguishes them’ from the next, in which the down is very conspicuous. 2. ROSA ferox. R. armis confertissimis inzequalibus conformibus. R. ferox. Lawr.roses. t. 42. Br! in Ait. Lew. ed. alt. 3. 262. Smith in Rees inl. Lindley in Edwards's Reg. t. 420. R. Kamchatica Redout. Roses. 1. 47. €. 12. Hab. in Caucaso, (Aiton.) (v. v. cult.) Four or five feet high. Branches downy, procum- bent, covered all over with unequal rigid, straightish, pale, pubescent prickles and a few setze. Leaves shin- ing, bright green, rugose; stipule large, dilated up- wards, downy, curled at the edge and glandular, naked above; petioles downy, with a few sete and prickles ; the latter yellow, slender and nearly straight; leaflets 5-9 elliptic, retuse, simply (seldom doubly) serrated, naked above, hairy beneath and paler; their veins un- usually close. Flowers large, red, solitary; bractew none, or large, nearly orbicular, pilose, serrated, fringed with glands; peduncle downy; tube of the calyx obo- vate, naked; sepals narrow, triangular, sometimes dis- posed to become compound, downy; petals obcordate, concave, crumpled; stamens 150-185; disk little ele- vated; ovaria 50-60; styles villous, distinct, a little exserted. Fruit globose, scarlet, covered with a deli- B 2 4 ROSA FEROX. cate bloom: upper part of the peduncle naked: peri- carps pale yellow, hairy. The hedgehog Rose, by which name this is known in the gardens, seems to have been first noticed by Miss Lawrance, who probably obtained it from the very extensive collection of Messrs. Lee and Kennedy ; for by those indefatigable cultivators it was first intro- duced. M. Thory has strangely confounded it with R. kamchatica, which he considers has been brought to be R. ferox by cultivation. How improbable is such a change must be sufficiently evident to any one who has carefully seen the two in a living state. Besides the distinction in the arms on which their specific character is founded, I may add that R. kamchatica is a taller plant than R. ferox; its leaves are opaque, not shining, smaller, and with a different outline, changing colour and falling off in the very beginning of autumn, long before those of R. ferox are withered; its fruit is also smaller and shorter than the sepals, which do not ap- pear to have any disposition to become compound. In R. ferox, on the contrary, the calyx is more fre- quently compound than otherwise; in more than one instance I have observed the segments so much divided that two were perfect leaves ; the others becoming less obviously so in the order of the old distich. If kept in a vigorous state by close pruning, this plant is very beautiful, on account of its fine, showy, crimson blossoms, which appear before those of the more common and fragrant species. \ oy i an ne a, Miryy 2; ROSA RUGOSA. 5 3. ROSA rugosa. R. armis confertissimis subzqualibus, pedunculo acu- leato. R. rugosa Thunb. jap. p. 213. Willd. sp. 2. 1070. Pers. syn. 2.48. Smith in Rees in loc. Ramanas Japonorum. Thunb. Vamanas? Icones Japonens. in bibl. Banks. Hab. in Japonia (Thunb.) Known only from the account of Thunberg, whose description contains very little to distinguish this from R. ferox or kamchatica. He says it is called Ramanas by the natives of Japan. In the collection of Japanese drawings in Sir Joseph Banks’s library is the figure of a Rose marked Vamanas, which answers tolerably to Thunberg’s description, and, as the resemblance of the names seems to indicate, is probably the very same. Its branches are slender (downy Th.) armed with very dense, straight, nearly equal (unequal Th.) prickles; stipules (none in the figure) ; petioles (downy Th.) with several straightish, scattered prickles; leaflets 5-9, ovate, very rugose, simply serrated, obtuse (with an acumen, downy be- neath Th.), veins very close. Flowers solitary; bractece none; peduncle (downy Th.) beset with several straight, short, scattered prickles, which are verticillate and larger at its base; tube of the calyx (globose Th.) ovate, naked; sepals refiexed (hairy Th.) entire, very narrow,—two with a dilated, foliaceous, serrated end; petals spreading emarginate. Supposing this to be Thunberg’s plant, which we can scarcely doubt, it will be easily distinguished from its nearest allies by the numerous leaflets, nearly equal prickles of the stem, and curved prickles of the pe- duncle, which last are remarkable for their form, as being situated on a part where they are usually slender, straight and mixed with setee in other species. 6 ROSA KAMCHATICA. 4. ROSA kamchatica. R. aculeis infrastipularibus falcatis majoribus, foliis opacis. R. kamchatica Vent. Cels. t.67. Ait! kew. ed. alt. 3. 259. Pers. syn. 2. 47. Smith! in Rees in loc. Lindley in Edwards’s Reg. t. 419. Hab. in Kamtchatke locis siccis saxosis, Nelson. (v. v. cult. et s. sp. herb. Banks.) Three or four feet high, with nearly the habit of R. ferox. Branches downy, pale brown, procumbent, beset with pubescent prickles and sete, when old fre- quently naked; prickles under the stipulz large, fal- cate, spreading, two or three together; the interme- diate ones much smaller. Leaves gray, opaque; stipule large, much dilated upwards, rather hairy, curled at the edge and here and there fringed with glands; pe- tioles downy, unarmed; leaflets 5-9, obovate, blunt, deeply and simply serrated, the teeth callous at the end, naked above, hairy and paler beneath. Flowers solitary, deep red; bractew elliptical, nearly naked; peduncle hairy at the base, purple; tube of the calyx globose, naked; sepals very narrow, downy, and spa- ringly glandular, a little dilated at the end, longer than the petals, which are obcordate, sometimes apicu- late; stamens 160-170; disk a little elevated, more evi- dent than in R. ferox; ovaria 50; styles villous, dis- tinct, a little exserted. Fruit spherical, scarlet, less than in R. ferox; as are the pericarps, which are small, shining, with an even surface. This has usually been considered of somewhat re- cent introduction to the gardens of Europe; but it is certain that the period of its arrival may be fixed at somewhat beyond the middle of the last century. Sir James Smith possesses a specimen of it gathered in the ROSA KAMCHATICA. 7 botanic garden at Chelsea in 1791; and in the Lin- nean herbarium are seedling plants marked China, which I have no hesitation in pronouncing to be the present plant. To M. Ventenat however must be given the credit of having first made it known in his Jardin du Cels. It flowers most part of the summer at irre- gular intervals. The only spontaneous specimens I have seen are in the magnificent herbarium of Sir Joseph Banks. They were collected by Nelson in Captain Cook’s last voyage, and differ from the cultivated plant in having more ovate and numerous leaflets, smaller flowers, and less dissimilarity in the form of the prickles. Diy. U1. Bracteate. Rami fructusque tomento persis- tente vestiti. This section, which probably extends across the continent of Asia, from Nepal to China, is readily distinguished from the preceding by the thick woolliness of its fruit, a peculiarity en- tirely confined to itself. Its leaves are very dense, usually shin- ing, and the prickles are placed under the stipule in pairs: the species which compose it may be considered to have their organs of fructification in the highest state of developement in the genus. The stamens vary from 350 to 400, and the ovaries from 140 to 170; the former being twice and the latter three times as nume- rous as in the last section, which perhaps holds the next rank in the scale of developement. 8 ROSA INVOLUCRATA. 5. ROSA involucrata. R. foliolis lanceolato-ellipticis infra tomentosis, bracteis contiguis pectinatis. R. involucrata Roxb. fl. ind. ined. R. palustris Buchanani MSS. Hab. in Nepalia, Buchanan; Bengalia tempore fer- vido ineunte florifera, pluvioso fructifera, Roxb. MSS.; China, ic. Sinens. (v. v. cult. et s. sp. herb. Lamb.) Branches pale brown, flexuose, covered with very soft down; prickles generally naked, with a long base, bright brown, pointing upwards, placed by pairs under the stipule, which are nearly distinct, downy, and di- vided at the margin into several capillary compound segments, here and there fringed with glands; on vi- gorous rootshoots they are united half way, and then the part which is disengaged frequently extends into a small pinnate leaf; petioles slender, downy, with a few small prickles; leaflets 3-9, elliptic lanceolate, obtuse, bluntly serrated, dull green, naked above, downy (rarely naked) and paler beneath. Flowers white, sub- solitary, surrounded by three or four approximated leaves; bractece pectinate, woolly, as are the short pe- duncle, globose tube of the calyx, and spreading entire sepals ; petals emarginate, longer than the last; disk long, large and thickened; styles villous, a little ex- serted. For an opportunity of examining spontaneous speci- mens of this new species I am indebted to Mr. Lam- bert; they were collected in Nepal by Dr. Buchanan, and from the ticket attached to them, probably in marshy situations. Of this however no mention is made by Dr. Roxburgh, by whom in his manuscript Flora Indica a detailed account of the species is given with the name here adopted. It has recently been im- ROSA MICROPHYLLA. 9 ported from the East Indies by Messrs. Whitley and Co. of Fulham, in whose fine collection I have seen it growing vigorously, and it proves an highly desirable addition to our gardens. It cannot possibly be con- founded except with R. bracteata or microphylla, from both which its dull narrow leaves, hoary beneath, and long slender shoots, distinguish it sufficiently; besides, the bracteze are at a little distance from the flowers. From a figure in a collection of Chinese drawings in the possession of Mr. Cattley it appears to be a na- tive of China as well as India. 6. ROSA microphylla. R. foliolis ovatis minoribus, bracteis appressis pecti- natis, fructu aculeato. R. microphylla Roxb ! fl. ind. ined. Hoi-tong-hong Sinensium. Hab. in China, Roxburgh. (v. pict. iconibus Sinens. bibl. cel. Colebrooke.) Apparently a sinaller plant than 2. bracteata, from which it differs in having prickly fruit, and ovate, ob- tuse leaves. As Iam scarcely acquainted with it ex- cept from a drawing in the possession of Mr. Cole- brooke, it is not possible nor indeed advisable to draw up a detailed description. Specimens however may probably exist among the unarranged plants in the herbaria of this country, and may afford materials for a complete account of it at some future time. Its flowers are double and of a very delicate blush colour, so that in a living state it must be a charming plant. I have seen some ‘fragments of a Rose nearly allied to the Macartney, obtained from a plant in the collection of the Right Honourable Lord Suffield at Blickling, c 10 ROSA BRACTEATA. Norfolk, the flowers of which are reported to be small and double. This therefore is very likely to be our plant, and if so, there can be no doubt, from the well-known liberality of its noble proprietor, that it will soon find its way into general notice. 7. ROSA bracteata. R. foliolis oblongis obtusis glaberrimis, bracteis ap- pressis pectinatis. R. bracteata Wendl. obs. p. 50. hort. herrenhus. 7. t. 22. Vent. cels. t. 28. Redout. ros. 1. 35.-f. 6. R. lucida Lawr. ros. t. 84. R. Macartnea Dumont-Cours. bot. cult. fide Redouté. ( scabricaulis, ramis setigeris, aculeis minoribus rec- tiusculis. R. bracteata Monch meth. suppl. 290. Jacq. fragm. 30. ¢. 34. 7.2. Curt. mag. 1377. Smith in Rees in U. Hab. in Bootan, Roxb; 6 in Chine provincia Tche- tchiang, Staunton. (v.v. c. et s. sp. herb, Banks.) A compact dark green shrub. Branches erect, stout, downy; prickles hooked, very strong, placed by pairs under the stipule, somewhat downy. Stipule nearly distinct, pilose, pectinate: segments capillary, the uppermost sometimes dilated and extending into a small pinnate leaf; petioles almost naked, with a few small, strong, hooked prickles ; leaflets 5-9, crenate, obovate, flat, shining, blunt, naked on both sides, dark green above, paler beneath; their veins inconspicuous. Flowers showy, pure white, solitary, nearly sessile in ROSA BRACTEATA. 3 i the midst of several ovate, imbricated, downy bracteas, finely pectinate at the ec dye ; ; tube of the calyx and se- pals, which are nearly simple, woolly on the outside ; petals large, obovate; disk much thickened, nearly flat; stamens 350-400 ; ovaria 140-170; styles distinct, naked. Fruit spherical, orange red, covered all over with woolliness; pericarps brownish, wrinkled, im- mersed in the unusually copious hairs of the receptacle. This plant, although a native of China and the northern provinces of India, is nevertheless tolerably hardy in our gardens, producing its fine milk-white flowers in profusion during the greater part of the sum- mer. For ripe fruit I am “indebted to Mr. Lyell. For the present I have thought it better not to con- sider var. (@ as a distinct species; but itis probable that, by future observation, its characters may be found suf ficient to entitle it to a place by itself. In general ap- pearance, it is similar to the plant described and figured by Wendland; yet when the two grow side by side, their aspect presents several marks of difference. The variety © is much less than the other; it forms a more compact bush; the prickles are nearly straight, not strong and hooked; the stem is covered with set, of which there are no traces onthe other. This last cha- racter is of the most importance, because when sete are produced accidentally, they usually are occasioned by excessive luxuriance, and therefore ought to be found on the stronger plant of the two, and not on the weaker, as is the case here. Iam not disposed to lay much stress upon their different habitats , because, as I have already observed, it is probable that the present group extends across the continent of Asia in certain latitudes. 12 ROSA LYELLII. 8. ROSA Lyellii. Tab. 1. R. foliolis oblongo-lanceolatis glabris, bracteis distanti- bus integris, floribus cymosis. Hab. in Nepalia; Wallich. (v. s. sp. herb. Banks.) Amicissimo Carolo Lyellio Arm., Botanices indigene precipue cryptogamice peritissimo, susceptique nos- tri fautori acerrimo, dicata. A small shrub with the appearance of R. bracteata. Branches densely villous, without setze; prickles placed by pairs under the stipulz, straight. Leaves dense, spreading, longer than the joints of the stem; stipule villous, adhering, divided at the edge into many very narrow segments, sparingly fringed with glands; pe- tioles downy, armed with a few small, hooked prickles ; leaflets 7, oblong-lanceolate, very shining, simply ser- rated, naked on beth sides, except the midrib beneath, which is downy. Flowers cymose; bractew at some distance from the calyx, linear, erect, hoary, entire ; pedicels hoary, elongated, glandular; tube of the calyx and sepals, which are nearly simple, and shorter than the petals, woolly. Petals and other parts of the fruc- tification appear to be the same as those of R. brac- teata. I have great pleasure in having an opportunity of giving so fine a species as this, to my excellent friend Mr. Lyell, whose extensive knowledge of the genus and liberality in communicating it, highly entitle him to such a distinction. It has been recently sent from Nepal with a very extensive collection of equally interesting plants to Sir Joseph Banks, by Dr. Wallich. The entire narrow bractese, at a considerable distance from the flowers, at once distinguish it from the rest of the division, with the characters of which it does not otherwise disagree. Jit ff veh om te ‘ s a ae ti tinct by I Redguuray (4 GF PA, Yeltsg. ; a “53 ~ — Oe ete (POs ge pats ysl, cig pasitibtnna hd ig _— : ROSA NITIDA. 13 Div. 1V. Cinnamomee. Setigerse v. inermes, bracteate. Foliola lanceolata eglandulosa. Discus tenuis (nequaquam incrassatus). This section is particularly distinguished by its long, lanceo- late leaves without glands; upright shoots and compact habit; red flowers which are never solitary except by abortion, and conse- quently always supported by bracteze; an inconspicuous disk but little thickened ; round small red fruit losing their long narrow se- pals immediately after ripening; and small smooth shining peri- carps. ‘The shoots are usually setigerous next the ground, but rarely so towards the extremities, except in one or two instances. Obs. &. alpina and acicularis, of the next division, sometimes have bracteze, but their sepals never fall off till the fruit is de- cayed. 9. ROSA nitida. Tab. 2. R. pumila, armis confertissimis gracilibus, foliolis ni- tidis angusté lanceolatis planis. R. nitida Willd. enum. 544. Pursh am. septr. 1 n. 3? Smith in Rees in l. ' R. rubrispina Bosc. dict. @agr. p. 246? R. blanda Pursh! l. c.n. 1. et in suppl. R. Redutea rubescens Redout. ros. 1. 103. ¢. 36. Hab. in Terra nova, herb. Banks. (v.v.c. et s. sp. herb. Banks.) A low reddish bush. Branches erect, much divided, covered all over with very numerous slender prickles, unequal in size and interspersed with seta. Leaves very shining, dark green, changing to purple in the autumn ; stipule flattish, naked, fringed with glands, entire or a little toothed, ovate at the end; petioles 14 ROSA NITIDA. slender, naked ; leaflets 3-7, narrow lanceolate, naked, simply serrated, their veins inconspicuous. Cymes one or few flowered; bractee polished, ovato-lanceo- late, waved, revolute; flower-stalks covered with nearly equal setae ; tube of the calyx setose, spherical or nearly so; sepals very narrow, shorter than the petals, without setose and downy. Petals obcordate, very red and brilliant, concave, nearly erect ; stamens 100-130; disk a little thickened and flattened. Ovaria 30-35 ; styles disengaged, villous, included. Fruit bright scarlet, depressedly spherical, somewhat hispid. A pretty little species, with very bright red, cup- shaped flowers, widely different from R. blanda, with which Pursh certainly confounded it; for it was from an inspection of this growing in Mr. Sabine’s garden that he altered the specific character of blanda in his supplement. Possibly he meant something else by nz- tida, but what that was there are unfortunately no materials for determining. It is commonly called the dwarf Labrador Rose in the gardens. Miss Lawrance’s t. 27 seems to be a miserable figure of this, and yet the learned author of the monograph in Rees’s Cyclo- pedia cites it to blanda, following the second edition of Hortus Kewensis. R. rubrispina of M. Bosc I have little doubt in referring here; and R. Redutea rubescens of Redouté is certainly our plant; what resemblance there can be between it and the original R. Redutea I am quite at a loss to discover. ROSA RAPA. 15 10. ROSA rapa. R. elatior diffusa, ramulis inermibus, foliolis oblongis undulatis lucidis, fructu hemispheerico. R. rapa Bosc. dict. @agr. Desf. cat. hort. par. 273. Poir enc. suppl. Redout. Roses. 1. 7. t. 2. Promv. nomencl. 27, R. turgida Pers. syn. 2. 49. R. fraxinifolia Dumont-Cours. bot. cult. fide Poir. Hab. in Americz septentrionalis provinciis calidioribus Fraser. (v.v. cult. et s. sp.) A taller bush than R. lucida with a more straggling habit. Branches red, either unarmed, or furnished with a few weak, pale, setiform prickles, now and then decreasing into sete; rootshoots very red, densely co- vered with very unequal, scattered, crimson prickles: of these the largest are compressed and falcate, as they decrease in size becoming gradually straighter till they change into setz. Leaves distant, tinged with red, which becomes darker in the autumn; stipule naked, flat, waved, either narrow or much dilated, finely toothed ; petioles armed with a few short, straight prickles, glands being here and there intermixed ; leaflets 3-9, simply or doubly serrated, undulated, en- tirely free from pubescence. Cymes many-flowered, overtopped by the young shoots; bractece ovate lan- ceolate, with a point, naked, finely toothed, large and spreading ; flowerstalks rough with setae and glands: tube of the calyx cyathiform, at the bottom rough like the stalks; sepals compound, with a foliaceous end, longer than the petals, hispid without ; petals always multiplied, bright red, smaller than those of R. lucida ; disk nearly obliterated. Fruit deep red, crowned by the reflexed sepals, round, with a very wide mouth which is filled up by the densely villous styles. 16 ROSA RAPA. A very handsome species with numerous double red flowers. It was first distinguished by Bose in the Dic- tionnaire d’Agriculture, but by some mistake called a native of Scotland, which has been copied by every successive French author. Redouté’s figure is of a much greener colour than I have ever seen it in any state. I possess specimens gathered in the Southern states of North America by Mr. J. Fraser, and I am obliged to Mr. Robert Sweet for fine fruit, which is very rarely produced. This is a plant with which I have been long ac- quainted, and I can by no means assent to the opinion that it is a variety of R. lucida. Doubtless they must be placed next each other in a natural disposition of the genus, but otherwise they are as distinct as species can be. R. lucida is a compact bush with dense, stiff leaves, and armed with prickles under the stipulz ; its flowers sit close among the leaves, and the mouth of the fruit is by no means wide; the sepals also converge. This, onthe contrary, is a naked straggling brier, with scarcely a vestige of prickles on the shoots ; its flowers are on long stalks, the mouth of the fruit is so wide that the fruit itself is nearly hemispherical, and the sepals are reflexed. ROSA LUCIDA. 17 11. ROSA lucida. R. compacta, aculets ramulorum stipularibus, foliolis oblongis imbricatis planis lucidis, fruetu depresso- globoso. R. carolina fragrans foliis mediotents serratis Dill. elth. 325. t. 245. f. 316. . rubra lucida Rass. ros. t. 7. & t. 25. f. 1. . lucida Ehr. beitr. 4. 22. Willd. sp. 2. 1068, Monch. meth. 687. Jacq. fragm. 71. t.107. f. 3. Pers. syn. 1.48. Pursh’ am. septr.n.4. Smith? in Rees in loc. Redouté ros. 1. 45. t. 11. Hab. in America septentrionali a Noveboraco in Caro- linam usque, (Pursh) ; juxta Boston in aquosis et ad margines paludum, Bigelow (v. v. c. et s. sp. herb. Smith). am A compact bush, from four to six feet high; some- times much smaller. Branches erect, reddish brown, shining, with nearly solitary slender prickles under the stipulze, and a few sete scattered here and there; the rootshoots sometimes very setigerous on their lower half, but like the branches on their upper. Leaves very close, spreading irregularly; stipudce without pu- bescence, flat, shining, rigid, waved, their edge mi- nutely toothed, the teeth sometimes tipped with a _ gland; petioles either naked or a little downy beneath, armed with a few short, stout prickles; leaflets nine, ovate-lanceolate, naked on both sides, very near each other, waved, simply and coarsely serrated, very un- equal, the lowest pair frequently very small. Flowers overtopped by the leaves and the new branchlets, very red, several together; bracteaw concave, revolute at the edge, ovate-lanceolate, pointed, naked on both sides, finely toothed, the serratures tipped with a gland; flower-stalks nearly naked, not much longer than the D is ROSA LAXA. fruit; tube of the calyx bristly, depressedly globose ; sepals simple, ovate with a long point, hairy and bristly on the outside; petals obovate, emarginate, a little longer than the sepals; disk flattened, not very thick ; receptacle frequently elevated in the centre; styles ex- tremely villous, but little exserted. Fruzé depressedly globose, nearly naked, bright red. Not uncommon in gardens, producing its fine red blossoms early in the autumn. ‘The differences between this and the last have been already indicated. From R. carolina and laxa its shining leaves immediately dis- tinguish it. The learned president of the Linnzean so- ciety can scarcely have been well acquainted with the plant before us, or he would not have excluded the re- ference to Dillenius’s figure, which is a good repre- sentation of it, nor have quoted Miss Lawrance’s ¢. 75, the R. alpina & of Aiton, which is undoubtedly Jac- quin’s R. blanda and my R. fraxinifolia. Yet fine wild specimens from Bigelow are in his herbarium, and from their ticket it appears that the species is common in marshy situations in North America. 12. RQSA laxa. Tab. R. diffusa, ramulis vimineis subinermibus, foliolis ob- longis undulatis opacis glaucescentibus. R. carolina < Ait. kew. ed. alt. 3. 260. R. earolina pimpinellifolia Andrews’s roses? Hab. in America septentrionali (v. v. cult.) A spreading shrub with reddish brown, shining, wiry branches which have straightish prickles under the stipulae; the branchlets are usually unarmed ; the rootshoots covered all over their lower half with nume- bet aig, Let i ae oie acu i aN wat ROSA LAXA. 19 rous, slender .prickles, and a few sete intermingled. Leaves not shining, thickset; stipules narrow, broader towards their end, where they are recurved, naked ex- cept at the margin, which is glandular ; petioles downy, reddish-green, furnished with weak prickles, setae and glands; Jeaflets 7-9, elliptic-lanceolate, glaucous, na- ked, waved, with inconspicuous veins. Flowers rose- coloured, growing usually in pairs; bractee ovate and fringed, otherwise naked; flower-stalks glandular ; tube of the calyx spherical, armed with some sete ; se- pals triangular, lanceolate, nearly entire, a little dilated at the end, shorter than the petals, hairy, glandular and setigerous on the outside, especially at the base ; petals flat; disk almost obliterated. Fruit unknown. Frequently cultivated under the name of the spread- ing Carolina Rose. It is not however with R. carolina that it can be confounded, since its whole habit, glau- cous leaves, and open stipulz, permanently distinguish it. RR. lucida is much more nearly allied to it; they differing chiefly in the following respects, but as it seems sufficiently. The strongest rootshoots of R. lara have scarcely any prickles, its branches are much more spreading and slender, very often unarmed, the leaves never shine and are always remarkable for their glau- cous hue; there seems to be no disposition to produce fruit in this, while R. lucida bears it abundantly. Their period of flowering is also different ; that of lu- cida being in the autumn, of dava early in the summer. I have never seen wild specimens, but there can be no doubt of its native country. It is very uncertain whe- ther Miss Lawrance’s spreading Carolina be this or not. 20 ROSA PARVIFLORA. 13. ROSA parviflora. R. pumila, stipulis linearibus: aculeis acicularibus, foliolis lanceolatis glabriusculis arguté serratis, ca- lycibus viscosis. R. carolina Du Roi harbk, 2. 354. Sm. Insects of Georgia 1. 49. ¢. 25? . humilis Marsh. Arb. 136. R R. parviflora Ehr. beitr. 4. 21. Willd. sp. 2. 1068. Pers. syn. 2.48. Pursh. am, septr. n. 2. Smith in Rees in loc. ? R. caroliniana Michauz. boreali-am. 1. 295. The Pennsylvanian Rose. Lawr. Ros. tt. 3 & 66. R. carolina y and 3 dit. kew. ed. alt. 3. 260. Hab. in collium declivibus Noveboraco Caroline, (Pursh). (v. v. cult.) A very low, weak, spreading species. Rootshoots with a few sete which quickly disappear; branches slender, reddish-brown, armed with a pair of needle- shaped prickles under the stipule; these are quite naked, very narrow, a little incurved, with a small flat extremity which divaricates; petioles naked; leaflets usually 5, somewhat shining, lanceolate, pointed, sim- ply and finely toothed, their veins inconspicuous, a little hairy on the rib beneath. Flowers pale blush usually growing by pairs; bractew ovate, concave, pointed, somewhat hairy; peduncles covered with glands and setze, like the tube of the calyx, which is round and small; sepals ovate with a very narrow point, nearly simple, their edge cottony, back clammy and glandular. Petals very numerous in the double variety, which is the most common, and which is the only one I have had an opportunity of examining. The double Pennsylvanian Rose is by far the hand- somest of the North American species, and does not ROSA WOODSII. 21 yield in beauty to the most splendid varieties of gallica. Its elegant unexpanding blossoms of the most delicate pink and its dwarf compact habit have made it an universal favourite, notwithstanding the difficulty of cultivating and especially of propagating it. I have seen it succeed best in such soil as American plants are in general found to require. Ehrhart, with his usual accuracy, was the first to point out the peculiarities which distinguish it from R. carolina and lucida. I unfortunately neglected to preserve any notes of the R. parviflora from Muhlenberg in Sir James Smith’s herbarium; but from his observations I cannot help thinking they must be of R. lucida; especially as he quotes Miss Lawrance’s figures under R. carolina, which would scarcely. have been the case had the true plant been before him. And yet the R. carolina of Sm. Insects of Georgia is very likely to be this, as was first noticed in Rees’s Cyclopedia. I am obliged to M. Achille Richard for an ample description of R. caroliniana of Michaux’s herbarium, which confirms the propriety of referring it hither. In Mr. Lambert’s collection is a garden specimen with almost linear leaves. 14. ROSA Woodsii. R. stipulis sepalisque conniventibus, foliolis oblongis ob- tusis glabris. R. lutea nigra Promv. nomencl. 24. Hab. juxta flumen Missouri Americ septentrionalis (v.v.c. hort. Sabine.) In honorem cel. Josephi Woods qui primus veris Ro- sarum characteribus ad species distinguendas usus est. —— A low shrub with upright, dull, dark branches, having very numerous, straight, slender, scattered 22 ROSA WOODSII. prickles, with a few setz at their base, the former be- coming stipulary towards the extremities ; branchlets often unarmed. Leaves without pubescence ; stipules very narrow and acute, convolute and fringed with glands; stalks armed with straight unequal prickles ; leaflets 7-9, shaped like those of R. rubella, shining, flat, simply serrated, paler beneath. Flowers pink, appearing in the spring. Fruit naked, ovate, with short, connivent, entire sepals which are free from. glands as is the peduncle. As it is scarcely probable that any new British rose will be detected, worthy of bearing the name of Mr. Woods, of whose high merit I have already had occa- sion to speak, the present species has been selected by Mr. Sabine and myself for that purpose. That it is essentially distinct from every other is very evident even from the incomplete account I have been able to give of it. I first saw it growing in Mr. Sabine’s gar- den at North Mimmns late in the month of November ; most of the leaves had fallen, but a few heps still re- mained on the bush. Its habit without foliage bears more resemblance to that ofa stunted cimmamomea than to any thing else. In character it approaches Ff. caro- lina, particularly in the remarkable convolution of sti- pule. From this its numerous ramifications, weak prickles and short shining leaves sufficiently distinguish it. It moreover flowers in the spring and has naked fruit with conniving sepals. I am assured by Mr. Sabine that this is the plant which was sent to France from a nursery here as a new American Rose with black and yellow flowers, and no- ticed as such in Promville’s book. Said to be a native of the country near the Mis- gouri. See raauas Bs ee i ; aes ‘io Oy ie hap Re r) d yw 5 ; “ei. x Ay Re hha hy " a 3 nhs, we faye y Nee ae ae a - ne a ibe ROSA CAROLINA. 23 15. ROSA earolina. Tab. 4. R. stipulis convolutis, foliolis lanceolatis, sepalis pa- tentibus. R. carolina Linn! sp. 703. Willd. sp. 2.1069. Lawr. Ros. t. 24? Ait! kew. ed. alt. 3.260. Pers. syn. 2.48. Pursh! am. septr.n. 8. Smith! in Rees in loc. Redout. ros. 1. 81. t. 28. . virginiana Du Rot harbk. 2. 353. Réssig. ros. t. 13. . palustris Marsh. arb. 135. Donn! cant. ed. 8. p. 169. . corymbosa Ehr! beit. 4.21. Muhl. cat. 50. . pennsylvanica Michaux boreali-am. 1. 296. . caroliniana Big! bost. 121. . hudsoniana Redout. ros. 1. 95. ¢. 30. (. florida, foliis impubibus tenerioribus. R. florida Donn! cant. ed. 8. 169. R. enneaphylla Rafin. Schm. précis des découvertes ? quoted in Desv. journ. 4, 268. Hab. in palustribus Novanglia Virginiam usque (Pursh.) (v. s. sp. & v. cult.) . ~AenD Ss From 2 to 8 feet high. Branches erect, green or red brown, with twin or solitary straight prickles under the stipulz; the arms of the rootshoots are more dense and soon become sete. Leaves opaque ; stipule unusually long, narrow, inflected and folded together except at the end, which is spreading, naked unless at the edge which is toothed and sometimes fringed. Petioles downy, and armed with little prickles ; leaflets 7, lanceolate, finely and simply serrate, above naked, and dark green, becoming discoloured towards the au- tumn, beneath downy and somewhat glaucous. Cymes one or many flowered, appearing after the summer Q4 ROSA CAROLINA. heats are past; bractee lanceolate, very concave, pointed, downy at the back; peduncles hispid, as is all the calyx, of which the tube is spherical and usually coloured, the sepals entire, with a very long narrow point and cottony edge; petals concave or flat, usually Jonger than the sepals, and deep red, crumpled; disk nat very apparent; styles villous. Fruit scarlet, round, hispid, not losing the sepals till it is quite ripe. Shrubberies are often enlivened, where few other flowers are to be seen, by the copious crimson bloom of this very pretty plant. In its native marshes it is exceedingly variable, in height, size, shape and pubes- cence of leaves and number of flowers; nor is it much less disposed to sport when cultivated. Its most com- mon State is to be about six feet high with very nume- rous flowers and rather short peduncles. When the latter are lengthened a little, with a corresponding in- crease in their number, it becomes the R. corymbosa of Ehbrhart. If its size is greater and its.shoots paler than usual, it is R. palustris. An increase of pubescence makes it R. pennsylvanica. Sometimes, when the plant is unusually luxuriant, the ends of the shoots have no prickles, and then it is Rosa hudsoniana. Variety @ has a diseased appearance, and is easily distinguished by the membranous texture of its leaves and their want of pubescence. Pas) or) 16. ROSA Dblanda. R. elatior, armis deciduis, foliolis oblongis planis: petiolo piloso. R. blanda @ Solander MSS ! R. blanda Ait! kew. 2. 202. Willd. sp. 2. 1065. Smith! in Rees in l. Hab. in Americe septentrionalis ora occidentali, Men- zies. sinu Hudsonis, herb. Banks (v. s. sp. herb. Banks & Smith.) Branches armed with scattered, pale, unequal, de- ciduous, straight prickles and sete. Leaves dull; sti- pules large, elliptical, rounded at the end and fringed with glands ; sta/ks unarmed, downy ; leaflets 5-7, lan- ceolate, or more usually oblong, simply serrated, naked above, downy at the rib beneath. Flowers large, red, solitary ; peduncle and calyx unarmed: tube roundish ; sepals ovate, pointed, entire. Although this has- been long cultivated, living plants have never fallen in my way. ‘The specimens trom which my description has been drawn up, exist in the Banksian herbarium. From original documents in that invaluable collection, it appears that when the first edition of Hortus Kewensis, in which this was es- tablished, was published, Dr. Solander’s manuscripts were consulted, who had two different things before him. One of these was R. fraxinifolia, which he marks as R. blanda; and the other the present species, which he considered a variety. It so happened, how- ever, that the character given in the Hortus Kewensis was of that variety, which has therefore been univer- sally understood as the true plant; and the original blanda, figured, I may observe, by Jacquin as such, has almost as generally been known under other names, as will be shown in the next species. No E 26 ROSA FRAXINIFOLIA. figure has been published of the plant before us, and on that account I should certainly have given one from dried specimens, had I not thought it better to trust to its again making its appearance in a fresh state, since there is little doubt of its still existing in this country. I have never seen the prickles red, as they are said to be by Sir James Smith. Possibly he described them from Miss Lawrance’s figure, which looks like R. nitida. Mr. Menzies found this on the north-west coast of N. America, and specimens gathered in Hudson’s Bay are in the possession of Sir Joseph Banks. 17. ROSA fraxinifolia. R. elatior inermis, ramis strictis glaucescentibus, fo- liolis opacis undulatis impubibus. R. virginiana Mill. dict. n. 10. R. fraxinifolia Bork. holz. 301. Gmel. bad. als. 2. 418. Ker in bet. reg. t. 458. R. blanda « Solander!’ MSS. Jacq. fragm. 70. ¢. 105. R. corymbosa Bosc. dict. @agr 2? Desf. cat. hort. par. 272? R. alpina 6 Ait! kew. ed. alt. 3. 265. R. alpina levis Redout. ros. 1. 57. t.19. (Lawr. ros. 493i) Tab. in Terra nova, herb. Banks. (v. v.c. et s. sp. herb. Banks.) In appearance and size resembling R. cinnamomea. Branches erect, unarmed, dark purple, covered with a ROSA FRAXINIFOLIA. 27 pale blue, waxen bloom; rootshoots with a few weak setiform prickles at their base. Leaves opaque, entirely free from pubescence ; st/pulce broad, much dilated to- wards the extremities, flat, serrulate; petioles un- armed; leaflets 5-7, lanceolate, simply serrate, grayish green above, glaucous beneath. Flowers small, red, in few flowered cymes; bractew elliptical, naked, fringed and toothletted; peduncles shorter than the leaves; tube of the calyx depressedly globose, gray— these last quite naked; sepals ovate, entire, with a long point, hispid at the back ; petals obcordate, somewhat converging; disk not distinct; styles villous. Fruit small, round or ovate, dull pale red, naked. I have already attempted to explain why this, the original R. blanda, should not now be distinguished by that appellation. In determining on another for it, I have thought it right to take the oldest, excepting Mil- ler’s, for which probably no one will contend. The description of Bosc’s R. corymbosa answers so closely to this species, that I have few doubts of the propriety of citing it here. So little reason was there to suppose this to be a variety of R. blanda, that, in the last edi- tion of the Hortus Kewensis, it has actually been con- sidered not distinct from R. alpina. Gathered in Newfoundland by Sir Joseph Banks. The want of prickles distinguishes this from most of the section. R. blanda when unarmed, as it often is, is readily known by the downy stalks of its leaves. Cinnamomea in a similar state may be recognised by the same character, with the addition of the majority of its leaves and its stipules being inflexed at the edge, not reflexed. re ~~) 28 ROSA CINNAMOMEA. 18. ROSA cimnamomea. Tab. 5. R. elatior cinerea, ramis strictis, aculeis stipularibus rectiusculis, stipulis dilatatis undulatis, foliolis ob- longis rugosis subtus tomentosis. « foliolis (ovalibus) obtusis. R. minor, &c. Bauh, hist. 2. 38. R. cinnamomea Besl. eyst. vern. ord. 6. fol. 5. R. cinnamomea Lin! sp. 703. Willd. sp. 2.1065. Alt. pedem. 2.138. Monch, meth. 687. Lawr. ros. t. 34. Bieb. taur. cauc. 1.3893. Gmel. bad. als. 2. All. Schranck monac. c. ic, Pohl. bohem. 2. 170. Ait ! kew. ed. alt. 3. 259. Pers. syn. 1.47. Eng. bot ! ¢. 2388. Smith! in Rees in 1. Rau enum. 52 a & 8. Woods! in act. linn, 12.175. Redout, TOs. 1, 10d;, t, 37, lowe teal R. faecundissima Munch. hausv. 5. 279. Du Roi! harb. 2. 343. Hoffin. deutsch. fl. 175. Brot. lus. 1. 339.. Fl. dan, t. 1214. , Roth. germ, 2,597, R. majalis Herm. diss. 8. Desf. ail. ? GB fluvialis—foliolis (ovatis) acutis. R. fluvialis Fl. dan. ¢. 868, Retz. scand. 120. Pers. syn. 1. 47, R. arvensis Linn. fide Afzelii. Hab. in Dania, (fl. dan.) ; Belgia (Hoffmann); Lusitania (Brotero); Germania (Roth); Helvetia, Schletch- cher, Hooker; Gallia, Decand.; Bohemia (Pobl) ; Caucaso (Bieb.); 6 in Dania, (fl. dan.) ; Helvetia Hooker (v. v. c. & s. sp.) A gray shrub 5 or 6 feet high. Branches erect in the single var. more diffuse and weak in the double sort, deep red-brown, usually armed with a pair of strong pale brown, straightish prickles under the sti- Hapa chala Du. Vidi Beis alts sli are hat ay bint Lt 1a e’ ay ‘ al: yt Pa ye ‘i ap pprinaa nei erp leroy ann rs a : role Iyiaster Cat hats tye F Why, kane y tke ng ROSA CINNAMOMEA. 29 pulze ; rootshoots more densely prickly and setigerous. Leaves close together; stipule broad, rugose, concave, red at the edge and middle and somewhat fringed, a little hairy ; petioles slender, downy, unarmed ; leaflets 5, rarely 7, lanceolate, simply serrated, rugose, opaque, smooth and gray above, downy and czsious beneath, concave in the single, fiat in the double plant. Flowers solitary, or two and three together, pale or bright red, small, single or double; bractee large, somewhat downy, rugose, concave, czesious, tinged with red at the edge and axis; peduncles, round; tube of the calyz, and sepals, quite unarmed; the latter very narrow, Jonger than the petals, spreading in the flower, con- verging in the fruit, cottony at the edge ; petals con- cave, obcordate ; dish obscure e; styles very villous, dis- tinct. Fruit round, naked, crimson, covered with a delicate waxen appearance, crowned by the converging sepals. This, on the authority of a plant found in the wood in Aketon pasture near Pontefract, has been considered a native of Britain, but I fear without sufficient reason. It is common over the greater part of Europe, growing in thickets and flowering early in the spring ; but it is much more common in the middle and southern coun- tries than in the northern ones, where it is scarcely found, its place being occupied in those regions by &. majalis, a very distinct thing, although hitherto consi- dered only a variety. From this difference in geogra- phical distribution, I suspect R. majalis of Deston- taines, found wild in the north of Africa, to be the cinnamomea. Linnzeus certainly confounded the two, as. appears from his herbarium, where they both exist marked with the same name. The plant, however, which he had before him, when the second edition of Species plantarum was written, is unquestionably this cinnamomea in a single state from the Upsal garden. The other was added afterwards, and may have been from wild plants in Sweden. Dr. Afzelius, in his first Tentamen, gives it as his opinion that the R. spinosissima >d of Linnzeus is a sort of cinmnamomea, not however ex- 30 ROSA CINNAMOMEA. plaining which sort he means; but this cannot be, for in Flora Suecica, ed. 2, the fruit is expressly said to be black, which is always the case with our spinosissima and never with any individual of this division. The double variety is much more common than the single and has altogether a different aspect ; the shoots are not strong and upright, but weak and wiry, and the leaves are flat, not concave. YetI have no inform- ation of this in a single state, and therefore suspect these characters to have some connexion with the mon- strosity in the flowers; and possibly the one would disappear with the other. Mr. Wood rightly observes that R. cinnamomea of Roth is R. lutea bicolor. Of R. fluvialis of Flora Danica I have specimens collected in Switzerland by Mr. Hooker. It seems to be a smaller plant, the leaves are shorter and the prickles less than in the common sort: the flowers too are of a deeper red. It has small pretensions to be a species; but may possibly be an intermediate state be- tween R. cinnamomea and majalis, agreeing with the latter in size and shape of leaves, but in every other essential respect with the former. R. cinnamomea of Hermann is spinosissima. ROSA TAURICA. 31 19. ROSA taurica. R. elatior cinerea, aculeis sparsis debilibus, ramis strictis apicem versus inermibus, foliolis oblongis rugosis subtus villosis, sepalis compositis, stylis por- rectis glabriusculis. R. taurica Bieb. taur. cauc. 1. 394. Poir. enc. bot. suppl. Hab. in dumetis Tauriz, Steven. With the habit of R. cinnamomea; from which it differs in having the leaves more villous beneath and Jess glaucous; the petioles armed with numerous little prickles ; the segments of the calyx shorter, some of them divided at the base; styles half as long as the stamens, pubescent only at the base and under the stigmas, otherwise naked; peduncles often in pairs, sometimes solitary or three together. The round tube of the calyx and the peduncles smooth; stem armed with recurved prickles. Bieberstein. Native of northern Asia, and only known from the description of Marschall von bBieberstein. It seems, however, well distinguished from its congeners by its compound sepals and exserted, smooth styles. 32 ROSA DAVURICA. 90. ROSA davurica. R. elatior ramosissima, ramis tenuibus coloratis, aculeis stipularibus patentissimis subrecurvis, stipulis li- nearibus, foliolis oblongis rugosis subtus tomentosis alté serratis. R. davurica Pall. ross. 61. Hab. in Davuriz et Mongolic transalpine apricis et betuletis, cum Spireea chameedrifolia, ubique copio- sissima et simul florens Junio (Pall.). ‘ Often five feet high, erect, much branched, with slender, rigid, brownish, smooth branches, and stipu- lary, twin, spreading, a little recurved, grey prickles. Stipules narrow, toothletted; petioles downy, unarmed; leaflets 7, nearly equal, lanceolate, entire at the base, the serratures increasing in depth towards the end, some nearly blunt and crenate, others acute, all pubes- cent beneath. Peduncles smooth, involucrated by a leaf and bractea; sepals downy at the edge, with a narrow foliaceous end, somewhat longer than the petals. Petals deep red, entire, large. Fruit red, ovate. Pallas. The specimens in Pallas’s herbarium answer by no means to this, but seem to be rather of a variety of R. reversa. It must therefore remain in the obscurity in which I find it. Had Pallas given his usual atten- tion to Roses, I should have thought it probable this might be cimnamomea, to which it is certainly very near and which he does not mention; although there is no doubt of its growing in the countries he visited. But the characters given above seem suflicient to dis- tinguish it, especially the long spreading prickles and narrow stipules. ROSA ARISTATA. 33 21. ROSA aristata. R. foliis superioribus sub-bijugis, petiolo in spina pro- ducto. R. aristata Picot Lapeyr. fl. pyr. t. 105. Hist. 285. Hab. juxta Baréges, (Lapeyr.). Stem with few prickles. Petioles usually unarmed ; leaflets obovate, oblong, toothed, glaucous and smooth above, woolly beneath; upper leaves with no terminal leaflet, being furnished in its stead with a strong spine, which is the extremity of the footstalk elongated (and indurated?). Flowers solitary, purplish; pe- duncles, tube of the calyx which is round, and the sepals, hispid ; petals shorter than the sepals. Lapeyr. l. c. I have not been able to meet with that part of La- peyrouse’s Flora of the Pyrenées in which this Rose is figured. From his description it is #. cinnamomea in every respect except having the stalk of the upper leaves lengthened out into a spine. Whatever it be, whether a monstrous or natural appearance, the above character is sufficient to indicate it. Those who have materials must judge. 34 ROSA MAJALIS. 22. ROSA majalis. R. humilior cxsia ramis strictis coloratis, aculeis sparsis subzequalibus, stipulis linearibus, foliolis ob- longis planis subtus glaucis tomentosis. R. majalis Retz. obs. bot. 3.33. Wahl! lapp, 141, R. mutica Fl. dan. t. 688. R. spinosissima Gorter. ingr. 78. R. collincola Ehr. beitr. 2. 70. f8 canescens, foliis albido-ceesiis. Hab. in Suecia, Afz. Swartz; Lapponia, (Wabl.); Dania, (fl. dan.) ; 6 in Suecia Afz. Swartz. (v. v. o. & 8.sp.) Three or four feet high, very glaucous. Branches erect, virgate, with slender, straight prickles, either scattered or under the stipulz: rootshoots beset with very dense, pale, straight, nearly equal prickles and setee. Stipule narrow, incurved, naked, with a short end which is sometimes rounded; petioles somewhat downy and glandular, with a few weak, pale, straight prickles ; leaflets usually 7, oval or obovate, obtuse, sinply serrated, flat, very smooth, glaucous on both sides but especially beneath, where they are also a little downy. Flowers solitary, small, cyathiform, pale red; bractee solitary, oval, concave, pointed, naked; pe- duncle and calyx quite naked: tube round, small; sepals subsimple, pointed, longer than the petals: these emarginate; disk obscure ; styles distinct. Fruit orange-red, spherical, naked, crowned by the sepals, which are scarcely longer than itself. This species is confined to Sweden and Denmark, where it appears to be a very common plant. Its cha- racters are clear and its habit widely different from that of R. cinnamomea, with which it has been confounded. oy . . Wy , } Si m.. J de ee ee Wael tas: at ey 1 he. . es _ Re ei akin “ | ie ig aria’ . = as ; ie} ie BT: iu Ye a pte . “uF fs ay rae. me pater ys Bree p my ‘ue i a pA 7 ROSA MACROPHYLLA. 35 From specimens communicated to Mr. Hooker it ap- pears that Swartz bad intended to divide this into three species, which he called cinnamomea, cinerea and turbi- nella. Their appearance is very similar, nor have I been able to detect sufficient marks of discrimination. No other figure than that in Flora Danica has been given of this pretty Rose. 23. ROSA macrophylla. Tab. 6. R. inermis, foliis longissimis, petiolis parcé glandulosis foliolisque lanceolatis subtus lanatis, sepalis angus- tissimis petalis apiculatis longioribus. Hab. in Gossam Than Wallich. (v. s. sp. in herb. Banks.) Branches unarmed? reddish brown. Stipula con- cave, dilated, falcate, acute, coloured, naked ; petioles sometimes nine inches long, densely cottony, unarmed, with a few glands immersed in the down; /eaflets 5-11, lanceolate, flat, veined, simply serrated, the serratures pointed, deep green tinged with purple and naked on the upper surface, white with down on the under. ‘Bractec tinged with red, of a thin substance, lanceo- late, very large and long, nearly entire, naked except the rib, which is hairy on both sides; peduncles villous with a few unequal setz, coloured; tube of the calyx oblong, naked; sepals very long, narrowly triangular, simple, dilated and toothed at their extremities, hoary with a coloured back; petals obovate, witha little point, rather shorter than the sepals, blush coloured ; anthers oblong, rather large; disk very broad, a little elevated at the orifice; ovaries 28, very hairy; styles pilose, ex- serted, distinct. F 2 36 ROSA MACROPHYLLA. One of the recent acquisitions sent from Gossam Than to Sir Joseph Banks by Dr. Wallich. It differs from R. alpina in the shape of its stipules and great bractez, besides having a great deal of down on its leaves, which are the longest I have ever seen. It can be confounded with nothing else, and may be considered the connecting link between this division and the next. Div. V. Pimpinellifolie. Setigerze armis confertis subconformibus, v. inermes; ebracteate (rarissimé bracteatz). Foliola ovata, v. oblonga. Sepala con- niventia, persistentia. Discus subnullus. This division is essentially different from the last in habit, although in artificial characters it must be confessed they nearly approach each other; and perhaps too nearly. It may however be distinguished by the greater number of leaflets, which vary from 7 to 13 and even 15, instead of from 5 to 7, and are usually ovate, rarely oblong, and never lanceolate; the flowers are uni- yersally without bracteze except in R. alpina, Sabini and perhaps marginata. ‘These having connivent, permanent sepals, cannot be confounded with the preceding nor, on account of their thin disk, with the following division. . Woodsii of the last group differs from its congeners in the shape of its leaves, as does, but in a less degree, FR. cinnamomea @; but both of them have stipu- lary prickles, of which there is no instance in the present tribe. Obs. In all, the pericarps haye an uneven surface. ROSA ALPINA. 37 24. ROSA alpina. R. inermis, fructu elongato pendulo: pedunculo his- pido. R. rubra preecox fl. simplici. Besl. eyst. vern. ord. 6. fol. 5. R. alpina Linn! sp. 703. Jacq! austr. 3. 43. t. 279. All. pedem. 2. 139. Willd. sp. 2. 1075. Lawr. ros. t. 30. Decand. fl. fr. 4. 446. 536. Pers. syn. 2.49. Ait! kew. ed. alt. 3.265. Smith! in Rees. inl. Lindley in Bot. reg. t. 424. . rupestris Crantz. austr. 85. . monspeliaca Gouan monsp. 255. X.n. 1107. Hall. helv. 2. 41. R. inermis Mill. dict. n. 6. Turr. diar. act. 128. R. hybrida Vill. dauph. 3. 554. R . lagenaria Vill. l. c.553. Willd. sp.2.1075. Smith in Rees in 1. R. biflora Krock. siles. 2. 157. 8 pyrenaica calycis tubo pedunculoque hispidulis. R. pyrenaica Gouan illustr. 31. t.19. Willd. sp. 2. 1076. Decand. fl. fr. 4. 446. “Pers. syn. 2. 49. Smith in Rees in lL. alpina Jacq. schénb. 4. t. 416. R. hispida Krock. stiles. 2.152. Pohl bohem. 2. 174. R. turbinata Vill. dauph. 3. 550? R. alpina 3. Decand. fl. fr. 6. 536. y pendulina foliolis pluribus cauleque coloratis. R. pendulina Linn. herb. Ait! kew. ed. 1. Willd. sp. 2. 1076. Pers. syn. 2. 49. (Lawr. ros. t. 91.) Ait ! kew. ed. alt. 3.265. Smith! in Rees in l. R. alpina pendulina Redout. ros. 1. 57. t. 17. 3 pimpinellifolia omnibus partibus minor. R. pimpinellifolia Vill. dauph. 3. 553. R. glandulosa Bellard. in act. tawr. 1790. p. 230. ~ ee 38 ROSA ALPINA. R. pygmeea Bieb. tawr. cauc. 1. 397? R. pyrenaica 6 Smith in Rees in l. HIab. in alpibus Austriz, (Jacq.); Gallise australis montosis, Gouan. Decand.; Silesie, (Krocker) ; Bohemizw, (Pohl); Delphinatus, (Villars); sed preecipue Helvetize copiosissime Hooker ; ubi alti- tudinem 6000 pedum attingit, nec infra 2600 inve- nitur, (Wahlenb.): in montibus Carpathicis ad Fagi limites, Helvetize Abietis (vix ultra) crescere desinit, (Wahl.). (v. v. c. et s. sp. comm. cel. Hooker.) Seven or eight feet high. Branches nearly erect, greenish brown, usually with a glaucous hue, unarmed, or (very rarely) furnished with a few weak prickles at the very base of the rootshoots ; and these have been noticed to exist even on the branches. Stipulde narrow, dilated at the end, naked, fringed with glands; petioles with scarcely any hairs, densely glandular and seti- gerous; leaflets 5-9, of a thin substance, ovate, acute at each end, doubly and coarsely serrated, naked, the rib beneath sometimes rough with minute prickles. Flowers erect, blush coloured, solitary ; peduncles un- armed, or hispid; tube of the calyx smooth or hispid, ovate, very long; sepals erect, narrow, simple, with a long point, dilated at the end which extends beyond the petals, on the outside hairy and naked, or rough if the tube be so; petals obcordate, concave; disk de- pressed, broad; styles villous, distinct. Fruit orange- red, oblong or obovate, with a long neck, crowned by the converging sepals, generally pendulous. I believe most authors are agreed avout the greater part of the numerous synonyms adduced to this plant. Its great abundance in the countries where it grows, and the various situations in which it has been found, have led many into the error of forming as many species out of it as it assumes appearances. Thus R. hybrida of Villars is chiefly characterized by its entire petals ; lagenaria of the same author rests upon the authority of a single plant found in the district of Embrun, ROSA ALPINA. 39 among the woods of Boscodon, with longer fruit than usual; and in the R. biflora of Krocker not a single character can be discovered for even the pretence of a species. Sir James Smith rightly removes the var. 6 of the Hortus Kewensis from this, but is unfortunate in the place he assigns it. My variety 6 may be known by its hispid fruit. M. Decandolle, who considered it a species in the first part of his Flore Francaise, has retracted that opinion in his supplement, where it stands as R. alpina 6. Jacquin’s figure, as usual, is excellent. Var. y. Under my next species but one I shall have occasion to notice Linnzus’s Rosa pendulina. This is the plant of his herbarium and of our gardens. Its coloured leaves and stem, and disposition to produce more leaflets than the common sort, with darker flowers, are not sufficient peculiarities to entitle it to rank asa species. Nor can I perceive how its fruit, being “ pen- dulous, scarlet, smooth and shining, remarkably elon- gated, beaked and curved,” will distinguish it from R. alpina of the Alps, as is observed in Rees’s Cyclopedia. From the characters of Villars and Bellardi, it has been generally thought that the R. pimpinellifolia of the former and glandulosa of the latter were scarcely distinct from alpina. ‘This has been already noticed by Sir James Smith, and [have much pleasure in agreeing with him on the propriety of uniting them to the same species as R. pyrenaica of Gouan. Decandolle has, however, in his supplementary volume to the Flore Francaise, separated them widely from that plant, and I know not on what authority, applied to them a de- scription of something evidently belonging to R. rubi- ginosa. R. pygmea of the learned author of Flora Taurico-Caucasica, to which R. alpina of some index of Pallas is quoted, appears to be either the dwarf mountain state of that species or a variety of rubella, on account of his describing the “ semmi ramuli flori- Seri hispiduli.”. However this may be, I cannot doubt the alpina of Pallas’s Flora Rossica belonging to the next species. 40 ROSA RUBELLA. 25. ROSA rubella. . armis confertis eequalibus, fructu elongato pendulo. . pendula Roth. germ. 2. 561. . alpina Pall. ross. O1. . rubella Eng! bot, t. 2521. Smith! in Rees in 1. Woods! in act. linn. 12. 177. R. polyphylla Willd. enum. suppl. 37. 68 melanocarpa fructu nigro-fusco breviore, Hab. in Anglia, Smith, Winch; Germania, (Roth) ; Sibiria copiosé ab Uralensi jugo usque in Davu- riam: in campis Isetensibus: ad Obum, Irtin et Jeniscam, (Pallas). (v.v. c. et s. sp.) area n Branches erect, reddish, 3 or 4 feet high, covered all over as far as the extremities with nearly equal weak setee and prickles. Stipu/e dilated towards their extremities, eroded at the edge and fringed with glands, naked; petioles sparingly glandular, without hairs, as are the /eaflets, which are 7-11, almost flat, oval, pointed, simply serrated, or nearly so, dark green above, paler beneath. Flowers solitary without bractee, pale or deep red; peduncles hispid; tube of the calyx less so; sepals erect, entire, rough, shorter than the petals, which are concave and emarginate ; disk not thickened. Fruit pendulous, long, ovate, scarlet, crowned by the converging, shorter sepals. This is probably one of the things confounded by Linneus under the name of pendulina. Of Dr. Roth’s synonym there can be no doubt, as there is no other uropean Rose any way answering to his character. I am also persuaded that Pallas had this chiefly in view when describing his R. alpina, ‘although it is possible he had the true plant in contemplation also. Speaking of it he says, it varies according to situation with ROSA RUBELLA. 41 smooth and prickly stems and petioles; the prickles being capillary but dense; all which answers well enough to rubella, but by no means to alpina. Thus, if my conjectures be correct, it was noticed long betore it was discovered in England and published in English Botany as new, but with a very erroneous account of it. What is said in Rees’s Cyclopedia about the inflexed calyx is equally applicable to R. spinosissima; and I fear the observation of Mr. Backhouse, that the leaves fold together at night, must have originated in mistake, as I never have been able to discover such a disposition in any of the genus, although I have repeatedly watched for it. Mr. Woods first remarked that the stems and branches covered with sete, intermixed with a very few aculei, sufficiently distinguish it from R. spinosis- sima. To this I must add the long red pendulous fruit, which that gentleman had not seen. From R. stricta it is more difficult to discriminate it. Their principal differential characters I shall notice under that species. R. polyphylla of the supplement to Willdenow’s enumeratio, for an opportunity of consulting which I am obliged to my friend Mr. Ker, appears to differ in no respect from this, and the R. swavis of the same work seems equally referable to my R. stricta. Variety 3 is just intermediate between R. rubella and spinosissima. I procured it from Mr. Lee’s nursery, under the name of rubella. & 42 ROSA STRICTA. 96. ROSA ‘stricta. Tab: 7. R. ramosissima, ramulis inermibus, fructu clongato pendulo. R. sanguisorbze majoris folio, fructu longo pendulo ex nova anglia Dill. elth. 325. t. 245. f. 317. . virginiana Herm. diss. 19? . pendulina Linn. sp. 705. R. stricta Muhl. cat. 50. R. carolina ¢ dit. kew. ed. alt. 3.260. Lawr. ros. t. 30. (pessima). R. suavis Willd. enum. suppl. 37 ? ? Hab. in Americe septentrionalis Novanglia, (Dille- nius); Pennsylvania, (Muhl.). (wv. v. ¢.) Branches erect, three or four feet high, pale green, covered all over with small, weak, nearly equal set, except at the extremities, which are unarmed, like the very numerous, slender branchlets. Leaflets 9-11, roundish, of a firm texture, the lowest pair smaller than the rest, glaucous. Flowers bright red. Fret before maturity speckled with little pale spots. Otherwise with the characters of R. rubella. Notwithstanding the close resemblance between this and the foregoing, I feel no hesitation in distia- guishing them. R. rubella has drooping very weak branches, surculi bending at the end, and hispid to their extreme points; its leaves are green, fruit small, ovaria from 12 to 18, pericarps ovate and somewhat pointed. AR. stricta, on the contrary, has nearly erect branches and surculi and branchlets without any his- pidity: its leaves are somewhat glaucous, fruit large and, before ripeness, covered with little pale blotches: the ovaries are from 25 to 35, and the pericarps are round, large, and much more hairy. Rubella frequently Sab], i Mallds ¥ oy : *\, : ‘ a? ) ve é ps > 5 * = a A 4 if i. a cy ‘ t ‘ yf . i, } Z q , 7 , ez 4g i es it) : rm . we j i Pr j ‘- a » : i 7 A , ¥ as i i ag ‘ . Tie on i : Wr iy girs 1 | a ee gh a is Wi aby nr 7 er Baca ROSA STRICTA. 43 has aculei, stricta never. It may be urged that I have in other instances rejected much better characters as insufficient to distinguish species; and with apparent reason. But when it is remembered that there is no instance of a North American Rose being found in Rurope, and that this must form an exception, if it be deemed not distinct from rubella, I shall have the im- portant difference in geographical distribution in my favour, It has been known in this country ever since the days of Dillenius, who raised it in Sherard’s garden from seeds received from New England, and published a figure of it in the splendid Hortus Elthamensis. From not attending sufficiently to his description, much con- fusion has arisen in its history, since his figure has been cited by every one to a variety of a different species, probably the offspring of cultivation; and thus my R. alpina y has been pronounced a North American plant, to the great perplexity of botanists of that country, who have long sought for it in vain. ‘To explain how this has originated, it becomes necessary to trace the history of the plant from its source. The specimen of R. pendulina in the herbarium of Linnzeus belongs decidedly, as I have observed already, to the plant always known under that name in our gardens. It is the end of a branchlet and not unlike Dillenius’s figure. It.does not appear from what quarter he received it, and may therefore have been known to him only ina dried state, which will suffi- ciently explain the cause of his error in quoting the Hortus Elthamensis. In the first edition of Species Plantarum the specific phrase of R. pendulina is “ fruc- tibus oblongis pendulis,” which served to distinguish it from the rest of his species, because he was not then acquainted with R. alpina. But before the second edi- tion appeared he acquired this last plant, and then it became necessary to alter the character of pendulina to * germinibus ovatis glabris, pedunculis cauleq. hispidis, petiolis inermibus, fructibus pendulis ;” which proves beyond a doubt that he held the “ stipites innumeris G 2 44 ROSA ACICULARIS. spinis tenuibus et innoxiis deorsum flexis horridi” of Dillenius, which are not found on the R. pendulina of Aiton, to be essential to his species. In this state he left it. In the first edition of Hortus Kewensis the definition is altered to “inermis, germinibus oblongis, pedunculis petiolisque hispidis, caule ramisque glabris, fructibus pendulis,” clearly intended for the pendulina of our gardens. From what cause this change was made I cannot conjecture, for Dr. Solander, whose manuscripts were certainly used in the genus, was well aware of its not being the plant of Linnzus. Here, however, the mistake originated, and the justly high authority of that excellent work has undoubtedly pre- vented its being sooner detected. 97. ROSA acicularis. Tab. 8. R. elatior, aculeis acicularibus inequalibus, foliolis glaucis rugosis convexiusculis, fructu obampullaceo cernuo. Hab. in Sibiria Bell. (v. v. c.) About eight feet high, compact. Branches erect, the younger glaucous, the adult ones brownish, clothed with unequal, very slender straight prickles and a few sete. Leaves dense, opaque, very glaucous ; stipule narrow, without hairs, fringed with glands, a little di- lated at the end; petioles pale green, naked, or a little hairy, slender, with very long joints; leaflets about 7, of a very thin texture, oval, convex, a little rugose, simply serrated, the teeth diverging, nearly without hairiness, very czesious on their under side. lowers solitary, pale blush, fragrant; bractee ovate, convex, naked, shorter than the naked peduncle; tube of the Fal. J re Nae qi pee ih a iy é Fi ar ms Wed pa? nee. af ay }: e # 4, aa |: ) By Ree ¥ i ae ogee ares S Sl akleaye ) 7) + i Pee > . , a: i ; ng Reba Wi dete 5) “4 vee ea Aud 4 sar oben: ROSA ACICULARIS. AS calyx naked, elliptical; sepals very narrow, somewhat divided, hairy, thrice as long as the tube; petals obo- vate, emarginate, spreading, shorter than the sepals ; disk broad, a little elevated; styles hairy, distinct, their ends exserted and spreading. Fruit obovate, with a neck, yellowish orange, naked, somewhat oblique, crowned with the connivent sepals, which are thickened at their base. An interesting addition to the spinosissima tribe, introduced from Siberia by Mr. Bell. From plants communicated by the late Mr. Donn to Mr. Sabine, it appears to be the R. kamchatica of his Hortus Canta- brigiensis. From the three preceding species inequality of prickles distinguish it; it is readily known from the rest by its greater size and glaucous, rugose leaves. In the former respect it is surpassed, indeed, by R. Sabini, but the strong prickles of that plant, which are falcate when mixed with setz, and pugioniform when without them, make it impossible that they should be con- founded, not to mention their entire dissimilarity in other respects. It is the first Rose that comes into leaf, and at that period is remarkable for the yellow, as it were blanched, colour of the nascent leaves. 46 ROSA SULPHUREA.: 28. ROSA sulphurea. R. stipulis linearibus apice dilatatis divaricatis, foliolis glaucis planiusculis, tubo hemispheerico. R. flava pleno flore Clus. cur. post. 6. R. lutea maxima fl. pl. Bes/. eyst. vern. ord. 6. fol. 2. R. lutea multiplex Park. parad. 417. n. 17. t. 415. f. 6. Ger. emac. 1267. R. lutea flore pleno Rat hist. 1475. n. 3%. R. hemispheerica Herm. diss. 18. R. glaueophylla Lhr. beitr. 2. 69. R. sulphurea dit. kew. 2. 201. Willd. sp. 2. 1065. Lawr. ros. t. 77. Pers. syn. 1. 47. Gmel. bad. als. 2.404. Ker regist.n. 46. Smith in Rees in l. Redout. ros. 1. 29. t. 3. B. lutea Brot. lusit. 1. 337. Hab. verosimiliter in Oriente (Clusius). (v. v. c.) About four or five feet high, chiefly leafy at the ex- tremities. Branches yellowish green, or brownish, beset with unequal, scattered, pale prickles and sete ; of the former the largest are falcate and the others weak and nearly straight. Leaves of a dull glaucous green; stipule narrow, flat, dilated, spreading, and coarsely serrated at the extremities, quite free from pubescence, as is every part of the leaf; petioles some- what glandular, with a few pale, straight prickles ; leaflets 7, obovate, flat, simply toothed, very czesious beneath. Flowers very large, of an exquisitely deli- cate, transparent yellow colour, always double ; bractee none; peduncle and calyx either naked or glandular; ¢wbe hemispherical. This, by far the most splendid of the genus, has never been heard of in a single state, nor even near it ; “ - AX % + ( N ohh a AR ie ee a Coe a cs ae ot N ay we ‘ ia oes as . ie Pyare gs’ fi —— Beas re! ac 3 a iat wa ROSA LUTESCENS. 47 and its native country is still unknown. The earliest information we have of it is from Clusius, who was first acquainted with its existence from the inspection of little, artificial, paper gardens, ornamented with shrubs of different sorts, among which were double yellow Roses. These, he ascertained, were brought from Con- stantinople, and by means of some of his numerous correspondents he quickly procured living plants, which were probably the parents of those cultivated at this day. Linnzus must have been unacquainted with this when he thought the yellow Rose the same as the Sweet Briar. Considerable difficulty is always experienced in making this expand or even produce its magnificent blossoms. I am informed by Sir Joseph Banks that he has had it growing and flowering with the greatest juxuriance when planted in the soil of a marsh. The fine specimen from which Sydenham Edwards’s excel- lent figure in the Register was taken, came from Ox- fordshire; and in such perfection was it, that a bud was taken to one of the theatres by a lady and it opened in her bosom in the course of the evening. 29. ROSA lutescens. Tab. 9. R. armis ramorum confertissimis inaequalibus gracilibus reflexis, ramulorum minimis subzqualibus, foliolis planis impubibus simpliciter serratis. R. hispida Curt. mag. t. 1570. (mala). R. lutescens Pursh. am. septr. vol. 2. in suppl. Hab. verosimiliter in Sibiria (v. v. c.) A tall, stout, dark shrub. Branches erect, nearly straight, dull brown, defended by innumerable very 48 ROSA LUTESCENS. slender, unequal, pale brown, deflexed prickles and an almost equal number of sete; branchlets without prickles, but rough with glands and hairs. Leaves dense, dark green, discoloured in the autumn, quite free from pubescence; stipule very narrow, flat; pe- tioles unarmed; leaflets 7-9, oval, flat, simply serrated. Flowers pale yellow, solitary; bractee none; peduncles and calyx naked; tube ovate, much shorter than the sepals, which are entire; disk not elevated; ovaries about 30; styles villous, distinct. Fruit large, ovate, black, with a fleshy stalk, crowned by the connivent, short sepals ; pericarps large, crimson, rugged. Pursh was led into the error of including this in his North American Flora from its being known in the nurseries under the name of the Yellow American Rose, for which there does not appear to be any authority. I am much rather disposed to agree with the learned editor of the Botanical Magazine, in considering it a native of Siberia, with plants of which country its habit certainly agrees, and not at all with those of N. America. It appears to have been raised at Chelsea by Mr. Fairbairn, and from the original, still there, the plants of the gardens have most likely originated. I may hope to be pardoned for preferring, for so obscure a plant, the best of two names, although not the oldest. It is very distinct from R. spinosissima in its whole appearance, especially in its stout, straight rootshoots covered all over with bristle-shaped, dense prickles, and in the purple colour of its leaves in the autumn. The flowering shoots offer an excellent discriminative character, as they differ entirely from the branches in their arms, which are little more than tubercles tipped with a weak bristle, so that they might without much impropriety be considered rudiments of or imperfectly formed prickles. ‘The peculiarity, however, is constant. ROSA VIMINEA. 49 30. ROSA vininea. R. ramis vimineis, armis setaceis confertissimis rectis patentibus inzequalibus, foliolis membranaceis planis impubibus simpliciter serratis. Hab.—— in horto quodam academico legit P. S. Pallas, (v. s.c. herb. Lambert.) Branches \ong, very slender and wiry, quite unlike those of R. spinosissima, armed with very dense, seta- ceous, spreading, straight, unequal prickles and a few settee. Leaves very long; stipules dilated at the end and somewhat falcate; leaflets 5-7, oblong, simply ser- rated, of a membranaceous texture; petioles, peduncle and calyx naked; tube ovate; flowers very large. For this I am indebted to the liberality of A. B. Lambert, Esq. who received it with the rest of Pallas’s splendid herbarium. Its native country is unknown. From the ticket attached to the specimens, which is scarcely legible, it seems to have been obtained from some Botanic garden. It can be confounded with no- thing but sp/mosissima or lutescens, from which its long, weak, wiry shoots, clothed with very dense, setaceous prickles distinguish it. I know no other Rose with such an habit. Had it been caused by the plant grow- ing in a shady close place, the shoots would not have been covered with such dense arms, and the leaves would have been further asunder. Its membranous fo- liage will prevent any variety of R. spinosissima being mistaken for it, whose texture is always very firm and rigid. Luxuriant shoots of the latter have very strong, usually falcate prickles ; weak ones have none. 50 ROSA SPINOSISSIMA. 31. ROSA spinosissima. R. armis inequalibus, foliolis planis impubibus simpli- citer serratis. R. dunensis. Dodon. stirp. hist. 187. t. 3. Cynorrhodi species, &e. Thal. sylv. herc. 35. R. campestris odora. Clus. hist. 1. 116. R. preecox spinosa fl. alb. Besl. eyst. vern. ord. 6. fol. 5. R. campestris, &ce. Bauh. pin. 483. R. pimpinelize folio Ger. em. 1270. R. pumila spinosissima, &ce. J. Bauh. hist. 2. 40. 2. Rati hist. 1472. n. 15. syn. 455. a pumila, armis horizontalibus, fructu ovato. * pedunculo glanduloso v. setoso. R. spinosissima Linn ! fl. suec. 442. sp. pl. 491. ed. 2%. 705. Herm. diss. 1762. Roth. germ. 1. 217. 2. 559. Willd. sp. 2.1067. Pers. syn. 2.48. Bieb. taur. cauc. 2. 395. . cinnamomea Herm. diss. 7 ? n. 1106. Hall. helv. 240. . chameerhodon Vill. dauph. 3. 555. . pimpinellifolia $. Redout. ros. 1. 119. ¢. 44. * pedunculo nudo. . Spinosissima Fl. dan. t. 398. Huds. angl. 218. Bull. par. t.277. All. pedem. 2.138. Lawr. ros. tt.18.48. Smith! britt. 2.537. Eng! bot. t. 167. Aiton ! kew. 3.259. Smith! in Rees inl. Woods! in act. linn. 12. 178. R. pimpinellifolia Linn! syst. nat. ed. 10. 1062. sp. pl. 703. Monch. meth. 687. Réssig. ros. t. 9. t. 25. f.2. Decand. fi. fr. 4. 438. Gmel. bad. als. 2. 415. Jacq. fragm. 71. t. 107. f. 1. Redout. ros. 1.983. 2.29; 85... t. 30. Bs de ROSA SPINOSISSIMA. 51 R. scotica Mill. dict. n. 5. R. collina Schrank baiers. fl. n. 774. fide Rau. 8 reversa, pumila, armis gracillimis: inferioribus de- flexis, fructu ovato. R. spinosissima Jacq. fragm. 79. t. 124: nana An- drews’s roses ? reversa Lindl. in bot. reg. t. 451. y platycarpa, pumila, fructu depresso et pedunculo setoso. d pilosa, pumila, foliis acutis infra pilosis. ¢ turbinata, pumila, fructu turbinato. € Pallasii, elatior, armis subzequalibus confertis. R. pimpinellifolia Pall’ ross. 62. ¢. 75. = Redout. ros. 1. 84. R. altaica Willd. enum. 543. 4 rossica, elatior, aculeis longis gracillimis. 3 islandica, elatior, aculeis maximis falcatis. R. hibernica Hooker ' Iceland. in app. : sanguisorbifolia, elatior, foliolis 9-11 oblongis, fructu depresso-globoso. R. sanguisorbifolia Donn! cant. ed. 8. 169. Hab. ~ in montosis maritimisq. totius Europze copiose ; etiam in Caucaso, (Bieberstein) ; y, 3, ¢ Hibernia, Hooker ; ¢ Rossia, Pallas ; Caucaso, (Bieb.) ; 4 Ros- sia, Pallas; 3 Islandia, Hooker; (v. v.c. & s. sp. ¢ herb. Banks, 4 herb. Smith, 3 herb. Hooker.) Obs. species quoad magnitudinem, fructuum superficiem et pe- dunculorum miré varians. Rami nunc subinermes, tortuosi, aut stricti, nunc graciles, aculeatissimi; quo juniores, eo ar- matiores. Varietas > facie diversissima est. A dwarf, compact, dark (sometimes reddish) green bush, with creeping roots. Branches short, stiff, much divided, beset by very dense, unequal prickles and sete; some of the former being usually falcate. Leaves close together, quite free from pubescence; stipule either narrow or dilated, of nearly equal breadth; pe- H 2 LIBRARY E UNIVERSITY OF {LUNO'S 52 ROSA SPINOSISSIMA tioles setigerous and prickly; leaflets about 7, bright green, flat, simply serrated, orbicular or nearly ‘so. Flowers solitary, without bracteze, cyathiform, blush co- loured; peduncles naked, or rough with glands and setze, as are the sepals, which are short and entire ; tube ovate or nearly round, naked; petals emarginate, concave; disk not thickened; styles villous, distinct. Fruit ovate or nearly round, black or dark purple, crowned by the connivent or somewhat spreading sepals. I have already given my reasons for differing from Afzelius as to the propriety of considering the ‘‘ R. spi- nosissima Linnzi prima et vera” to be R. cinnamomea. And I am equally unable to agree with Mr. Woods, that the pimpinellifolia of the Linnzan herbarium re- sembles R. rubella. On the contrary, I do not hesitate to pronounce it, as Sir James Smith has done long ago, indisputably my R. spinosissima «. The work of Schrank cited for R. collina of that author I have been unable to examine, and therefore depend upon Rau for its accuracy. R. spinosissima of Gorter seems to be a cinnamomea ; whilst the plant called by the last name by Hermann must be spiosissima, on account of its orbicular leaves and rough peduncles. ‘The figures of Bulliard and Flora Danica represent a very weak state of it. This can be confounded only with R. viminea and grandiflora; from the first its stout, straight shoots and strong prickles, and from the last the presence of numerous sete among the prickles of the branchlets, cistinguish it. @ has the arms of the stem slender and reversed; its leaves are very glaucous, and in the spring it is co- vered all over with a profusion of snow-white flowers. Possibly it may have some pretensions to be a species. Its native country is unknown; unless the spinosissima of Jacquin, found wild in Austria and figured in his Fragmenta, should be the same; but the prickles are horizontal. Otherwise they are much alike. Varieties platycarpa, pilosa and turbinata are only ROSA GRANDIFLORA. 53 known from specimens collected in Ireland by my friend Mr. Hooker. Their characters sufficiently indi- cate their particular differences. Pilosa can only be distinguished from involuta by the simple serratures of its leaves. It is very different nevertheless. Pallasii grows in elevated plains and exposed pre- cipices from the Northern part of the Altaic moun- tains, extending through Siberia. Its more robust habit and the approach to equal size in its prickles are its chief features. Rossica has exceedingly long slender prickles; it exists in the extensive herbarium of Sir James Smith. Islandica is the only Rose found in Iceland; its strong vigorous shoots led Mr. Hooker into the error of considering it Hibernica, which I believe has never been discovered out of the neighbourhood of Belfast, where it was first detected. Sanguisorbifolia has a different appearance from the rest. Its peduncles are very short, and its leaflets unusually numerous. Native country unknown. 32. ROSA grandiflora. R. setis ramorum nullis, aculeis subzequalibus distan- tibus, foliolis planis impubibus simpliciter serratis. R. pimpinellifolia Bieb. taur. cauc. 2. 394: Hab. in Sibiria, Hort.; in Caucasi subalpini collibus sterilibus? (Bieb.) (v. s. c. herb. Lyell, Sabine.) It is chiefly at the suggestion of Mr. Sabine that I have been induced to distinguish this from R. spino- sissima. They differ nearly in the same way as R. in- voluta and Sabini, except that the latter is much more 54 ROSA NANKINENSIS. gigantic even in its variety @ than the present plant. The chief points of difference between the latter and spi- nosissima are its larger flowers and want of setee among the prickles of the branchlets; characters which appear to be constant here, although I have not admitted them in uniting Sabini and Doniana. However this may be, it is too remarkable a plant to escape notice, and if it should hereafter be reduced to spinosissima, it must stand as a distinct variety. I have little doubt, from Bieberstein’s account, that his R, pimpinellifolia is this, especially as he divides it from spinosissima, which so accurate an observer would scarcely have done unless his plants had actually been different. Native of Siberia. 33. ROSA nankinensis. R. pumila ramosissima, armis confertissimis, foliolis acuminatis ciliato-serratis, sepalis aculeatis, petalis apiculatis. R. nankinensis Louwr. coch. 324. Hab. Cantone Sinarum et alibi, a Nankino oriunda. (Lour.) Stems shrubby, stout, very much branched, six inches long, prickly all over. Petioles prickly; leaflets in three pairs with an odd one, ovate-oblong, acumi- nate, ciliato-serrate, flat, sessile. Flowers pale red, small, double; petals ovate-oblong, somewhat acumi- nate, flat; peduncles hispid. Tube of the calyx ovate, smooth: sepals partly prickly, partly naked. Fruit neither large nor pyriform. Lour. Known only from Loureiro. It appears to be allied to the last species, differing in having acuminate leaf- lets and prickly ods Can it be a congener of R. Lawranceana ? idles be a aes PP a co in Nibde-: bites hake. tty eine Visite pig ete Hyg a ee {LZ a TAN pon Wie < Ny Ak ROSA MYRIACANTHA. 58 34. ROSA myriacantha. Tab. 10. R. armis inzequalibus: majoribus pugioniformibus, foliis glandulosis impubibus orbiculatis. R. parvifolia Pall. ross. 62? R. provincialis Bieb. taur. cauc. 1. 396? R. myriacantha Decand. fl. fr. 4. 439. Hab. in Ossetize dumetis? Pallas; Delphinatu, D. C. ; juxta Monspelium, Reguien (v. s. sp. herb. Hooker. Lambert.) A little stunted shrub with almost simple erect shoots; which are brownish and defended by dense, slender, unequal, straight prickles and sete. Leaves chiefly about the ends of the shoots, without pubes- cence ; stipules narrow, glandular at the back ; petioles glandular and setigerous, now and then furnished with a few little straight prickles; leaflets 5-7, elliptical or orbicular, doubly serrated, beneath rusty with glands. Flowers solitary, cup-shaped, small, among the leaves, without bracteze; peduncle and calyx densely clothed with glands and sete, except the upper part of the globose tube; sepals reflexed after flowering, longer than the unripe fruit; disk a little elevated: the pro- truding ends of the styles and stigmas not very hairy. This little plant has hitherto been found only in the south of France, unless the synonym quoted from Pal- las belongs to it. However, his account is too incom- plete to enable us to determine it satisfactorily ; and the very different habitats of the two will probably be considered a material objection. It resembles in many respects R. spinosissima in a stunted state. The glands on its leaves appear sufficient to prevent their being mistaken for each other. _R. provincialis of Bieberstein answers precisely to this, and confirms me in supposing that the synonym of Pallas belongs to it. 56 ROSA INVOLUTA. 35. ROSA involuta. R. armis valde inzequalibus confertissimis, foliolis dupld serratis pubescentibus, petalis convolutis, fructu aculeato. R. spinosissima Monch meth. 687 R. inyoluta Eng ! bot. t. 2068. Ait. kew. ed. alt. 3. 260. Smith! in Rees inl. Woods! in act. linn. 12. R. nivalis Donn. cant. ed. 8. 170. Hab. in montibus Scotize, Walker. (v.v. c. & s. sp.) Two or three feet high, compact, reddish gray. Branches not much divided, erect, with very strong, dense, unequal, straight prickles and setz and a cracked bark. Leaves close together with a slight turpentine smell when bruised; stipule narrow, somewhat con- cave, acute, naked, but toothletted and fringed with glands; petioles hairy, glandular and setigerous, a few straight longer prickles being interspersed ; leaflets 5-7, concave, ovate, acute or obtuse, doubly serrated, naked above or nearly so and opaque, villous beneath with a few pale glands, scarcely distinguishable from the sur- face. Flowers solitary, without bractez, red and white ; peduncle, spherical tube of the calyx and simple sepals bristly all over with pungent setze and clammy glands; petals obcordate, involute; disk a very little elevated; unripe fruit crowned by the converging sepals. For the discovery of this the world is indebted to Dr. Walker, who found it in the highlands of Scotland, nor does it appear to have been observed elsewhere. At least all the specimens I have seen from other quarters marked R. involuta were decidedly either Sa- bini or its variety Doniana. From these it is not very easy to point out characters which will distinguish it in a dried state. When growing, their appearance is ROSA REVERSA. 57 exceedingly dissimilar. R. involuta is a little dark bush, with involute petals and very dense prickles ; its leaves usually naked or nearly so on their upper surface, and its fruit never ripening in a cultivated state. R. Sabini is, on the contrary, a tall plant from 5 to 10 feet high. When its prickles are mixed with setz the- largest of the former are falcate; when there are no sete, they are straight. The leaves are hairy on both sides, sometimes hoary, and the fruit usually comes to perfection in the gardens. 36. ROSA reversa. R. armis setaceis subequalibus reflexis, foliolis dupli- cato-serratis pubescentibus, fructu hispido. R. reversa Waldst. & Kitaib. hung. 3. 293. t. 264. Hab. locis saxosis montium Matre, (W. & K.) A shrub in its wild state two or three, in a culti- vated five feet high and more. Stems much branched, on their lower half covered with weak, brown, equal, deflexed prickles (sete?) Leaves pale, yellow green ; petioles furnished with setz; Jeaflets ovate, acute, finely and doubly serrated, naked above, downy beneath: the middle nerve is glandular. Flowers solitary, white tinged with pink; stalks and calyx hispid; tube ovate; sepals nearly entire; petals emarginate concave. Fruit ovate, dark purple, hispid, crowned by the sepals. W. & K. This was discovered in Hungary by Waldstein and Kitaibel, who published a good figure of it in their fine work on the rare plants of that country. It seems, as far as can be ascertained from their account of it, to be related to R. spinosissima on the one hand and to invo- I 58 ROSA MARGINATA. luta on the other. From the former its doubly serrated leaves and hispid fruit distinguish it, from the latter its equal small prickles and black fruit. The figure indi- cates a tendency of the petals to become involute; but I know not whether it can be depended upon in such a ° case. Among the plants of Sievers from Pallas now in the possession of Mr. Lambert are specimens of a Rose from Davuria marked R. davurica; but probably by accident, as they in no way answer to the description of that plant in Flora Rossica. If they be not of a distinct species, they must be referred to this, from which they chiefly differ in the colour of their fruit, which is not black, but red and smooth, in an unripe state. 37. ROSA marginata. R. pumila, ramis tortuosis junioribus pruinosis, foliolis ovatis cordatis triplo serratis glaberrimis, sepalis muricatis. R. marginata Wallr. an. bot. 68. Hab. in agrorum versuris sinistrorsim a Bennstadt (Wallr.). A tortuous shrub 1-2 feet high, below protected by a few prickles, above covered over by very dense straight ones; branches much divided, purple: the branchlets frosted. Stipule and petioles smooth, glan- dular ; leaflets ovate oblong, cordate at the base, of a firm texture, above shining, deep green, very smooth on both sides, thrice serrated, serratures edged with red and glandular. Peduncles hispid with glands ; tube of the calyx spherical, coloured, very smooth; sepals nearly entire, dilated at the end, almost muricated ROSA SABINI. 59 with glands. Petals blush-coloured, with yellow claws and no scent. Fruié purplish. Wallr. l. c. Differs from R. canina in having a dwarf stem in every state; the prickles being straight, subulate and copious ; the petioles and stipulze glandular; leaflets somewhat coriaceous, ovate-oblong with a cordate base, thrice serrate and glandular, of a glaucous red; flowers without scent; peduncles and sepals constantly bristly with glands ; fruit ovato-globose, turgid and co- loured. Wallroth. From this description R. marginata should be a very excellent species. But I nevertheless have some fear that it may prove to be too nearly allied to R. ru- biginosa, if they even be distinct. No one appears to have seen it except Wallroth, who undoubtedly may be depended upon for accuracy in describing the leaflets as cordate; the only instance of that form in the genus. 38. ROSA Sabini. R. setis raris aculeisq. inzequalibus distantibus, foliolis duplo serratis tomentosis, sepalis compositis. R. Sabini Woods ! in act. linn. 12. 188. R. involuta Winch ! ess. geogr. 41. (6 Doniana, setis subnullis, aculeis rectiusculis. R. Doniana Woods ! lL. c. 12. 185. Hab. in Britannia septentrionali; @ etiam in Sussexia Borrer (vy. v. c. & s. sp.) Shrub 8-10 feet high. Branches erect, stout, dark brown, armed with distant faleate prickles and a few sete. Leaves grey, distant; stipule narrow, fringed with glands ; petioles downy, glandular, armed with 9D) I 4 60 ROSA SABINI. little prickles; leaflets 5-7, oval, doubly serrate, flat, hairy on both sides, a little glandular beneath. Flowers usually solitary, sometimes in great bunches; peduncles and calyx yery hispid; the tube round; sepals com- pound. Fruzt round, scarlet, hispid with sete. By specimens from Mr. Winch I have ascertained this to be his R. avoluta. It is a charming plant; and as it is by far the most interesting of our British species, it has been with peculiar propriety dedicated by Mr. Woods to our common friend Mr. Sabine. It differs from R. imvoluta in being far more robust and more strongly aculeated. ‘The peduncles are soli- tary or aggregate, and in the latter case furnished with bracteze ; the sepals also are compound. It is so pre- cisely intermediate between this division and the next, that it might with equal reason be referred to either. As it however is a British plant, and moreover con- fessedly of the family of imvoluta, I have preferred placing it in this division, notwithstanding its divided sepals and somewhat thickened disk. R. Doniana is more dwarf than the other, and has straight prickles without setze on the branchlets. Can this be after all a production of R. tomentosa mollis ? Div. VI. Centifolie. Setigerze, armis difformibus ; bracteatze. Foliola oblonga v. ovata, rugosa. Dis- cus incrassatus faucem claudens. Sepala composita. This division comprises the portion of the genus which has most particularly interested the lovers of flowers. It is probable that the earliest Roses of which there are any records, as being cultivated, belonged to some portion of it; but to which particular species DIV. VI. CENTIFOLIA. 61 those of Cyrene or Mount Pangzeus are to be referred it is now too late to inquire. I may be allowed, how- ever, to conjecture that they may all have descended from a common stock, and, by long-continued cultiva- tion, have been brought to assume those appearances on which botanists rely for their differential characters. The Attar which is so important an article of com- merce is either obtained from them indiscriminately, as in the manufactory at Florence conducted by a convent of friars, or from some particular kind, as in India. From specimens in Mr. Lambert’s herbarium brought from Ghizapore by Colonel Hardwicke it appears that R. damascena is there exclusively used for obtaining the essential oil. The Persians also make use of a sort, which Kempfer calls R. shirazensis, from its growing about Schiraz, in preference to others; this may be, as I shall have occasion to explain shortly, either R. damascena or centifolia. It is, however, well known that Attar from different countries is of various degrees of goodness; that from Turkey being usually the best. I am therefore disposed to think that R. moschata may be sometimes used either alone or mixed with other kinds; especially at Mogadore, where, I am informed by Dr. Shuter, considerable quantities are procured, but of inferior quality. To the three or four following species nearly all the innumerable varieties of the gardens are referable. As it does not enter into my plan to notice any except such as are botanically remarkable, I gladly relinquish the task of describing the garden varieties to my friend Mr. Sabine, from whom an ample account may soon be expected. In the mean time, it will be sufficient to point out the distinguishing characters of the species without entering into a particular description of each. They are all setigerous, by which they are distinguishable from the following divisions; their incrassated disk and divided sepals separate them from the preceding. To the division of Rubiginose the glandiferous sorts approach; but the different uature of their glands, the size of their flowers, and their dissi- milar habit, prevent their being confounded. 62 ROSA DAMASCENA. 39. ROSA damascena. R. armis inequalibus majoribus falcatis, sepalis reflexis, fructu elongato. R. damascena Mill. dict. n.15. Du Rot harbk. 2. 364. Willd. sp. 2. 1072. Ait. kew. ed. alt. 3. 263. Smith! in Rees inl. Redout. ros. 1. 137. t. 53. R. belgica Mill. dict. n. 17. Du Roi harbk. 2. 364. La Rose pale Regn. bot. c. fig. R. calendarum Munch. hausv. ex Bork. holz. 330. Réssig. ros. tt. 8. 33. Gmel. bad. als. 2. 430. R. bifera Poir. enc. 6.276. Pers. syn. 2.48. Redout. rose VINO 63522). £45. Hab. in Syria? (v. v. c.) R. damascena may be distinguished from R. centi- folia by the greater size of its prickles, the almost uni- versally green colour of its wood, elongated fruit, nu- merous flowers, and especially by its long sepals being reflexed during the time of flowering. In the last re- spect it agrees with R. alba. ‘The bloom is exceedingly fragrant. R. bifera of some continental botanists is the Quatre saisons Rose of the French nurseries; and perhaps, from the long succession of its flowers, the most esteemed of all the varieties. Immense numbers in pots are sold weekly in the flower markets in Paris. I perceive no character to distinguish it, even as a va- riety, from the more common state of damascena, un- less its smaller size be sufficient. The native country of this is still not known with certainty. Sir James Smith has conjectured that it may be the Rose introduced from Syria by a Comte de Brie on his return from the crusades. But the most satisfactory account of it has been given by Nicholas Monardi, in his dissertation on the Roses of Persia, &c. ROSA DAMASCENA. 63 printed in Clus. exot. p. 48. He says they were called damascene because they are believed to have been brought ‘ ex Damasco nobilissima Syriz urbe ;” and he adds, they have only been known about. thirty years; thus bringing the date of their introduction to 1575. His description of his plant is excellent, and leaves no room for doubting that he meant the present R. damascena. “Sunt rosaria heec velut nostra, sed magis arbusta, etc.—aculeos plurimos emittunt quin et acutiores. Folia velut nostra sed ampliora. Florum numerosiorem quantitatem effundunt, qui 5 aut 6 ha- bent folia. Inter album et rubrum medium colorem sortiuntur.” 64 ROSA CENTIFOLIA. 40. ROSA centifolia. R. armis inzequalibus majoribus falcatis, foliolis glan- duloso-ciliatis, floribus cernuis, calycibus viscosis, fructu oblongo. Rosa n. 1. Linn. cliff. 191. R. centifolia Linn. sp. 704. Du Rot harbk. 2. 367. Bull. par. t. 275. Lour. coch. 323? Réss. ros. t.1. Bieb. taur. cauc. 1. 397. Rau enum. 109. Redout. ros. 1. 25. t. 1—37. t. 7.—77. t. 26—79. t. 27.—111. ¢. 40. R. provincialis Mill. n. 18. Du Roi harbk. 2. 349. Willd. sp.2. 1070. Pers. syn. 2.48. dit. kew. ed. alt. 3.261. Gmelin bad. als. 2. 429, Smith in Rees in lL. Y R. polyanthos Réss. ros. t. 35. R. caryophyllea Poir enc. 6. 276. R. unguiculata. Desf. cat. 175. R. varians Pohl. bohem. 2.171. muscosa, calycibus pedunculisque muscosis. R. rubra plena spinosissima, pedunculo muscoso Mill. ic. 22Ue fk R. muscosa Mill. dict. n. 22. Du Roi harbk. 2. 368. Willd. sp. 2.1074. Lawr. t. 14. Rass. ros. t. 6. Pers. syn. 2.49. Ait. kew. ed. alt. 2. 264. Ker regist. tt. 53. 102. Redout. ros. 1. 39. ¢. 8.—41. t. 9.—87. é. 31. R. provincialis 6 Smith in Rees in U. y Pomponia, omnibus partibus minor. R. centifolia minor Réss. ros. tt. 20. 37. R. divionensis Ross. l. c. t. 24. R. pomponia D. C. fl. fr. 4. 443. Red. ros. 1. 65. t. 21. R. burgundiaca Pers. syn. 2. 48. ROSA CENTIFOLIA. 65 R. provincialis y Smith in Rees in 1. R, centifolia 7. Redout. ros. 1.113. ¢. 41. 6 bipinnata, foliis bipinnatis. R. centifolia bipinnata Pers. syn. 2.48. Redout. ros. 2.11. £4. Hab. in Caucasi orientalis nemorosis (Bieb.) (v. v. c.) This has much the appearance of the last, but may be distinguished by its sepals not being reflexed at any period, the flowers full double, and the petals very large, whence the name of Cabbage Rose, by which it is usually known. Its fruit is either oblong or roundish; but never elongated. From gallica it may be told by its flowers being cernuous, and by the larger size of its prickles, with a more robust habit. It is well known that these plants are usually propagated by inlaying; but it is somewhat curious that, although the layers of R. damascena strike root readily, those of centifolia and gallica do not. Sir James Smith is disposed to agree with those who think this a native of the south of Europe; but the places in which it has been reported to grow wild, in that quarter, are manifestly too suspicious to be ad- mitted as authority for the habitat of a species so uni- versally cultivated. I prefer, therefore, to place its native country in Asia, because it has been found wild by Bieberstein, with double flowers, on the eastern side of Mount Caucasus, whither it is not likely to have escaped from a garden. Perhaps the celebrated Rose of Schiraz, in praise of which Keempfer says so much, may be this also, or damascena; we have, however, no materials for more than conjecture. The flowers of this are chiefly used for obtaining distilled Rose water ; those of gallica for drying. Pohl, in his Flora Bohemica, has considered gal- lica and provincialis as varieties of each other. Iam much rather disposed to agree with Borkhausen and French botanists, in taking the provincialis of Miller K 66 ROSA CENTIFOLIA. and the centifolia of Linnwus to be the same. On this head no information is to be obtained from the Linneean herbarium, and therefore other means must be used to ascertain the truth of the opinion. There can be little doubt that Linnzeus was ac- quainted with the Provins and Officinal Roses, and it is highly probable that he had them both growing in the garden at Upsal. Admitting this to be so, it is far more reasonable to suppose that he would distin- cuish these from each other, than that he would select for a species so trifling a variety of one of them (gal- lica), as the Dutch hundred-leaved Rose is, and would at the same time not notice so different a looking plant as the Provins. Let us see how far this is confirmed by his publications. R. centifolia, in the first edition of Species Planta- rum, appears with the character ‘ caule aculeato, pe- duncvlis hispidis, calycibus semipinnatis glabris,” which, as far as it can belong to either the Provins or hundred-leaved Rose, is equally applicable to both. He quotes R. multiplex media Bauh. pin. 482, which, from the reference to R. centifolia batavica secunda of Clus. hist. 1, 114, also cited by Linnzus, appears to be a sort of small Provins Rose; since Clusius expressly says it is intermediate between his: centifolia batavica alba, which is the White Provins Rose, and his centi- folia batavica prima. In the second edition of Species Plantarum the character is altered to “ germinibus ovatis pedunculisq. hispidis, caule hispido aculeato, pe- tiolis inermibus,” which applies pretty well to the Pro- vins Rose and not at all to the other. The same re- ferences are continued, and R. rubra plena spinosissima pedunculo muscoso of Mill. dict. t. 221, f. 1, which is a tolerably good figure of the Moss Rose, is added as probably belonging to it. Now this he never would have guessed to be a variety of the Hundred-leaved Rose. In his earlier publication, the Hortus Cliffortianus, his R. No. 1. which is the same as his R. centifolia, ROSA CENTIFOLIA. 67 has the additional quotation of R. centifolia rubra of Besler’s Hort. eyst. vern, 92. f. 4. which is really one of the hundred-leaved Roses; but which it is fair to presume he afterwards discovered to be so, and conse- quently erased, as it does not appear in his subsequent publications. The other references to R. maxima mul- tiplex and R. hollandica rubella plena, quibusdam centi- folia spinoso frutice of Bauh. hist. 236, unquestionably belong to the Provins Rose. Miller, however, judging from the name centifolia, rather than from the specific character or references of Linneus, concluded too hastily that the Dutch hun- dred-leaved Roses were intended. But as these were evidently no varieties of the Provins Rose, he proposed the latter as a new species, and, without further exa- mination, he has been followed by subsequent writers in this country. The Moss Rose is a mere variety of the common appearance of the Provins. Messrs. Lee and Kennedy possess a plant which produces both indiscriminately ; and Sir James Smith was informed in Italy that the mossiness disappears almost immediately in that cli- mate. The Pompone, strangely confounded with the Bur- gundy Rose by some, is smaller in all its parts; and the next variety, the celery-leaved Rose of the French gardens, is a singular monstrosity with mis-shapen bi- pinnate leaves. I have seen a similar variety of R. ca- nina growing in Mr. Sabine’s garden. 68 ROSA GALLICA. 41. ROSA gallica. R. armis subzequalibus conformibus debilibus, foliolis rigidis ellipticis, floribus erectis, sepalis ovatis, fructu subgloboso. . rubra, &c. Bauh. hist. 2. 34. _n. 3. Linn. cliff: 191. . gallica Linn! sp. 704. Mill. fig. t. 221. f. 2. dict. n. 20. Du Rot harbk. 2. 363, All. ped. 2. 139. Thunb. jap. 214? Willd. sp. 2.1071. (Ross. ros. tt. 17. 22. 25. f. 6. 26. 28. 31. 36, 38.39.) | Pers. syn. 2.48. Gmel. bad. als. 2. 406. Ait! kew. 3. 362. Smith! in Rees in l. Redout. ros. 1. 73. t. 25.—135. ¢,52.—2. 17. ¢. 7.—19. ¢. 8. 10. R. centifolia Mill. dict, n. 14. Willd. sp. 2. 1071. Pers. syn. 2. 48. Rosier de provins Regn. bot. R. sylvatica Gater. montaub. 94. R. rubra Lam. fl. fr. 3. 130. R. holosericea Réss. ros. t. 16. purpurea zbid. t. 18. R. belgica Brot. lus. 1. 338. R. blanda Brot. l. c. ? R. cuprea Jacq. fragm. 31. t. 34. fi 4. (@ pumila, floribus simplicibus, radicibus repentibus. R. pumila, &c. Bauh. hist. 2. 35. R. pumila Linn. suppl. 262. see austr. 2. 59. t. 198. All. ped. 2.140. Willd. sp. 2.1072. Pers. syn. 2.49. Bieb. taur. cauc. 1. 397. Ait ! kew. 3. 263. Pohl. bohem. 2.172. Wahl. cauc. 150. Smith ! in Rees inl. Rau enum. 112. Rosa 1104 Hall. helv. R. repens Munch. hausv. 5. 281. R. hispida Munch. l. ¢. ie damascena rubro- ROSA GALLICA. 69 R. austriaca Crantz. austr. 86. Poll. palat. 50. R. olympica Donn! cant. ed. 8. 170. y arvina, foliis utrinque nudis. R. arvina Krock. siles. 2.150. Rau enum. 106. Hab. in sepibus circa Montalbanum, (Gaterau) ; du- mosis circa Walzenberg, (Wibel); 6 circa Gene- vam—frequens in collibus herbidis siccioribus, im- primis ad sylvas et fruticetis Austrie, Jacquin; Pedemontii, (4l/.); Tauriz et Caucasi Iberici, (Bieb.) ; y ad margines agrorum prope Retzbach, (Rau). (v. v.c. et s. sp. herb. Banks.) Since R. pumila of Jacquin is to be considered as the wild state of this species, it ought perhaps to have been placed first rather than as a variety. In that case, however, the well-known name of gallica must have been given up for another, the knowledge of which scarcely extends beyond the country in which it grows wild. Switzerland and Austria produce it in the greatest abundance, but it has also been found in Asia by Bie- berstein. Rau informs us that in the vicinity of Wurtzburg it grows so copiously as to injure the corn exceedingly by its creeping roots, like Rubus cesius. it is better known in our gardens by Donn’s name of olympica, while the name pumila is improperly applied to R. majalis. The numerous double varieties known under the names of the Giant, Velvet, Bishop, &c. Roses are of the most exquisite beauty, and would be unrivalled in the vegetable world if accompanied by the fragrance which characterizes less brilliant species. The most splendid of them all is the Tuscany Rose, of which the late Mr. Sydenham Edwards left an excellent figure, which will soon appear in the Botanical Register. The Rosa arvina of Krocker’s Flora Silesiaca differs, as Rau himself confesses, in little except having a smooth tube to the calyx and naked leaves. | 70 ROSA PARVIFOLIA. R. gallica has many points in common with R. centifolia. 'They may be distinguished in any state by the stiff upright flowerstalks, want of large prickles, rigid leaves and smaller petals with shorter sepals of the former; its mode of growth is more compact and stature generally less. Its leaves are moreover never edged with glands, which those of eentifolia always are. Forskahl’s Rosa gallica, which he mentions as growing at Constantinople as high as the houses, and with double white flowers, cannot possibly be this. Could he mistake R. moschata for it? which is known to be cultivated there. 42. ROSA parvifolia. R. nana, armis subzequalibus, foliolis rigidis ovatis acutis argute serratis, sepalis ovatis. R. parvifolia Ehr. beitr. 6. 97. Willd. sp. 2. 1078. Pers. syn. 2. 50. Smith in Rees inl. Bot. reg. t. 452. R. burgundiaca Ross. ros. t.4. Gmel. bad. als. 2.431. Brot. lus. 1. 339. R. remensis Desf. cat. 175. Decand. fl. fr. 4. 443. Mer. par. 191. Hab. in montibus Divionensibus, (Durand) (v. v. c.) A little dark, compact, blueish gray plant. Branches somewhat glaucous, straight, erect, slender, armed with unequal, scattered, slender, somewhat falcate prickles and a few seta. Leaves on the strongest shoots at least twice as long as the joints, on the branchlets very densely aggregated ; stipules linear, nearly naked, fringed with glands, bright green; petioles hairy, hav- ROSA PARVIFOLIA. 71 ing at the back a few strong short straightish little prickles, glandular; /eaflets 3-7, usually 5, small, stiff, ovate, acute, flat, very finely and simply toothed; ser- ratures with a gland on one side of a deep dull green, rugose, and naked above, pale ash-colour, with a hairy rib and prominent veins beneath, the lowest pair, when more than three, generally very small. Flowers soli- tary, overtopped by the young shoots, without bractez, purple, always very double ; peduncle with no hairs but a few weak setae: tube of the calyx ovate, naked; sepals ovate with a point, nearly simple, concave, reflexed, hairy and scattered over with glands, very much shorter than the petals; these are spreading, except the inner ones, which are in part formed from the ovaria and very closely imbricated ; styles hairy, a little exserted, and adhering by their down. I have little hesitation in distinguishing this parti- cularly from the last, especially as I have the authority of the accurate and observing Ehrhart for doing so. It surely differs as much from gallica as that does from centifelia, and asI have no varieties to enumerate of it, there is the less difficulty in finding characters that may be depended upon. I have seen it growing in the most sterile and the most fertile soils; yet without material alteration in its appearance, and most cer- tainly without the slightest tendency to assume the cha- racters of gallica. M. Durand is reported, on the authority of Decandolle, to have found this wild on mountains in the neighbourhood of Dijon. 72 DIV. VII. VILLOSE. Diy. VII. Villosw. Surculi stricti. Aculei rectius- culi. Foliola ovata v. oblonga serraturis divergen- tibus. Sepala conniventia persistentia. Discus in- crassatus faucem claudens. This division borders equally close upon those of Canine and Rubiginose. From both it is distinguished by its rootshoots being erect and stout, not bending gracefully except in the case of the true tomentosa. The most absolute marks of difference, how- ever, between this and Canine exist m the prickles of the former being straight and the serratures of the leaves diverging; I know no instance in which these two taken together will not prove satis- factory. If, as is sometimes the case, the prickles of this tribe are falcate, the serratures diverge the more evidently ; if, on the contrary, the latter converge, the prickles become straighter; the former appearance bemg caused by luxuriance, the latter by debi- lity. The reverse obtains in Canine. Persistence of sepals is another peculiarity by which the tribe under consideration may be distinguished from the Canine. Rubiginose cannot be confounded with Villos@, on account of their unequal hooked prickles and glandular leaves. Rough- ness of fruit and persistence of sepals is common to both. R. villosa has sometimes sete. ROSA TURBINATA. 73 43. ROSA turbinata. . calycis tubo turbinato. . francofurtana Munch, hausv. 5. 24. Bork. hols. 312. Gmel. bad. als, 2. 405. R. turbinata Ait! kew. 2. 206. Willd. sp. 2. 1073. Lawr. t. 63. Jacq. schinbr. 4. t. 415. Pers. syn. 2.49. Jacq. fragm. 71. t. 107. f. 2? Smith! in Rees inl. Rau enum. 48, Redout. ros. 1, 127. t. 48. R. campanulata Ehr. beitr. 6. 97. R. francfurtensis Réss. ros. t. 11. Desf. cat. 175. Hab. ; quasi spontanea in Germaniz vineis et dumetis. (v. v. c.) aA A bush with the size and general aspect of R. da- mascena, from which it differs in having no setz, equal straight prickles, ovate entire sepals, and turbinate tube of the calyx. The native country of this Rose is not exactly known. Rau asserts it to be a native of Germany, and mentions as places of growth the bor- ders of vineyards and bushy places. Yet it is difficult to understand how so very double a flower should ever be propagated by seed, and if not by seed, how it should find its way to ‘such places, except as the out- cast of gardens. Jacquin, in his Fragmenta, figures the fruit of what he considered to be a single state of this species ; but it is oblong and must surely belong to something else. 74 ROSA VILLOSA. 44. ROSA villosa. R. foliolis ellipticis obtusis, fractu. maximo armis ri- gidis confertis horrido, sepalis viscosis hispidis. R. villosa Linn. sp. pl. 704. Willd. sp. 2. 1069.. Smith! britt. 2, 538. Eng. bot! 583. Ait, kew. ed. alt. 3. 260. Bieb. taur. cauc. 2. 395. Decand. fl. fr. 4. 440. Smith in Rees in Ll. Rau enum. 150. Redout. ros. 1. 67. t. 22. excl. fig. fruct. (Lawr. ros. t. 29.) R. pomifera Herm. diss. 16. Bork! holz. 309. Gmel. bad. als. 2. 410. R. gracilis Woods! in act. linn. 12. 186. Hab. in Anglia septentrionali, Woods; Gallia, (De- cand.) ; circa Wirceburgum, (Rau); Tauriz mon- tibus sylvaticis, (Bieb.). (v. v. c. et s. sp.) The largest of the genus, sometimes forming a small tree, with a trunk as thick as a man’s arm. Branches dull, very glaucous, frequently without any tinge of red, armed with strong, straight, or somewhat faleate, equal prickles, either scattered or under the stipule; branchlets witha few sete or none. Leaves usually very large and gray, densely downy every where; stipule spreading, acute, finely serrated and fringed with glands ; petiole glandular, with pale, fal- cate, unequal prickles; leaflets about 5, very unequal, elliptical, flat, rugose, with a turpentine smell when bruised, very coarsely and doubly serrated, the ser- ratures diverging. Flowers in pairs, either blue or deep red, of a middling size; bractee large, ovate, concave, rugose, hoary, nearly smooth above; peduncles very short, they and the calyx protected by rigid, unequal setee, and clammy with glands; tube ovate, glaucous ; sepals narrow, compound, spreading; petals longer than the last, obcordate, a little crenate at the edge ; ROSA VILLOSA. 75 disk elevated, not very thick; styles hairy, distinct, usually much sborter than the ripe fruit. Fruit either purple or deep red, round, with a thickened short pe- duncle, covered with stiff setze and crowned by the connivent pale brown clammy sepals. The distinction between this and the following hav- ing been ill understood by the greater part of botanists, it has become not only very difficult, but in many cases absolutely impossible, without authentic specimens, to extricate their synonyms. ‘The above are therefore all I have thought it safe to cite. The characteristic definition of Linnzeus, “ germi- nibus globosis aculeatis, pedunculis hispidis, &c.” by which he meant to contrast the rigidity of the arms of the former with the weakness of those of the latter, places his plant beyond the reach of doubt, especially because there is no state in which the fruit, either young or old, of tomentosa can be called aculeated. Mr. Woods, however, judging from the specimens marked villosa in Linnzeus’s herbarium, conceived that, not- withstanding his specific character, he really intended that variety of tomentosa which I have called mollis, and which he considers a distinct species. But I am assured by the learned possessor of that collection, that the specimen there is no authority whatever, because it was acquired after the publication of the first edition of Species plantarum. It however confirms me in the opinion that Linnezeus did not distinguish the two plants; at least not in his publications. For, in addition to the proof afforded by his herbarium, Afzelius has as- certained that R. tomentosa alone grows in the places indicated by Linnzeus as producing his R. villosa. The most essential point of difference between the two is in the fruit, which has in R. villosa a consider- able number of rigid setze and even prickles scattered over its surface: while that of tomentosa can never be termed more than hispid. It is also much larger in the former than in the latter, and is more fleshy. The leaves are larger, more exactly elliptical, and coarsely serrated. L 2 76 ROSA VILLOSA. The flowers usually grow in pairs and with stalks of unequal length: the longer drooping gracefully as the fruit ripens. The young shoots are remarkably glau- cous (as in R. alba), and there is a manifest tendency to produce setz and glands on the branchlets. The curious plant which Mr. Woods calls gracilis has nu- merous sete intermixed with the prickles: thus having in a great measure the characters of the centifolie di- vision. Mr. Sabine detected it among young plants raised from seed of the common tree Rose, in Mr. Lee’s nursery at Hammersmith. R. villosa of Pallas seems to be rather a variety of R. rubiginosa; of most other authors to be the next species. Grows probably all over Northern and Middle Eu- rope and Northern Asia, but not in great abundance. ROSA TOMENTOSA. 77 45. ROSA tomentosa. R. foliolis ovatis acutiusculis, fructu hispido nudove. a verd, surculis arcuatis, sepalis compositis. R.n. 1105. Hall. helv. R. villosa Du Roi! harbk. 2.341. Huds. angl. 219 var. 8. Monch. meth. 688. Afz. tent. prim. Mer. par. 190. Fl. dan. t. 1458. Desv. journ. bot. 2. 117. R. mollissima Bork. holz. 307. Willd. prodr. fl. berol. 1237. Gm. bad. als. 2. 409. R. tomentosa Smith! britt. 2. 539. Decand. fl. fr. 4.440. Eng. bot! 990. Mer. par. 190. Pohl bohem. 2.171. Pers. syn. 2.50. Smith! in Rees in l. Woods! in act. linn. 12.197. Redout. ros. 2. 39. ae R. dubia Wibel wirth, 263. R. scabriuscula Eng. bot! t. 1896. Smith! in Rees inl. Woods! in act. linn. 12.193. Winch! ess. geogr. 43. R. foetida Bat. suppl. 29. Decand. suppl. 534. Re- dout. ros. 1. 131. ¢. 50. 8 mollis, surculis strictissimis, sepalis subsimplicibus. R. villosa Vill. dauph. 3.551. Woods ! 1. c. 12. 189. R. mollis Eng. bot! t. 2459. Smith! in Rees in 1. Winch! ess. geogr. 42. R. heterophylla Woods! 1. c. 12. 195. R. pulchella Woods! in act. linn. 12. 196. R. villosa minuta Rau enum. 166? y resinosa, pumila, czesia, foliolis angustis, floribus ru- berrimis. Hab. per totam Europam sepibus incultisque; y in 78 ROSA TOMENTOSA. Hibernia, Drummond. (v. v. s. & ¢.3 ys. sp. herb. Hooker.) Seven or eight feet high, spreading, very gray. Branches somewhat glaucous, armed with straight, (rarely falcate) equal, scattered prickles and without setee. Leaves hoary with down; stipules concave, di- lated, toothletted and fringed with glands; petioles slightly prickly and glandular ; leaflets about 5, oblong or ovate, obtuse, doubly serrated ; serratures diverging, rarely converging; soft and rugose, paler beneath, and sometimes slightly glandular, when bruised having a turpentine smell. lowers one or more, reddish, cup- shaped, with short stalks; bracteas ovate or oblong, downy, longer or shorter than the peduncles, which are hispid with unequal setze and glands ; tube of the calyx ovate, oblong or round, usually hispid, sometimes nearly smooth; sepals compound, spreading, always hispid at the back ; petals entire, obcordate, concave ; disk thick- ened, flat ; styles very hairy, distinct. Fruit somewhat purple, round or obovate, or depressed, usually hispid, crowned by the converging sepals; but these sometimes fall off immediately after the fruit is ripe. If Iam right in referring Borkhausen’s Rosa mol- lissima to this variety rather than the next, it will have the claim of priority over Sir James Smith’s tomentosa. But, however, as this cannot be absolutely determined without actual inspection of authentic specimens, I have preferred leaving the name as I found it. This is the most variable of the genus except ca- nina; but the greater part of the varieties are very trifling and can be brought within the compass of a tolerable definition only in the three instances of ¢o- mentosa and mollis of English Botany and resinosa of Mr. Lyell’s MSS. The first has the leaflets smooth above (tomentosa 6 Woods. and fetida Bat.)—or smooth on both sides (tomentosa y Woods)—or without glands (tomentosa o Woods). The fruit is long, round, depressed or tur- ROSA TOMENTOSA. 79 binate, hispid, or smooth, or nearly so. Flowers pale blush, or deep red, or blotched, as in the English Botany figure of R. scabriuscula. 'This plant is very common in Suffolk, and may well have puzzled Mr. Woods to find out what the important difference is between it and tomentosa. In fact, a vague, almost indescribable dissimilarity in their general aspect, chiefly caused by the larger leaves of the former, is all they can be dis- tinguished by, even by the most practised observer. So far is the pubescence from being harsher than in ¢o- mentosa, that it is just the reverse. What Mr. Winch finds near Newcastle has more acute leaflets than the Suffolk plant, which is very well represented in English Botany. R. fetida of Batard’s supplement to the flora of the Maine and Loire is a weak variety with leaves smooth above. Its fruit is said to be fetid when bruised. R. Reynieri referred here by Woods seems rather to be R. rubiginosa flexuosa. has certainly a well-marked character, in its mode of growth, to distinguish it from «—its rootshoots being very straight and not bent like a bow, as in the other. I doubt, however, whether this can be consi- dered sufficient without some additional peculiarities. The undivided sepals are tolerably constant; but I have specimens from Mr. Lyell of a Northumberland plant which produces both. These in heterophylla are confessedly a little divided; and in pulchella, which has all the appearance of the stunted state of mollis figured in English Botany, are quite compound again. Many specimens of R. tomentosa have sepals perfectly intermediate between compound and nearly simple; and I believe it will not be doubted that the distinction between simple and subsimple is too ambiguous for specific discrimination. I have examined Mr. Woods’s own specimens of R. pulchella without being able to detect the crenature of the petals, on which he is dis- posed to place too much confidence. For it cannot be worth much as a character unless the comparative size of flowers be admitted also; since it always happens 80 ROSA TOMENTOSA. that crumpled petals have their margin more or less crenated. Plants of R. Aibernica in Mr. Lyell’s garden had crenate petals one season and emarginate ones the next. Variety resinosa is a very interesting plant, and may be considered as the same sort of offspring of tomentosa as Rau’s actphylla is of canina. Wild specimens are smaller in all their parts, with very compact foliage, narrow hoary leaves, and bright red flowers. I have, however, an intermediate specimen from the same part of Ireland, and in Mr. Lyell’s garden the cultivated plant is becoming more robust every year and less hoary. It was found in the south of Ireland by Mr. Drummond, curator of the Botanic garden at Cork, and kindly communicated by Mr. Hooker. So closely do tomentosa and canina border on each other, that, as satisfactory marks of difference, I have only to propose the straight prickles, diverging ser- ratures, hispid fruit, sepals and peduncle and soft leaves of the former, as contrasted with the hooked prickles, converging serratures, smooth calyx, decidu- ous sepals, and naked or harshly pubescent leaves of the latter. R. tomentosa has usually the sepals erect during flowering, but I have specimens from Cha- moun, gathered by Mr. Hooker, with reflexed ones. ROSA ALBA. 8] 46. ROSA alba. . foliolis oblongis glaucis supra nudiusculis simpliciter serratis, sepalis reflexis, fructu inermi. . sativa Dodon. pempt. 186. t. 1. . candida plena et semiplena Bauh. hist. 2. 44. . damascena fl. pl. albo. Besl. eyst. vern. ord. 6. fol. 1 .alba Linn! sp. 705. Mill. dict.n. 16. All. pedem. 2. 139. Lour. cochin. 323? Willd. sp. 2. 1080. Monch meth. 689. Lawr. ros. tt. 23. 25. 32. 37. Decand. fi. fr. 4. 448. Pers. syn. 2. 49. Ait. kew. ed. alt. 3. 267. Gel. bad. als. 2.427. FI. dan. 1215. Smith! in Rees in l. Rau enum. 94. Redout. ros. 1. 97. t. 34—117. t. 43. R. usitatissima Gat. montaub. 94. Hab. in Pedemontio, (Allioni); Cochinchina: (Lou- reiro); in sepibus Fioniz, (Fl. dan.) ; Galliz, (De- cand.) ; Hessiz et Saxoniz, (Roth). (v. v. c.) ~ Fey ZB Six or seven feet high, spreading, very grey. Branches strong, dull, glaucous, on the sunny side sometimes red, armed with straightish or falcate, slen- der or strong, unequal, scattered prickles and no sete. Leaves dull, glaucous ; stipule narrow, flat, elongated at the end, nearly naked, serrated’ and fringed with glands ; petioles downy, glandular and prickly ; leaflets 7 or 5, large, rugose, ovate, or nearly round, obtuse or with a little point, simply serrated with pointed teeth, above naked, beneath downy and very pale. Flowers large, numerous, either white or of the most delicate blush colour, frequently double; bractee lanceolate, downy, straight, concave; peduncles with unequal weak sete; tube of the calyx oblong, naked or bristly at the M 82 ROSA HIBERNICA. bottom; sepals long, pinnated, hispid on the outside, refiexed, deciduous ; petals concave, emarginate; disk thickened, and flattened; styles villous, distinct. Fruit oblong, scarlet or blood-coloured. If R. gallica be the most splendid of the garden Roses, this species may be considered the most beauti- ful. Nothing can be more delicately coloured than its full double, blush petals, nor more gratefully fragrant than their scent. It is naturalized on the banks of the Tyne, as lam informed by Mr. Winch; but it has not yet been found wild in this country. It has been dis- covered in France; and is not uncommon in Germany and Piedmont. Is it possible that Loureiro’s R. alba can be it? Rugose, very glaucous leaves, simple serratures, long, reflexed, deciduous sepals, and usually acicular unequal prickles, divide it from R. tomentosa and ca- nina. R. turbinata resembles it more in its botanical characters than in reality. 47. ROSA hibernica. R. aculeis inzequalibus: minoribus setiformibus, foliolis ovatis acutis nudiusculis simpliciter serratis. R. hibernica Eng. bot! t. 2196. Ait! kew. ed. alt. 3. 261. Smith! in Rees inl. Woods? in act. linn. 12. 222. Hab. in Hibernia Templeton (v. v. c. & s. sp. herb. Banks, Hooker, Smith, &c.) A compact shrub three or four feet high. Branches erect, reddish brown, with equal, straight prickles and ROSA HIBERNICA. 83 no sete ; branchlets with weak unequal prickles, some of which are very small; roofshoots rather setigerous, covered all over with much longer, but unequal prickles, some of which are hooked. Leaves like those of R. spinosissima sanguisorbifolia, but larger and more acute; leaflets generally 5, hairy beneath, especially at the rib, simply serrated. lowers solitary, almost always without bracteze; peduncle, round tube of the calyx and sepals naked, the latter compound, reflexed after flower- ing: petals concave, emarginate; disk flat, conspicuous. Fruit crowned with the sepals, deep dull red. It is more difficult to assign a situation for this, than for any other species of the genus. Its habit is when weak, like spinosissima; when more vigorous, like ca- nina; andif exceedingly luxuriant, like tomentosa mol- lis. It comes better into the character of the division where [ have placed it than elsewhere, and may be con- sidered as a transition from Villose to Canine. Mr. Woods, with his usual acuteness, has selected as its most important character the mixture of small straight prickles on the branches, adding, “It is true that R. hibernica has this in common with rubiginosa; but the entire want of glands, the simple serratures and the shape of the fruit, render it impossible that any mistake should arise between them.” ' If this be not the most interesting, it is at least the most valuable of the genus ;—or, rather, was so to Mr. Templeton, who found it, as he became entitled to fifty pounds, offered as a premium by the patrons of Botany in Dublin, for the discovery of a new Irish plant. The neighbourhood of Belfast. is the only part of the world in which it has yet been detected. 84 ROSA LUTEA. Div. VIII. Rubiginose. Aculei insequales, nunc seti- formes, rarod (an unguam?) nulli. Foliola ovata v. oblonga, glandulosa, serraturis divergentibus. Sepala persistentia, Discus incrassatus. Surculi arcuati. The numerous glands on the lower surface of the leaves will usually suffice to prevent any thing else being referred to this tribe. But &. tomentosa has sometimes glandular leaves, and in such cases the inequality of the prickles of Rubiginose and their red fruit will alone distinguish them. 48. ROSA lutea. R. aculeis rectis, foliolis planis coneavis, calycibus sub- inermibus integris. R. lutea Dodon. pempt. 187. Bauh. hist. 2. 47. R. lutea simplex Bauh. pin. 483. Besl. eyst. vern. ord. 6. fol. 5. R. eglanteria Linn! sp. 703. Wibel. werth. 263. Roth. germ. 1.217. 2. 553. Decand. fl.. fr. 4. 437. Pers. syn. 2.47. Mer. par. 189. Redout. ros. 1. 69. ¢. 23. R. lutea Mill! dict. n. 11. Du Rot harbk. 2. 344. Monch meth. 688. Willd. sp. 2. 1064. Lawr. ros. t.12. Curt. bot. mag. n. 363. Ait! kew. 3. 258- Gmel. bad. als. 2.403. Smith’ in Rees in l. Rau enum. 107. R. foetida Herm. diss. 18. All. pedem. 2. 138. R. chlorophylka Ehr! beitr. 2. 69. R. cerea Réssig. ros. t. 2. ( punicea, floribus bicoloribus. R. sylvestris austriaca, flore phzeniceo Hort. angl. 66. 18. ROSA LUTEA. 85 R. punicea Mill. dict. n. 12. Du Roi harbk. 2. 347. Ross. ros. t. 5. R. cinnamomea Roth. germ. 1. 217. & 2. 554. R. lutea bicolor Jacq! vind. 1. t. 1. Lawr. ros. t. 6. Sims bot. mag. n. 1077. Ait ! kew. 3. 258. Smith? in Rees in fe R. eglanteria punicea Redout. ros. 1. 71. t. 24. Hab. circa Alliano, (Allioni); in sepibus Wertheimen- sibus, (Wibel); in Gallia australi, Requien; circa Wirceburgum, (Rau); 6 in Austria. (v.v.c. & s. sp. herb. Hooker.) A naked-looking bush, abovt four feet high. Branches somewhat erect, shining, dark brown, de- fended by pale, straight, nearly equal, scattered prickles and no setz; roofshoots more densely armed. Leaves somewhat shining, deep green; stipules narrow, dilated and divaricated at the end, finely toothed and fringed with glands, a little pubescent or not; petioles naked or downy, rarely glandular; leaflets 5-7, elliptical or ovate, a little pointed, spoonshaped, simply or doubly serrated, naked above, hairy more or less and glandular beneath. Flowers deep yellow, large, cupshaped, soli- tary; bractewe none; peduncle and tube of the calyx un- armed, the latter ovate; sepals ovate, pointed, little divided, setigerous and even prickly on the outside; petals obcordate; disk thickened; styles villous, dis- tinct. #ruit unknown. This, as Sir James Smith observes, has been strangely confounded by some botanists with R. sulphurea. And yet their resemblance chiefly consists in the similarity of colour in their flowers ; su/phurea being undoubtedly allied to R. sibirica, lutescens, &c. and this, though very different, so closely bordering upon R. rubiginosa that Linnzeus at one time did not distinguish them and united them under the name of eglanteria. This name, De Theis tells us, should be written aiglanteria, being formed from aig, which is derived from the Celtic ac, and signifying point. French botanists have agreed to 86 ROSA RUBIGINOSA. consider this the real eglanteria of Linnzeus, and have continued that name in preference to Miller’s. As far as the authority of the Linnzan herbarium goes, they have it in their favour. But I nevertheless prefer fol- lowing Willdenow and others in retaining the name lutea, rather than one which is by no means either ex- pressive or generally adopted; and, if we may judge from what Linneus says in the first edition of Species Plantarum, he at that time had rubiginosa in view. It is known at first sight by its branches with foliage only at the extremities, prickles usually several under the stipule, and leaflets which are hollow like the bowl of a spoon. The only spontaneous specimens I have seen were gathered near Avignon by M. Requien, and are in the possession of Mr. Hooker. 49. ROSA rubiginosa. R. aculeis aduncis, foliolis rugosis opacis, calycibus pe- dunculisque hispidis. a vulgaris, aculeis fortibus valde inzqualibus, stylis villosis, fructibus ovatis v. oblongis. R. sylvestris odorata Dodon. pempt. 186 ic. 2. R. sylvestris foliis odoratis Bauh. pin. 483. R. foliis odoratis, &c. Bauh. hist. 241. R. sylvestris odora Ger. 1087. 1. R. Fl. Suecica 443. R. eglanteria Mill. dict. n.4. Du Rot harbk. 2. 336. Huds. angl. 218. Afz. tent. 1. Woods! in act. linn. 12. 206. R. rubiginosa Linn! mant. 2. 564. All. pedem. 2. 140. Monch meth. 688. (Lawr. ros. tt. 41. 61. 65. 72. 74.) Roth. germ. 2. 558. Willd. sp. 2. 1073. R. R. R. ROSA RUBIGINOSA. 87 Smith! britt. 2. 540. Schkuhr bot. handb. t. 134. Eng. bot! t. 991. Decand. fl. fr. 4. 445. Pers. syn. 2.49. Bieb. taur. cauc. 1. 398. Ait! kew. 3. 264. Gmel. bad. als.2. 407. Smith! in Rees in 1. suavifolia Lightf. scot. 1. 262. Fl. dan. t. 870. pseudo-rubiginosa Lejeune fl. des env. de Spa ex Desv. rubiginosa vulgaris Raw enum. 130.—~—glabra Rau Ap 6 re @ micrantha, aculeis ramulorum e«qualioribus v. nullis, ~S 3 fans SS eA AF AD pi! sepalis ante maturitatem deciduis, stylis villosius- culis, fructibus oblongis v. obovatis. . odoratissima Scop. carn. 1. 354. **2 Crantz stirp. austr. 1. 87? . eglanteria rubra Réss. ros. t. 10. . rubiginosa Jacq. austr. 1. 31. t. 50? . Crantzii Schultes obs. 94? rubiginosa triflora Wild. berl. baum. 397. Wallr. an. bot. 65. Rau enum. 134. Redout. ros. 1. 93. ‘34. . micrantha Eng. bot! t. 2490. Decand. suppl. 539. Smith! in Rees inl. Woods! in act. linn. 12. 209. . eglanteria americana Andrews’s roses. c. fig. . suaveolens Pursh. am. septr.n. 11. Smith! in Rees in Ll. . nemorosa Lejeune spa. 2. 311. ex Redout. . rubiginosa resinosa Wallr. an. bot. 65. parvi- folia Rau enum. 135. . rubiginosa nemoralis Redout. ros. 2. 23. #. 10. umbellata, inflorescentiz ramulis aculeatissimis, fructibus elongatis. . umbellata Leers herb. 119. add. 286. Gmel. bad. als, 2. 425. D.C. suppl. fl. fr. 5382. Rau enum. 140. . sempervirens Roth. germ. 1. 218. 2. 536. . tenuiglandulosa Mer. par. 189. 88 ROSA RUBIGINOSA. R. eglanteria cymosa Woods! in act. linn. l. ¢. 8? grandiflora, foliis nudiusculis, floribus maximis, fructu purpureo. R. grandiflora Wallr. an. bot. 66. ¢ flexuosa, ramis valde flexuosis, foliolis suborbiculatis, bracteis deciduis, floribus subsolitariis, stylis impu- bibus. R. Reynieri Hall. fil. in Rom. arch. b. 1. st. 2. p. 7? R. flexuosa, Rau enum. 127. R. montana Decand. suppl. 532? ¢. rotundifolia, ramis flagelliformibus: aculeis rectius- culis tenuibus, foliolis subrotundis dupld minoribus, calycis tubo subgloboso glabro. R. rubiginosa rotundifolia Raw enum. 136. n septum, ramis debilibus flexuosis, foliolis utrinque acutis, floribus sub-solitariis, fructibus glaberrimis, sepalorum laciniis angustissimis. R. helvetica Hall. fil. in Rom. arch. b. 1. st. 2. p. 6? R. myrtifolia Hall! fil. MSS. R. canina 3 D. C. fl. fr. ed. 3. 3716 ex D. C. R. sepium Thuill. par. 252. Mer. par. 192. D.C! suppl. 538. R. agrestis Savi pis. 1. 475. mat. med. t. 27 ex D.C. R. biserrata Mer. par. 190? R. macrocarpa zd. fide Desv. R. stipularis id. fide Desv. S inodora, aculeis valde aduncis subzqualibus, foliolis minus glandulosis, sepalis ante maturitatem deci~ duis. R. villosa Pall. ross. 63 ? R. inodora Agardh. novit. 9. R. dumetorum Eng! bot. t. 2579. Smith! in Rees in L. R. Borreri Woods ! in act. linn. 12. 210. Hab. per totam Europam copiose; Caucaso, (Bieb.); Anglia infrequens; Germania, (Roth); Gallia, (De- cand.); <« circa Wirceburgum, (Rau); Helvetia, ROSA RUBIGINOSA. 89 Hooker; € circa Wirceburgum (Rau); 4 Gallia Decand.; 3 Anglia; Rossia (Pall.); Suecia, (Agardh). (v. v. sp.3 &, 4, Ss. Sp. herb. Hooker.) Much branched, three or four feet high, with a more compact habit than R. canina. Branches bright green, flexuose, armed with numerous, hooked, un- equal, scattered, strong prickles; on the rootshoots sometimes very small and tipped with a gland. Leaves dull, rugose, green, very sweetscented, covered beneath with numerous brown glands ; stipule dilated, tooth- letted, hairy beneath; petioles with a few strong, un- equal prickles ; leaflets 5-7, roundish or ovate, pointed, doubly serrated, somewhat spoonshaped, usually naked above, covered with hairs, and very pale and rugose beneath. Flowers one to three together, concave, pale blush; bractew pale, lanceolate, acute, concave, slightly hairy and glandular; peduncles and calyx hispid, with weak setae; tube ovate: sepals reflexed, pinnate; petals obcordate ; disk much thickened; ovaries 30-40; styles hoary, distinct. Fruit orange red, roundish, oblong or obovate, hispid or smooth; crowned by the ascend- ing sepals. Under the foregoing species I have attempted to explain why I cannot agree with Mr. Woods in adopting the rejected Linnzean naine of eglanteria. If it is to be retained at all, this is certainly not the plant to bear it. The more common appearance of this plant is a compact, much-branched bush, with pale red flowers in threes, bristly scarlet fruit and bright green but not shining leaves, which are powerfully and gratefully fragrant. All these characters are, however, liable to considerable variation, and have been the foundation of a multitude of supposed species. Many of them have been given up by their authors; and those which re- main may be reduced to seven natural groups, to which I have prefixed the best characters I have been able to find. N 90 ROSA RUBIGINOSA. R. micrantha was first proposed as a species by Sir James Smith in English Botany, and has been more re- cently adopted by Mr. Woods, who attempted to dis- criminate it by its long fruit and the equal size of the prickles. But these appearances are very inconstant, and may not unfrequently be observed on indisputable R. rubiginosa, It is common in the south of England with very small flowers; but Mr. Lyell, who has con- stant opportunities of watching it, is unable to distin- guish it essentially from the common sweetbriar. The scent of the leaves is equally variable in both. There are, however, some peculiarities which, though not of much importance, will help to distinguish it with to- lerable certainty. Frequently it produces long, ram- bling, unarmed shoots, which are rarely observed in R, rubiginosa. The styles are often without pubescence, and the sepals usually drop off before the fruit is quite ripe. It appears to be the R. rubiginosa triflora of German botanists, and the variety nemoralis of Re- douté. Jacquin’s figure in Flora Austriaca seems to be this, but the detached fruit is rounder than I have ever observed it. Crantz describes his R.**, in Stirpes austriacw, with entire sepals; otherwise I perceive no material difference in his account of it. The American Sweetbriar, R. swavedlens of Pursh, is admitted by American botanists to be an imported species, now naturalized in many parts of the United States. Sir James Smith, with his usual liberality, has permitted me to examine the specimens from which he framed his account in Rees’s Cyclopzdia. They were sent from Pennsylvania by Muhlenberg, and differ in no respect from the European plant. The leaflets are by no means rounder than they often are in this coun- try. Pursh had no specimens; therefore what he says about the undivided calyx was probably taken from Andrews’s wretched figure ; on which, it is evident, no reliance whatever can be placed. R. umbellata is very common in the gardens, with flowers in a semidouble state. Its aspect is that of R. caucasea. I have counted as many as forty flowers in ROSA RUBIGINOSA. 91 one bunch, and all of them producing fruit. Its more robust mode of growth, and having the ramifications of the inflorescence closely covered with setz and straight prickles, which are also scattered all over the tube of the calyx and sepals, are sufficient to point it out. Roth mistook it for R. sempervirens; and Rau appears not to have understood the latter much better, as I shall have occasion to show hereafter. It is the R. eglanteria cymosa of Woods. My next variety 3 is the R. grandiflora of Wallroth, and referred here not without considerable hesitation. His description answers pretty well to var. 3, but be says the fruit is “ demum atro-purpureus” and flowers “< roseo-purpurei.” Moreover the large size of the latter and the leaves very green and nearly without down are not characteristic of R. rubiginosa inodora. When I first received < from Mr. Hooker, who ga- thered it near Seez, I did not doubt it would prove a distinct species, distinguished by its zigzag branches, very broad round leaves, and perfectly glabrous styles. The latter peculiarity is, however, not unfrequent in R. rubiginosa micrantha, which always has a less quantity of pubescence on that part than the common sweet- briar. More extended observations have also convinced me of the insufficiency of the shape of the leaves and mode of ramification, both of which may perhaps be owing to accidental circumstances. The description of R. montana in the supplement to the Flore Francaise is quite applicable to this, especially the “ aiguillons rares, épars, droits, assez gréles—ovaire ovoide, a peu pres sphérique, un peu hérissé, surtout vers sa base.” Villars’s R. montana must be a widely different species, for he describes it with columnar styles. See R. ar- vensis. Iam acquainted with ¢ only from Rau’s descrip- tion. He says it is two or three feet high, with fewer branches than the others. Prickles of the branchlets usually two together, slender and straightish. Leaflets roundish, scarcely longer than the prickles. Tube of N 2 92 ROSA RUBIGINOSA. the calyx roundish, smooth. Sepals divided, glandular. Flowers solitary, small, deep red. I really wish some permanent character could be found for the R. sepium of Thuilliers. It is the plant to which Mr. Woods alludes under his R. eglanteria, as having been brought from the South of France by Mr. Hooker. It grows there by waysides, in hot, dry places, in great abundance. It is altogether a smaller plant, with dark green leaflets almost always acute at each end, slender prickles and very zigzag branches. The fruit is perfectly smooth as well as the peduncles, and the divisions of the sepals are unusually narrow and numerous. But, unfortunately, in a specimen from the vicinity of Nismes the transition from this to R. ru- biginosa vulgaris is so complete, that it is impossible to say which it most resembles—some of the leaflets being rounded and some acute. Yet it came from the same bush as the others whose appearance is so dissimilar. Desvaux is my authority for the three synonyms of Merat. R. Borreri of Woods, which appears to be the same as R. inodora of Agardh’s Novitie, has given me more trouble than even the interminable varieties of R. ca- nina. It is a puzzle between the latter and rubiginosa, and, I do think, is equally referable to either. It is not unfrequent in the neighbourhood of Halesworth with smaller leaves than ordinary, but unequivocally tinged at the edge with red. Its mode of growth and prickles are like rubiginosa, but its sepals are deciduous - and leaves often without glands. Sometimes its ser- ratures diverge, sometimes point towards the end of the leaflet. Mr. Lyell has R. Borreri from Mr. Borrer growing by the side of R. micrantha, and the difference is very trifling. It is by the persuasion of the former gentleman that I have at length placed it here; for I certainly believed I had traced it into R. canina «. Pallas’s R. villosa answers precisely to this; nor does Agardh’s R. modora appear to differ in any respect, unless in his calling the fruit purple. ROSA PULVERULENTA. 93 50. ROSA pulverulenta. R. ramulis glandulosis, foliis utrinque pruinosis: supe- rioribus subverticillatis. R. pulverulenta Bieb. taur. cauc. 1.399. Poir. suppl. enc. in l. Hab. in collibus circa acidulam Narzana Caucasi sub- alpini, (Bieb.) (v. v. c. fl. delaps.) A low stiff shrub. Prickles straightish, strong, those of the ramuli intermixed with numerous short tender sete, tipped with a grey gland. Leaves rather hairy: stipule narrow, spreading, glandular, somewhat undulated; petiole prickly, glandular; leaflets 5-7, oval, pointed, doubly serrated, frosted all over with grey glands, their odour oily unlike that of R. rubigi- nosa, (sui generis). Flowers solitary, pale red, almost sessile, involucrated by about four approximated, ho- rizontally spreading, reduced leaves, rarely having bracteze ; peduncles slightly pubescent ; tube of the calyx roundish, naked; sepals spreading, foliaceous, with very numerous equal narrow segments; disk almost obliterated and mouth wide; styles very villous. Fruit ovate, smooth, bright red, crowned with the narrowed, connivent, glandular sepals, its peduncle with no hairs. Lyell’s MSS. A very curious plant, for which I am obliged to Mr. Lyell. It was imported by Loddiges under the name of R&R. precox. From R. rubiginosa it is very distinct, as indeed it is from every thing else. The approximated floral leaves, grey with glands on their upper surface, and its dwarf, stunted habit distinguish it without difficulty. Native of the subalpine hills of Caucasus, where it was gathered by Bieberstein. 94 ROSA CUSPIDATA. 51. ROSA cuspidata. R. sepalis hispidis in cuspide lineari-lanceolato serrato ipsis longiore productis. R. cuspidata Bieb. taur. cauc. 1. 396. Por. enc. bot. suppl. Hab. in aggeribus inter vineas circa oppidum Kisljar. Floret Junio. (Bieb.) Two or three feet high, much branched. Prickles very strong, much dilated at the base, hooked, and scattered. Stipules acute, glandular on the outside ; petioles prickly and glandular; leaflets 7, ovate-lanceo- late, acute, finely and doubly serrated, smooth above, hairy beneath. Flowers numerous, the size of R. ca- nina; peduncles, tube of the calyx, and sepals very rough with glands; the latter witha linear-lanceolate, serrated point, longer than themselves, at the base pin- natifid; petals white; styles hairy, much shorter than the stamens. Fruit globose, hispid, dark purple ? (atrocerulei.) Bieberstein. This is known only from the above description of Bieberstein. I have little hesitation in referring it to this division, on account of the glands on the stipulee and petiole. A similar tendency to produce the re- markable sepals from which it has been named, is evi- dent in R. pulverulenta. ROSA GLUTINOSA. 95 52. ROSA glutinosa. R. ramulis pilosis, foliolis incanis suborbiculatis viscosis. R. pumila alpina, pimpinellze exacté foliis sparsis, spinis incurvis, aquaté purpurea; Cupan. panph. ed. 1. t. 61. ex Smith. R. cretica montana, foliis subrotundis glutinosis et vil- losis Tourn! cor. 43. R. glutinosa Smith! prodr. fl. grec. 1. 348. R. rubiginosa cretica Redout. ros. 1. 93. 125. t. 47. Hab. in Parnasso, Sibthorp; Siciliz montibus, (Cu- pani); Crete, Zournefort, (v. s. sp. herb. Smith & Banks.) (Siem is low and bushy, with numerous stout branches, Smith); the old ones as thick as a goose quill, without down, defended by strong, close, unequal, fal- cate prickles; the young ones downy, with smaller and more slender prickles, which are often very densely ag- gregated under the stipule. Leaves hoary; stipule much dilated upwards, concave, without glands, except at their edge, which is nearly entire; petioles witha few little prickles and glands; leaflets 3-7, flat, round- ish, small, with coarse nearly simple serratures, and a few glands on the under side, (glandular and viscid on both sides. Flowers smali, pale blush, solitary, on short, bristly viscid stalks, Smith). Fruit without bractez, scarlet, covered all over, as is its stalk, with little stiff prickles, crowned by the connivent, nearly simple, hoary sepals. For the synonym of Cupani I trust to Sir James Smith. No copy of his Panphyton containing t. 61 has fallen in my way. This is very nearly allied to R. rubiginosa, but differs in having hoary leaves and pu- bescent branchlets ; a very curious and important cha- racter. It appears from Redouté’s figure, which is less happy than usual, to be cultivated in France; our own gardens it has not yet reached. 96 ROSA MONTEZUM&. 53. ROSA Montezume. R. ramis inermibus. R. Montezumz Humb. et Bonpl. nov. gen. & sp. tom. 3. ined. Redout. ros. 1. 55. t. 16. Hab. in jugo montium Mexice sub gradu 19° latitudinis septentrionalis, altitudine plusquam 9300 pedum, in cacumine Cerro-Ventoso juxta S. Petri fodinam, (H. & B.) Unarmed, with smooth branches. Stipules fringed with glands; petioles downy, armed with many little prickles; leaflets 5, oval, acute, naked on both sides, dark green above, paler beneath. Flowers pale red, solitary, without bractexe, sweetscented; peduncle and elliptical tube of the calyx naked; sepals compound, dilated at the end. Redout. l. c. So incomplete is the account given in Redouté’s work of this most interesting plant, that it is quite im- practicable to ascertain with certainty, even the division in which it should be arranged. The figure is probably taken from a dried specimen and is very like R. rubigi- nosa; yet the leaves are described as naked on both sides. If it be really an unarmed species, it will be easy to characterize it; but if, as I believe, it is only an unarmed branch that is figured, and if it do not be- long to this division, it must be placed in the next; but then I do not perceive how it is to be distinguished from R. canina. The petioles are said to be prickiy, and I know no instance of a species without prickles on the branches, producing them on any other part. It was found on the chain of porphyry mountains which bound the valley of Mexico on the north, at the elevation of 1460 toises, on the top of Cerro Ventoso near the mine of San Pedro. The thermometer in May from 10° to 11° of Reaumur. ay . Pen watt. yas Read en | 2 eens tee acts Nes dasa oe iM; Fey Bs matteo, iat ee Bae oper ‘i a . ht % , f ah dy ¥ ee — , i din? ‘ Ait Mf y halt. bhai Div. IX. Canine. Aculei equales adunci. Foliola ovata eglandulosa, serraturis conniventibus. Sepala decidua. Discus incrassatus faucem claudens. Surculi majorum arcuati. The disunion of styles will prevent any individuals of this section from being confounded with the next. The essential dif- ferences which distinguish it from the preceding Divisions have been explained under their respective heads. Mr. Sabine has a plant of &. canina which produces setz ; but this is a solitary ex- ception and cannot affect the general importance of the character I have assigned to the section. 54. ROSA caucasea. Tab. 11. R. foliolis mollibus ovatis, ovariis 50-60. R. caueasica Pall. ross. 62. Bieb. taur. cauc. 1. 400. Ait! kew. ed. alt. 3. 266. Smith in Rees in 1. ab. in Iberia (Steven.) (v. v. c.) This has so great a resemblance to many states of the next species, that I almost doubt whether they really be distinct. The present plant may be usually distinguished by a very robust habit, broad and soft leaves, and flowers growing in bunches. The fruit is very large and its flesh is soft. MR. canina, it is true, sometimes has the greater part of these peculiari- ties, but its leaves are not soft; on the contrary, their pubescence is harsh. The most certain test, however, of the species seems to be its unusually numerous ovaria, which in the central flower are not less than 50 but frequently more than 60; while canina has rarely more than 25. ) 98 ROSA CANINA Pallas must have had a very imperfect specimen be- fore him, as he describes his plant without prickles. Bieberstein appears to have ascertained the incorrect- ness of this, and properly corrects him. The serratures are always double. 55. ROSA eanina. R. foliolis rigidis ovatis, ovariis 20-30. R. canina Linn! sp. 704. Bull. par. t. 276. All. pe- dem. 2.139. Willd. sp. 2. 1077. Monch meth. 689. Lawr. tt. 60 & 81. Wib. werth. 264. Rés- sig. ros. tt. 21.29. Curt. Lond. t. 299. Afsz. tent. prim. Smith! britt.n. 6. Eng. bot! 992. Svensk bot. ¢. 29. Gmel. bad. als. 2. 422. - Brot. lus. 1. 340. Bieb. taur. cauc. 1. 399. Schrank monac. ec. Jig. Fl. dan. t.555. Smith in Rees in l. Woods! mm act. linn. 12. 223. Rau enum. 71. R. dumalis Bechst. forstb. 241 & 939 ex Rau. L’eglantier Regn. bot. c. fig. R. andegavensis Bat. main. & loir. 189. suppl. 29. Redout. ros. 2. 9. t. 3. R. glauca Lois. in Desv. journ. ? R. arvensis Schranck monac. c. fig. R. glaucescens Mer. par. 192. R. nitens Mer. 1. c. ‘R. teneriffensis Donn! cant. ed. 8. 169. R. senticosa Achar. in kongl. vetensk. acad. handl. 34. Oteef. 3: R. surculosa Woods! in act. linn. 12. 228. R. sarmentacea Woods! in act. linn. 12. 213. R. nuda Woods! 1. c. 12. 205. ROSA CANINA. 99 R. affinis Raw enum. 79. R. glaucophylla Winch! ess. geogr. 45. 8 aciphylla, pumila, foliis utrinque impubibus flori- busque multo minoribus. | R. aciphylla Raw enum. 69. c. fig. Redout. ros. 2. 31. t..13. y egyptiaca, foliolis laté ovatis, grossé serratis utrinque impubibus, receptacula elongato. R. indica Forsk. p. exiii? 6 collina, foliolis infra v. petiolo hirsutis, sepalis pedun- culisque hispidis, disco conico. R. collina Jacq! austr. 2. 58. t.197. All. pedem. 2 140. Willd. sp. 2.1078. Bieb. taur. cauc. 1. 399. Ait ! kew. 3.266. Mer. par. 191. Woods! in act. linn. 12.219. Rau enum. 163. Redout. ros. 2. 13. td. . umbellata Leyser pal. 435. . fastigiata Bat. main. & lowr. suppl. 30. D.C. suppl. 535. . platyphylla Rau enum. 82. . psilophylla Raw lc. 191. . solstitialis Besser. galic. primit. 1. 324. ¢ dumetorum, foliolis utrinque hirsutis, sepalis pedun- culisque glabris. R. sepium Borkh. forstb. 1527 ex Rau enum. 90. R. dumetorum Thuill. par. 250. D.C. suppl. 534. Rau enum. 85. Woods! in act. linn. 12. 217. R. corymbifera Gmel. bad. als. 2. 424. R. leucantha Lois. not. 82. Bat. l.c. 32. Mer. par. 193. D.C. suppl. 535. Redout. ros. 1. 129. ¢. 49. R. obtusifolia Desv. journ. 2. 317. R. leucochroa Desv. l. c. t. 15. D. C. hort. monsp. 138. R. stylosa 6 Desv. l. c. R. bractescens Woods ! in act. linn. 12. 216. ¢ cesia, foliolis cesiis utrinque pilosis, tubo calycis el- liptico. oar 2 o 2 aad 100 ROSA CANINA. R. cesia Eng. bot! t. 2367. Smith! in Rees in 1. Woods ! in act. linn. 12. 212. Hab. sepibus ruderatisque totius Europe Asizeq. sep- tentrionalis, pro loco polymorpha; Teneriffe Mas- son; ( circa Wirceburgum (Rau); et verosimiliter alibi locis sterilibus ; yy AZgypto? Forskahl ; ¢ Scotiz montibus borealis, Borrer, Jackson, (v. v. sp. y herb. Banks). 5) A straggling briar six or seven feet high. The branches bright green, reddish brown on the sunny side; armed with strong, scattered, hooked, nearly equal prickles (rarely straight, and then much closer together) and no sete. Leaves distant, pale or dark green, frequently tinged with red, in exposed situations usually much blistered by the sun, quite free from pubescence; stipules rather diated, a little reflexed, acute-pointed; petiole armed with a few, little, hooked prickles; leaflets 5-7, ovate or oblong, acute or round- ed, sessile or subsessile, flat or concave, even or rugose, coarsely or finely, simply or doubly serrated, the ser- ratures always acute, without glands, and converging. Cymes one or many flowered; bractece ovate-lanceolate, appressed, acute, concave or flattish, finely toothed and glandular at the edge; peduncles and calyx smooth; tube ovate; sepals spreading, sharp-pointed, deciduous, somewhat divided; petals obcordate, concave; disk very thick, elevated; ovaries 20-30; styles nearly smooth, distinct, included or a little exserted. Fruit ovate or oblong, scarlet, shining, without any bloom ; pericarps large, uneven. A more striking instance of unimportant characters being made the test of species than the preceding list of synonyms presents, is not to be found in the whole ve- getable kingdom. Surely it is not surprising that the most common species of the genus, whose fruit is scarcely ripe before it is devoured by small birds, and deposited by them in every possible variety of soil and situation, should frequently assume features consider- ably different from its more general appearance. And ROSA CANINA. 101 yet on such differences, which in less variable genera would scarcely have been trusted, have writers on Roses attempted to establish their species. Pubescence has received much attention; on its absence, presence and quantity R. collina, dumetorum and canina of authors and bractescens of Woods are divided from each other. Yet examine for a moment R. canina, as it grows in every hedge. A careful observer will pre- seutly discover on the same plant some leaves entirely naked, and others in which the midrib and primary veins of the under surface are clothed with hairs. Here, then, is the first approach to pubescence, which, be- coming increased in quantity, distinguishes R. collina ; this usually has hairs on the upper surface of its young leaves, but none on the old ones. In R. dumetorum there is a further increase of pubescence, which then covers both sides of the leaves, and, becoming very dense and permanent, forins R. bracteseens of Woods. The distinction between simple and double serratures in this species I confess myself unable to understand. I have attempted to draw a line of separation between them, but without success. They have no limits; for no one can always say whether the serratures of a par- ticular leaf are simple or double. But the value of these and similar characters has been already dis- cussed. It is therefore unnecessary now to extend their examination. The foregoing description applies strictly to R. ca- nina « When this is weak and grows in woods or shady places among grass, it has straight prickles and becomes R. nuda of Woods; with very distant aculei it is R. andegavensis of Batard; with very dense ‘ones it is R. canina 3 of Rau. The stem is slightly setige- rous in a plant in Mr. Sabine’s garden. Another of the same collection has the leaves bipinnate. The leaflets are dull in R. sarmentacea and canina 8 of Woods; much rounded, with blunt serratures, in a plant from Mr. Lyell; irregularly serrated in R. sarmentacea of Woods and affinis of Rau; pubescent on the upper sur- face in affinis. The sepals are assurgent, and disposed 102 ROSA CANINA. to become persistent in Mr. Winch’s glaucophylla; nearly simple in R. canina 3 of Woods; and glandular on the outside in glaucophylla. The disk is flat in 7. surculosa 6 of Woods. The fruit is nearly round in R. canina < and sarmentacea 5 of Woods; at the same time very small in R. teneriffensis of Donn; and rough in R. canina y of Woods and andegavensis of Batard. In the latter the peduncles are hispid. Such is the most common Ft. canina and that with which Linnzeus was best acquainted. The Teneriffe plant is very impatient of cold, flowers sparingly, and produces little mis- shapen fruit. Mr. Winch’s glaucophylla is a remark- able variety with obovate fruit and nearly persistent sepals. The difference of 6 seems to be nothing more than the smaller size of every part; an appearance which is by no means uncommon in this country, although I have never observed it in so remarkable a degree as Rau’s figure indicates. The specimen figured by Re- douté is evidently an approach to a more robust mode of growth. Perhaps it is the same sort of variety of canina, as the dwarf Chinese Rose of the gardens is of R, Indica. Iam acquainted with y only from a specimen in Sir Joseph Banks's herbarium, from Forskahl, marked R. wegyptiaca. It is distinguished by the unusually deep serratures of the leaves and its very long re- ceptacle. Forskahl mentions no Rose as having been found by him in Egypt; can this, then, be what he calls R. indica, found on the mountains of Arabia felix ? A has the lower sides of the leaves hairy, the upper surface shining, and the sepals and flowerstalks usually hispid. In other respects it is not to be distinguished from R. canina «. The R. collina of English Botany belongs to a very different plant, R. systyla. R. platy- phylla of Rau has smooth peduncles; and R. psilo- i ylla of the same author has downy petioles with a naked under-surface to the leaves. I. fastigiata of Batard has no character whatever to distinguish it. ROSA CANINA. 10% To R. dumetorum of 'Thuilliers the succeeding list of synonyms may be referred. It is distinguished from canina « by its dull grey hue, occasioned by the dense pubescence of every part of the leaves: but by nothing else. It is more frequent in North Britain than else- where. ‘The petioles are sometimes unarmed, as in R. sepium of Rau. R. leucochroa has the styles a little exserted and united by their hairs. Care must be taken not to confound this with R. systyla, whose styles are smooth and consequently cohere from some other cause than the intertexture of their hairs. I have spe- cimens from Mr. Lyell of a very grey Rose gathered at Kinnordy, with nearly simple sepals, which must be referred here. R. bractescens of Woods has very short peduncles and large bracteze; but I have examined Mr. Woods’s own specimen in the collection of the Linnean Society without being able to distinguish it from R. dumetorum. Every diversity of form of bracteze and length of peduncle may be observed in the hairy- leaved canina of Scotland. R. cesia is a curious plant, first taken up in Eng- lish Botany. It is scarcely found out of the highlands of Scotland and there very sparingly. Its very glau- cous hue distinguishes it. There is a remarkable peculiarity in R. canina, that the further to the North any variety of that species is found, the more villous are the styles; and the less so as it proceeds southwards; hair entirely vanishes from those organs in Madeira. Its long rambling shoots are sometimes applied to the same purposes as those of Rubus fruticosus ; but they are inferior, being more brittle. The Tartars boil the twigs and leaves for tea; some Russians also have this custom, especially in Siberia, and praise its reviv- ing stomachic qualities. Those of the Volga prepare a spirit from the flowers by fermentation. In the Ukraine these are made into a preserve with honey and sugar. 104 ROSA RUBRIFOLIA. 56. ROSA rubrifolia. R. aculeis parvis distantibus, foliolis ovatis ramisq. glaucis opacis discoloribus, ovariis 20-30. R. rubrifolia Villars dauph. 3.549. Bellardi in act. taur. 1790. 229. ¢.9. Willd. sp. 2. 1075. Jacq. Jragm. 70. t. 106. opt. Picot Lapeyr. pyren. 284. Smith in Rees inl. Redout. ros. 1. 35. t.4. Lind- ley in Bot. reg. t. 430. .n. 1101 6 Hall. helv. multiflora Reyn. act. Laus. 1. 70. t. 6. .rubicunda Hall. fil. in Rim. arch. b. 1. st. 2. p. 6. canina © Suter helv. 1. 302. glauca Desf. cat. H. P. 175. . glaucescens Wulf. in Rom. arch. 3. 376. . lurida Andrews’s roses. . cinnamomea y Redout. ros. 1. 134. Hab. in sylvis circa Lans, (Villars); in alpibus Sabau- diz, (Bellardi), Hooker ; Helvetize, (Haller) Hooker; Austria ad Gutenstein, (Jacquin); Pyrenzis, (La- peyrouse) ; montibus Alverniz, (Redouté) ; (v. v. ¢. & s. sp.) BS md mo sd mo Stems deep red or purple, covered with a pale bloom and armed with small, short, pale, hooked, equal prickles, which are very dense but not larger on the rootshoots. Leaves tinged with red, very glau- cous, rugose, opaque. Flowers deep red, small ; sepals very narrow and longer than the petals; disk much thickened, almost closing the orifice. Fruit oblong with very tender flesh. Otherwise with the characters of R. canina, from which, nevertheless, its whole ap- pearance is dissimilar. If proper attention be paid to Pee Peo ee \ y cf Poe hy ‘ a £ ‘ j : a Me 1 te Be: | ere ae ony . = = ay ; 4 , Jae pats #5 ae 5 Oy ae al 2 as wy y iG . Cee ae ; Nedh F GRar Psa y ¥ ' % Ae ee Se a ‘ ~ i. ian ; “eet? » he ek rity. ee 7 1% “VER > . aa ve ba ROSA SERICEA. 105 the dull glaucous-red bloom of the branches, their small prickles, and the long sepals, it will never be confounded with canina. It has been strangely reduced to R. cinnamemea by Thory; on what grounds I am quite at a loss even to conjecture. 57. ROSA sericea. Tab. 12. R. aculeis stipularibus compressis: superioribus runci- natis, foliolis oblongis obtusis apice serratis subtus sericeis. Hab. in Gossam Than, Wallich. (v. s.s. herb. Banks.) Branches brown, stiff, straight, the old ones very rugose. Prickles very large, ovate, compressed, their point turned upwards, placed under the stipule. Leaves very close ; stipule long, narrow, concave, with- out pubescence, fringed or naked at the edge, falcate and dilated at the end; petioles very. slightly downy or naked, unarmed, or furnished with a few sete and straight prickles having a broad base ; leaflets 7-11, ob- long, flattish, waved, green and naked above, paler with the rib and principal veins silky beneath; at the end, which is blunt, simply and deeply toothed: the ser- ratures acuminated. The petiole in some specimens is unusually elongated before the first leaflet is set on. Flowers solitary, concave, without bractez, erect or nodding: peduncle and calyx naked; tube ovate; sepals ovate with a very narrow point, slightly pubescent. This is the first of a set of species found only in the warmer countries of Asia, but not materially receding from the characters of the division. It is remarkable for the silky under side of its oblong leaves which are P 106 ROSA INDICA. blunt at each end, and serrated only at the tip, but there deeply. Discovered very recently in Gossam Than, and with R. macrophylla found in the same district, it exhibits the nearest approach among the Indian Roses to those of Europe. The specimens from which my description and figure are taken are in the rich collection of Sir Joseph Banks. 58. ROSA indica. R. foliolis ellipticis acuminatis glabris crenato-serratis subtus glaucis, ovariis 40-50. a vulgaris, fructu turbinato. R. indica Lin! sp. 705. Willd. sp. 2. 1079. Lawr ros. t.26. Ait! kew. ed. alt. 3. 266. Smith! in Rees in l. Redout. ros. 1. 51. #. 14. 2. 35. €. 15. R. sinica Linn! syst. veg. ed. 13. 398. Smith! in Rees in L, R. semperflorens carnea Réss. ros. t. 19. (6 odoratissima, fructu ovato, floribus odoratissimis. R. odoratissima Sweet! hort. sub. lond. R. indica fragrans Redout. l. c. 61. ¢. 19. y pumila, fruticulus, omni parte minor. R. indica pumila Redout. ros. 1.115. #. 42. § longifolia, foliis lanceolatis, ramis subinermibus. R. longifolia Willd. sp. 2.1067. Redout. ros. 2. 27. t. 12. Hab. in China juxta Cantonem Sinarum, Staunton. (v.v.c. & s. sp. herb. Banks.) ROSA INDICA. 107 Branches stout, glaucous green, armed with brown, scattered, compressed, hooked, equal prickles. Leaves shining, without pubescence; stipules very narrow, sub- ulate and glandular at the point; petioles rough with setee and little short, hooked prickles; leaflets 3-5, even, elliptic, acuminate, nearly simply crenato-serrat- ed, above dark green, glaucous beneath. Flowers very numerous, usually semi-double; bractee narrow, lan- ceolate, without pubescence, toothletted, glandular ; peduncles long, rough ; tube of the calyx oblong, naked; sepals deciduous, nearly simple, ovate, pointed, glan- dular on the outside; petals obcordate, concave ; stamens 105-110; disk a thick flattened cone; ovaria 40-50; styles nearly naked, exserted, very slender, dis- tinct. Fruit obovate, scarlet. It is now, perhaps, too late to inquire what was really intended by Linneeus for R. indica, since his specific character and description will agree with no species from China at present known; and the figure of Petiver which he quotes to this, in which he is followed by Willdenow, belongs to a widely different plant, very nearly allied to R. Banksie, and which I have called R. microcarpa. Ihave, however, examined his specimen, which I see no reason to doubt belonging to this species. The specimen which. Sir James Smith considers to have been the foundation of R. sinica I have also been permitted to see, and I feel little hesita- tion in pronouncing it-to be a monstrous state of the species before us. The stipulz are narrow, pointed and finely toothed at the edge; the prickles are straight, very slender and unequal, which may be reasonably ex- pected on R. indica in so weak a state as this R. sinica evidently is. That name, therefore, becomes disen- gaged, and I have retained it for the plant which was distinguished by it in Hortus Kewensis. The delightfully fragrant “‘ Sweet-scented Chinese Rose” of the gardens isa variety, with ovate fruit and a dwarfer habit. It is right that cultivators should know that there are two sorts of this, of which the p 2 108 ROSA SEMPERFLORENS. most common has a very inferior perfume to the other, which is propagated with more difficulty. The willow-leaved Chinese Rose, R. longifolia, is another variety, but it bas little to recommend it to notice. I can by no means agree with the editor of Re- douté’s Roses, in considering this a variety of R. sem- perflorens, from which it differs in many important cha- racters, as will be seen under the following species. 59. ROSA semperflorens. . foliolis ovato-lanceolatis crenato-serratis, ovariis 15, petalis integris. . indica Burm. ind. 117? . chinensis Jacq. obs. 3.7. t.55. Willd. sp. 2. 1078. Smith in Rees in l. . semperflorens Curt. mag. 284. Willd. sp. 2. 1078. Lawr. ros. t. 23. Monch meth. 290. Réss. ros. t.12. Sm! exot. bot. 2. t. 91. Jacy. schinbr. 3. t.281. Ait! kew. ed. alt. 3. 266. Smith! in Rees in l. R. diversifolia Vent. cels. t¢. 35. R. bengalensis Pers. syn. 2. 50. R. indica Redout. ros. 1. 49. ¢. 13.—123. #. 46.—2. 37. Zi. Hab. in China, Ekeberg. (v.v. c. & s. sp. herb. Banks.) a Ae A A spreading, elegant shrub. Branches slender, dark green, armed with scattered, compressed, hooked prickles and a very few glands. Leaves shining, dis- tant, deeply stained with purple ; stipule narrow, flat, ROSA SEMPERFLORENS. 109 glandular ; petioles without pubescence, glandular and slightly setigerous ; leaflets 3-5, ovate-lanceolate, sim- ply crenato-serrate, flat above, glaucous and slightly downy beneath: the lowest pair is very small and usually wanting. Flowers solitary, deep crimson; bractee narrow, lanceolate, serrated, fringed with glands ; peduncles rough with minute glands; tube of the calyx oblong, naked; sepals reflexed, deciduous, narrow, compound, rough on the outside; petals en- tire, spreading, nearly flat ; stamens 50, deciduous ; disk conical, thickened; ovaries 15; styles very slender, nearly naked, exserted, distinct. Fruit spherical. This is one of the species remarkable for having stamens which drop off nearly at the same time with the petals, which I am not aware to be the case in any semi-double state of RR. amdica. From that species it may be distinguished by its more slender branches, deep-red flowers, and more membranous leaves, which are usually stained more or less with crimson. There is also the important difference in number of ovaries, which are not more than 15 in this plant, and vary from 40 to 50 in R. indica. We have many splendid varieties in the gardens with semi-double crimson flowers, and the French ap- pear to have some others still more beautiful which have not yet been imported. 110 ROSA LAWRANCEANA. 60, ROSA Lawranceana. R. nana, foliolis oyatis acutis arguté serratis, petalis acuminatis, ovariis 7-8. R. semperflorens minima Sims. bot. mag. n. 1762. R. pusilla Mauritius cat. p. 15: R. Lawranceana Sweet! hort. sub. lond. Hab. verosimiliter in China. (v. v. c.) A very low, compact, little shrub, rarely exceeding a foot in height. The prickles are large, stout, and nearly straight. Leaflets ovate, acute, flat, very finely toothed. Petals small, pale blush, pointed; ovaries 7-8. Otherwise with the characters of R. semperftorens, from which I nevertheless have no hesitation in sepa- rating it. The difference in number of ovaries in this division appears constant, and therefore important. Mr. Sweet introduced it from the Mauritius, some years ago, and it may be the &. pusilla of the catalogue of the Botanic Garden there. China is probably its native country, as it approaches so very nearly to R. semper- Jlorens. ROSA SYSTYLA. ill Div. X. Systyle. Styli in columnam elongatam co- heerentes. Stipulz adnatie. Habit nearly the same as that of the last division. Leaves frequently evergreen. 61. ROSA systyla. R. surculis assurgentibus, aculeis validis aduncis. a ovata, foliolis ovatis, fructu oblongo. R. collina Eng. bot! t.1895. Smith ! in Rees in 1. R. systyla Bat. main. et loir. suppl. 31. Woods! in act. linn. 12. 230. R. stylosa Desv. journ. 2.317. D. Cand. hort. monsp. 138. R. brevistyla D. C. suppl. fl. fr. 537? R. dibracteata D. C. 1. c. 6 lanceolata, foliolis ovato-lanceolatis, fructu spherico. y Monsonice, caule humiliore: florifero erecto multi- floro, ramis raro setigeris. Hab. « in Anglia; Gallia, (Batard, Decand.); @ Hi- bernia australi, Drummond; y Anglia juxta Wat- ford, Domina Monro. (v. v. sp.; 8. 8. sp.; yy. v. ©. hort. Sabine.) A shrub. with the habit and for the most part with the characters of R. canina, but differing chiefly in having its styles united into a long smooth column, and more flowers in a cluster. Variety © was sent to Mr. Hooker from the South of Ireland by Mr. Drummond. It differs in having nearly round fruit, and long rugose shining leaves. 112 ROSA ARVENSIS. Monsonie is a very charming variety found in a hedge at Watford by Miss Monro. By the wish of Mr. Sabine it is named after Lady Monson, to whose garden it was originally removed and whence it has since been obtained. It appears to be precisely the same sort of variety of systyla as hybrida is of arvensis, and may be distinguished from the two preceding va- rieties by its dwarfer habit, flower-bearing shoots being erect, stiff, and terminated by an unusually large bunch of the most elegant flowers; its fruit is more orange-red than that of the true systyla. 62. ROSA arvensis. . surculis flagelliformibus, aculeis inzequalibus fal- catis, foliolis subtus glaucis. R R. campestris repens alba Bawh. pin. 484. R. sylvestris, &c. Bauh. hist. 2. 244. R. candida Scop. carn. 1. 354. R . arvensis Huds. angl. ed. 1. 192. Linn. mant. 2. 245. All. pedem. 2. 139. Willd. sp. 2. 1066. Lawr. ros. t. 86. Smith! britt. 2.538. Eng. bot! 188. Pers. syn. 2.47. Ait! kew. 3. 259. Smith! in Rees in 1. Woods! in act. linn, 12. 232. Re- dout. ros. 1. 89, £.32. Bot. mag. t. 2054. .n. 1102 Hall. helv. . sylvestris Herm. diss. 10. Poll. palat. 51. Roth. cat. bot. 1. 59. . scandens Monch weiss. pfl. 118 fide Pohl. . herporhodon Ehr ! beitr. 2. 69. . Halleri Krock. siles. 2. 150. . fusca Monch meth. 688. . serpens Ehr. arb, 35. Wibel werth, 265. mDAaaee 2 ROSA ARVENSIS: 113 R. sempervirens Réss. ros. t. 32. R. repens Gmel. bad. als. 2. 418. Willd. enum. 547. Jucq. fragm. 69. t. 104 opt. Rau enum. 40. ( montana, pumila, fructu hispidulo. R. montana Vill. dauph. 3.547. Suter helv. 1. 300. Willd. sp. 2. 1076. Smith in Rees in 1? y hybrida, surcutis crassioribus et brevioribus: flori- fero erecto multifloro, ramis sparsim setigeris, stylis discretis. R. hybrida Schleich. cat. R. geminata Rau enum. 39. R. gallica hybrida Ser. mel. bot. n. 1. p. 39. | Hab. in Anglize sepibus; Pedemontii, (Alliomi) ; Pala- tinattis, (Pollich); Germaniz, (Roth); Silesiz, (Krocker); Helvetiz planitiebus, Hooker; {3 in Delphinatts montibus, (Villars) ; Helvetize, (Suter). FUL BES) Branches flagelliform, procumbent, slender, dull glaucous-purple, armed with scattered, falcate, or straightish, equal prickles, those of the old shoots al- most white, of the young ones smaller and red, some- times none (in weak specimens). Leaves distant, dark green, or, on a chalky soil, yellowish; stipules narrow, flat, naked, fringed with glands, red in the middle; petioles pubescent, with scattered glands and little fal- cate, dorsal prickles; leaflets 5-7, flat, ovate, somewhat waved, simply serrated, very glaucous beneath; the rib somewhat hairy. Flowers solitary on the branch- lets, numerous on the roctshoots, white with a yellow base, and a slight scent, at first cyathiform, afterwards more open; peduncles rough with glands and a very few setz ; tube of the calyx ovate, naked; sepals short, ovate, concave, a little divided, these which are so, rough with glands; petals obovate, emarginate; stamens per- sistent; disk elevated, fleshy; ovaries 15-25; styles united into a long smooth column. Fruit scarlet, round or oblong. Q 114 ROSA ARVENSIS. A very common plant in many parts of England, adorning the hedges in the summer months with its elegant, snowy bloom. ‘The flowers are much more cup-shaped than those of systyla, or indeed of any other British Rose. Mr. Sabine has a variety with pink flowers. Dr. Afzelius considered the Linnzean arvensis to be something different from our plant, which does not grow in Sweden; and possibly that variety of cimnamomea which is figured in Flora Danica under the name of R. fluvialis. The Linnzan herbarium throws no light upon this, nor have I any additional facts to offer in il- lustration of it. The styles united in a long smooth column, incor- rectly described by Sir James Smith as lengthening after flowering, distinguish this from all the British species except the last. From that it differs in having long trailing shoots, not stout assurgent ones, which are dull glaucous green, generally tinged with purple, and not of the bright green colour of systyla.. To this species the Ayrshire Rose of the gardens is undoubtedly to be referred, as has already been done by Dr. Sims. Of this plant, however, there are two sorts; the one sold in the nurseries about London, and cultivated by Mr. Sabine, I suppose is to be considered the real kind ; and, as I have just observed, is a variety of arvensis ; the other, which is cultivated at Kew, is sempervirens, from which it does not appear to differ in any respect. This has been considered as the real Ayrshire and published as such under the name of ca- preolata in the Edinburgh Philosophical Journal, by Mr. Neill, who assures us that it received its name from having been first raised at Loudon Castle, Ayr- shire, from heps imported from N. America. Without attempting to dispute the accuracy of this, 1 must ob- serve, that if the seeds were brought from America, they were carried thither originally from Europe. From R. sempervirens there can be no difficulty in distinguishing arvensis. The leaves of the former are ROSA ARVENSIS. 115 shining, evergreen, and set on at short intervals; of the latter opaque, glaucous beneath, deciduous, and covering the branches thinly. The bracteze of arvensis are short and erect, the flowers solitary; of semper- virens reflexed with a narrow point and red and shining, the flowers in bunches. The former often produces a callosity at the ramifications which, under favourable circumstances, strikes root; the latter never. R. montana of Villars is an exceedingly obscure plant; its author describes it with the styles of arvensis, and his description answers well to mountain specimens of that plant brought from Switzerland by Mr. Hooker; except in not having hispid fruit. If, however, the R. montana of Villars and Suter be not distinct from arvensis, there is little reason to suppose that what other botanists have taken for it are so also. The spe- cimens from Schleicher under that name which I have had an opportunity of examining, as far as can be de- termined from such imperfect morsels, appear to be of rubiginosa ; and, as Sir James Smith depends upon his authority in this instance, it is not improbable that the plant from which the description in Rees’s Cyclopedia was formed, is the same. ‘The account of R. montana in the supplement to the Flore Francaise reads very like R. rubiginosa also. Var. y I, for a long time, was disposed to consider a distinct species. From its habit it might be thought an hybrid production, between R. provincialis and ar- vensis, for in flowers, prickly leaves and mode of growth it seems to partake equally of both. But when I saw the var. Monsonice of the last species, I was con- vinced that the present plant bore just the same rela- tion to arvensis as that does to the species under which it is placed. Ihave therefore referred it hither, but in doing so it is necessary to subjoin the principal differ- ences which distinguish it. ‘The branches have setz sparingly mixed among the prickles; deaflets larger, oblong-ovate, the younger ones stained with red; flowers in bunches, very large, semi-double, of the Q 2 116 ROSA ABYSSINICA. most delicate flesh colour; the styles long, exserted, but not united. It has been found in the neighbour- hood of Wurtzburg by Rau. The union of styles was long ago pointed out in R. arvensis by Lachenal and adopted by Haller and Villars. Afterwards it was strangely neglected, and has only been reconsidered within a few years. M. De Candolle was the first to employ it as a means of form- ing a natural assemblage among Roses, in his Hortus Monspeliensis, where he defines six species from which the last is to be excluded. I have four to add; and R. setigera of N. America has the same structure; but, on account of its habit and subulate stipule, belongs to my division Banksiane, 63. ROSA abyssinica. Tab. 13. R. surculis scandentibus, aculeis confertissimis fal- catis, foliolis ovatis sempervirentibus, calycibus pe- dunculisque tomentosis. R. abyssinica Brown! in Salt’s Abyssin. app. leiv. Hab. in Abyssinia Salt (v. s. sp. herb. Banks et Lam- bert.) This is one of the very few Roses indigenous to Africa. It was first noticed as a distinct species by Mr. Brown, in his appendix to the travels in Abyssinia of Mr. Salt, who discovered it. It can be confounded with nothing except R. sempervirens, from which it differs in the following particulars: its leaflets are shorter with a little stalk, broader towards the point than at the base; the petioles are exceedingly rough with unequal glands and setze; the peduncles and calyx are covered over with a thick down; and the prickles — are exceedingly numerous and strong. a / Fats. ROSA SEMPERVIRENS. 117 64. ROSA sempervirens. R. surculis scandentibus, aculeis subsequalibus falcatis, foliis sempervirentibus. R. sempervirens Jungermanni Clus. hist. 2. Dill. elth. 326. ¢. 245. f. 318. R. sempervirens Linn! sp. 704. Mill. dict. n. 9. Willd. sp. 2.1072. Lawr. ros, t.45. Pers. syn. foo. D.C. fh. fr. 4. 446. Ait! kew. 3. 263. D. C. monsp. 138. Smith! in Rees inl. Ker bot. reg. t. 409. R. scandens Mill. dict. n. 8. Brot. lusit. 1. 341. R. balearica Desf. cat. h. p. Pers. syn. 2. 49. R. atrovirens Viv. fi. ital. 4. t. 6. R. capreolata Neill in Edinb. philos. journ. 3. 104. (2 microphylla, foliolis suborbiculatis. R. microphylla Desf. atl. 1. 401. Hab. in Gallia australi, Decandolle; Lusitania, (Bro- tero); Italia circa Pestum abundeé, Woods ; Insulis Balearibus, Requien; Grecia (Sibthorp); 6 circa Tunetam, Desfont. (v. v. c. & s. sp.) A climbing plant with very long, slender, bright green, much divided shoots, reddish on one side, and armed with slender, somewhat booked red prickles. Leaves usually deflexed, very shining, evergreen and without any sort of pubescence; stipules narrow, red, reflexed at the end, with a few glands on their edge ; petioles armed with little curved prickles; leaflets 5-7, oval or ovato-lanceolate, flat, simply serrated, bright green on both sides, but. much paler beneath. Flowers very numerous, white and fragrant; bractee naked, lan- ceolate, reflexed, stained with red; peduncles naked or glandular; tube of the calyx ovate, naked or glan- dular; sepals deciduous, ovate, acuminate, azarly simple, 118 ROSA PROSTRATA. shorter than the petals, rough with glands; petals ob- cordate, concave; stamens 138-140, quickly dropping off; disk conical, very thick ; ovaries 30; styles united into a long, hairy column. Fruit round, orange-co- loured, small. A very ornamental plant, rapidly forming a com- pact covering to old pales or buildings against which it is planted. From R. prostrata its rambling shoots and hairy styles distinguish it. Viviani’s R. atrovirens is described with rough and figured with smooth fruit. The Ayrshire Rose described by Mr. Neili in the Edinburgh Philosophical Journal under the name of capreolata does not appear to differ from this, which is not a native of America, but is confined to the South of Europe and North of Africa, 65. ROSA prostrata. R. surculis prostratis, aculeis subzequalibus falcatis, foliis sempervirentibus, stylis glabris. R. prostrata D. C. hort. monsp. 138. suppl. 536. Hab. in Gallia australi. (Decand.) This Rose has much resemblance to var. ( of sem- pervirens, from which it differs in having styles abso- lutely naked; its tube of the calyx oval-oblong and not globose; its stem prostrate, with scattered somewhat curved prickles; flowers either solitary or nearly so, Decand. l. ¢. Notwithstanding the very great resemblance be- tween the description of this and sempervirens, I wish to leave them separate for others who can compare the two to decide. M. De Candolle assures me that their aspect is exceedingly dissimilar, and that they do not vary when cultivated. ROSA MULTIFLORA. 119 66. ROSA multiflora. R. ramulis pedunculis calycibusque tomentosis, foliolis mollibus lanceolatis rugosis, stipulis pectinatis. R. multiflora Thunb. Jap. 214. Willd. sp. 2. 1077. Pers. syn. 2.-50. Ait. kew. ed. 2. 3. 265. Bot. mag. t. 1059. Smith in Rees in loc. Lindley in Ker’s Reg. t. 420. R. flava Donn. Cant. ed. 4. 121. R. florida Poir. enc. suppl. in loc. R. diffusa Roxb. fl. ind. ined? Hab. in Japonia (Thunb.); China Staunton (v. v. c. & s. sp. herb. Linn. e¢ Lambert.) Twelve or fifteen feet high. Branches flagelliform, naked, flexuose ; prickles in pairs under the stipule, hooked. S#ipule linear, adherent, toothed, downy be- neath; petioles very villous; leaflets 5-7, approximated, rugose, lanceolate, obtuse, crenate, very dull, hairy on both sides. Flowers of a beautiful pink, numerous, small, clustered, always double; bractecw linear, tooth- ed, quickly deciduous, downy, as are the pedicels, tur- binate tube of the calyx, and entire, ovate sepals. Styles downy, 18-25, united in a column, longer than the inner petals. Fruit turbinate, bright red, not crowned by the calyx, smooth, as are the peduncles. This is known in the gardens only with flowers in a double state, which then bear so much resemblance to those of some species of Rubus, that it is commonly known by the name of the Bramble-flowered China Rose. Its fruit has never before been described. For an opportunity of examining it Iam obliged to Mr. Lambert, in whose possession is a specimen brought from China by Sir George Staunton, of what is cer- tainly this plant, without the pubescence of peduncles 120 ROSA BRUNONII. and calyx; which is therefore deciduous. It is so un- like any other plant of the same division, that I know not with which it can be confounded except with the next species, from which it, however, differs very essen- tially. R. Grevillii, known also under the name of R. Rox- burgh, is a weak variety. 67. ROSA Brunonu. Tab. 14. R.. ramulis foliolis lanceolatis calycibusq. tomentosis glandulosis, stipulis integris. Nomine celeberrimi doctissimique Roberti Brown, Aus- tralasie indagatoris indefessi, Botanicorum prin- cipis, qui solus inter hodiernos Rosarum species pro- posuit novas omnesque recté, insignita. Hab. in Nepalia Wallich, Buchanan. (v. s. sp. herb. Banks et Lambert.) Shrub with the appearance of R. moschata. Old branches sparingly hairy, stout, armed with scattered, short, strong, hooked prickles; younger ones downy and elandular—their prickles falcate. Stipulc linear, adherent, subulate and spreading at the end, beneath glandular; as are the petioles, which are hairy and. beset with a few falcate prickles; leaflets 5-7, lanceo- late, flat, simply serrate, hairy all over, dull green above, paler beneath and elandular; serratures much converging. Flowers in bunches; bractew straight, lanceolate, hairy, rolled inwards at the edge, glandular at the back; peduncles villous, brownish, covered with setee and glands which are more densely placed on the oblong villous tube of the calyx, but more sparingly on the reflexed sepals; these last seem longer than the {a Khe MhG . kar :” 4 , " aad hay Ph Ae oi ’ { Hie i : 4 4 é in } . a ‘ a 4 is Nee ae 5 4 , hia! oe f ih, eu HW , ¢ é } Tie’ . . fF : é ‘a i‘ } 7 e ia ta) ’ ) eo : bh hws ae ! ’s 1) hy - ee F +l I > ‘@ sa : n 7 4 ae "; F s t a” j t ‘ y er. ; } ; « , , a 4 a FT. nas es yi : ob oes 2. : ree | . "/ 4 , . . ' iy, i on ea 4 4 ee r . Lit ees ~ = a = a ~ eye at a ae. ‘Rg fs nal 4 : dis Na ate ROSA MOSCHATA. 121 petals, and are nearly simple; petals white? stamens and styles like those of moschata. This highly interesting addition to the division of Roses with united styles is a native of Nepal, whence it has been sent by Dr. Wallich. . It was also found in the same country by Dr. Buchanan, who communicated specimens to Mr, Lambert. I am unable to refer it to any species in Roxburgh’s unpublished Flora Indica, unless it be his R. pubescens, a drawing of which I have had an opportunity of seeing. In this, all the most important characters of R. Brunonii are omitted, nor are they noticed in Roxburgh’s description. At any rate, if they should prove the same, so indifferent a name as pubescens will of course give way to that I have proposed. | From moschata it differs in having hairy and glan- dular leaves, branchlets, and calyx; the leaflets also have an entirely different outline. 68. ROSA moschata. R. ramulis nudiusculis, foliolis ellipticis acuminatis subtus glaucis serraturis conniventibus, stipulis in- tegris, sepalis compositis acuminatis. . moschata minor, &c. Bauwh. hist. 2. 45 & 47. R R. muscate Regn. Bot. c. ic. R. moschata Mill. dict. n. 13. Du Roi harbk. 2. 365. Quer. fl. Esp. 6. 205. Jacq. Schéinbr. 3. t. 280. Willd. sp. 2.1074. Desf. atl. 1.400. Lawr. ros. tt. 53. 64. Pers. syn. 2.49. Gm. bad. als, 2. 429. Jacq. fragm. 31. t. 34. f. 3. Ait! kew. ed. 2. 3. 264. D.C. cat. hort. monsp. 138. Smith! in Rees in loc. Redout. ros. 1. 33. ¢.5: 99. t. 35. R 122 ROSA MOSCHATA. R. opsostemma Lhr ! beitr. 2. 72. R. glandulifera Roxb! fl. ind. ined. (6 nudiuscula, foliolis oblongis acutis impubibus, pe- tiolis pedicellis calycibusque glandulosis. Hab. in agro Tunetano? ubi colitur (Desf.) ; Hispania calidiore, (Quer.), Alstrémer; Madera, Staunton, (Shutter). (v. v. cult. et s. sp. herb. Smith, Lam- bert.) Erect, much branched. Branches very sparingly glandular, armed with nearly equal, strong, hooked, scattered prickles. Stipule linear, adherent, awl-shaped at the end, fringed with glands, hairy beneath; petioles hairy, prickly, and glandular; leaflets ovate-lanceolate, unpolished, simply and finely toothed, naked above, glaucous beneath with a hairy midrib. Cymes very numerous, about 7-flowered, corymbose with downy ramifications ; bractew very deciduous, convex, reflexed, hairy and glandular; pedicels somewhat glandular, downy like the ovate tube, and reflexed sepals; these last elongated, slightly compound, falling off soon after the petals; petals pure white with a slight scent of musk, nearly entire, spreading and somewhat convex ; stamens 80-85, very quickly deciduous ; disk coloured, thickened and nearly flat; ovaria 20; styles hairy, united in a long slender column. Frwit sinall, red. This is one of the few species found in the North of Africa, extending across the continent from Egypt to Mogadore and thence to Madeira, whence it was brought by Sir George Staunton, and by him commu- nicated to Mr. Lambert. On the authority of Quer, it is found wild in the temperate and warm provinces of Spain; and in the Linnzean herbarium is a Spanish specimen from Alstrémer. But there is no ground for M. Thory’s assertion, that it is a native of Hindostan. Roxburgh, who describes it under the name of glan- dulifera in his MSS. was uncertain how it found its way into the Botanic garden at Calcutta; but guessed it might have been introduced from China. Mo 4 Vay, ee ; eon rt yi : J a ua +¢€ 3 ML. i KA Sati A ra s by i Pay ye ris eee 4 \ * 7 of v6 4 J > +: é > CyPay re a ite 2 vu meoter uate li a ] | Subse ~ ue ROSA RUBIFOLIA. 123 It is very generally cultivated on account of the fine musky perfume of its flowers; whence its name. Our winters, however, are usually too rigorous for it. It exhibits, apparently, the most compound inflorescence of the genus; but I am disposed to consider the mass of flowers it produces to be formed by the aggregation of a great number of leafless floriferous branchlets, each of which considered separately would not be found in a state of greater composition than is usual; rather than similar to cymes of Roses in general. The order of expansion confirms my opinion. Besides their dissimilarity in habit, it differs from sempervirens nearly in the same way that abyssinica does. And it is not the least remarkable part of these the only Roses strictly natives of Africa alone, that they should both have down on their branchlets, ramifica- tions of inflorescence, and young fruit, which is a cha- racter otherwise peculiar to certain Asiatic species only. 69. ROSA rubifolia. R. ramulis impubibus, foliolis ovato-lanceolatis serra- turis divaricatis, stipulis integris, sepalis ovatis, fruc- tibus pisiformibus. R. rubifolia Brown! in Ait. kew. ed. alt. 3. 260. Pursh am. septr. 1. . 9. Smith in Rees in l. ( fenestralis, foliolis utrinque impubibus, floribus sub- solitariis. ‘Tab. XV. R. fenestrata Donn! cant. ed. 8. 170. Hab. in America septentrionali, Masson (v. v. c. hort. Sabine ets. sp. herb. Banks.) A shrub three or four feet high. Rootshoots ascend- ing, straight; branches bright green, without down, rR 2 124 ROSA RUBIFOLIA. sparingly armed with scattered falcate prickles. Leaves distant; stipules very long, narrow, naked, fringed with glands ; petiole naked, sparingly prickly ; leaflets about 5, ovate, acute, simply serrated, serratures diverging; bright green, naked and somewhat shining above, very much paler and downy beneath. Flowers small, pale red, about three together; peduncle and calyx without pubescence; the former glandular: sepals simple, ovate, hairy, reflexed, deciduous ; stamens de- ciduous; séyles united into a downy, clavate column. Fruit about the size of a pea, quite round and naked. This has hitherto been considered a very obscure plant, depending almost entirely upon the authority of the Hortus Kewensis, in the last edition of which it was described by Mr. Brown from plants raised from heps sent by Masson from North America. It is a very dis- tinct species, having little affinity with any other than R. moschata. From this its naked branchlets, peduncle and calyx will immediately distinguish it without recur- ring to other characters. Its habit is the same, but size less. The flowers, too, are pale red and very small; quite unlike those of moschata. The variety fenestralis differs from the true rubi- folia in the total absence of pubescence on the leaves, in their paler colour and thinner texture. My figure was taken from an unusually weak specimen and does not present the most common appearance of the plant. The flowers grow generally three or four together. ROSA LAVIGATA. 12 Cr Div. XI. Banksiane. Stipule subliberae, subulate vy. angustissimée, sepius decidace. Foliola szepius ter- nata, nitida. Cziules scandentes. The species of this division are remarkable for their long, graceful, often climbing shoots, drooping white flowers, and _ter- nate shining leaves. Their distinguishing mark is the deciduous, subulate, or very narrow stipula. ‘Their fruit is very various. R. hystrix has setigerous branchlets, and &. setigera has united styles. 70. ROSA levigata. R. stipulis lineari-lanceolatis semi-adnatis, petiolis in- ermibus, fructibus muricatis. R. levigata Mich. bor. am. 1.295. Pers. syn. 2. 49. Pursh am. sept. 1.n. 10. Smith in Rees inl. Hab. in Georgie sylvis umbrosis (Pursh), Fraser. (v. s. sp. herb. Sabine.) Stem climbing (Pursh). Prickles scattered, falcate; stipules very narrow, united to the petiole by a small part of their lower half, apparently not deciduous, fringed with glands; petioles naked; leaflets 3, ovate- lanceolate, when old coriaceous, shining, simply ser- rated, entirely free from pubescence. Flowers solitary, large, white; peduncle and tube of the calyx covered all over with dense, weak, unequal bristles; sepals spread- ing, ovate with a point, entire, dilated at the end, with a few bristles at their back; petals longer than the last, nearly entire. Stamens numerous; mass of stigmas very large and woolly; disk thickened. Fruit oblong, red, muricate with stiff prickles and crowned by the indurated sepals. 126 ROSA SINICA. Native of woods in Georgia, where it is said to climb to the top of the tallest trees. Its resemblance to the next species is very great, and has occasioned in one instance the Chinese plant to be mistaken for the American, and thence to be called Cherokeensis. They may, however, be distinguished by the following characters. . laevigata has a climbing stem, persis- tent, half-adherent stipules, naked petioles and ribs to the leaves; R. sinica has a rambling stem, deciduous subulate stipules, very prickly petioles and ribs. Their fruit is so similar as not to be distinguished. The only specimen I have seen was liberally com- municated by Mr. Sabine. 71. ROSA sinica. Tab. 16. . stipulis setaceis deciduis, petiolis costaque aculeatis, fructibus muricatis. . alba cheusanensis foliorum margine et rachi media spinosis. Pluk. amalth. 185. .sinica Ait! kew. ed. alt. 3. 261. . trifoliata Bosc. dict. fide Poir. . ternata Poir. in enc. bot. 6. 284. . cherokeensis Donn! cant. ed. 8. 170. R. nivea D. C. hort. monsp. 137. Hab. in China, Bladh. (v. v. c. et s. sp. herb. Banks.) SAA r SF Branches rambling, armed with’ scattered, red, equal, falcate prickles. Leaves very shining; stipules setaceous, deciduous, fringed with glands; petioles not downy, armed with very numerous little prickles; leaflets ternate, ovate-lanceolate, finely serrated, very green above, paler beneath with a prickly rib. Flowers white, solitary; sepals rigid, entire; fruit orange red, muricate, crowned with the spreading, rigid sepals. _ nd _ 7 _ gf a Lar, iy 1 ie, oP. i one, yy. on Nad holy amide a pala: a His geal DR nih all vit Ana tans ss ae ae? He iv eK Reg do's Pe NE: fe enh Bere r,. 1 ks $f 7 rd ve e Re a . oa. a +: se : al) ie M: Hy ee oy f na te Wie | ; - 7 pl) ae iv ye ca: SHY Ss ory “! . - Vat gait nis we td, ae Oe ag BE Ae ROSA RECURVA. 127 This is a species not uncommonly cultivated in gar- dens, where, however, it has never produced its flowers. At Montpellier it blossomed and was taken for a new species by M. Decandolle and published in his cata- logue under the name of R. nivea. There, however, can be no doubt that this is what was intended in the Hortus Kewensis for R. sinica, which name I have therefore retained. It may be necessary to observe, that Linnzeus had another plant in view for R. sinica, which is noticed in my remarks upon R. indica. Ihave already pointed out the differences between this and R. devigata under the latter species. Their heps are so similar that I have never been able to dis- tinguish them. Fruit of R. sinica, gathered near Macao, where it is common, I have received from Mr. Sabine, and of R. levigata from Mr. Fraser. The tab. 16 is copied from a Chinese drawing in the possession of the Right Honourable Sir Joseph Banks. 72. ROSA recurva. R. stipulis subulatis, foliolis 5-9, petiolis aculeatis, fructibus muricatis. R. recurva Roxb. fl. ind. ined. Hab. in Nepalia, (Buchanan), Roxb. MSS. Subscandent, well armed with strong, recurved prickles. Leaflets 5-9, ovato-lanceolate, acutely ser- rated, smooth. Stipules subulate. Petioles armed. This stout, straggling, recurved, powerfully armed shrub was brought by Dr. Buchanan from Nepal to the Botanic garden, Calcutta, where it has been ten years without flowering. Roxb, MSS. 128 ROSA SETIGERA. The above account of Dr. Roxburgh is the only au- thority for the present species. From the little that is said of it I should almost doubt its being different from R. sinica, but 1 have met with no instance of that species producing more leaflets than three; this is said to have from 5 to 9. It should also seem to be more robust. 73. ROSA setigera. R. sepalis pinnatifido-setigeris, stylis coalitis, fructibus muricatis. R. setigera Mich. bor. am. 1. 295. Pers. syn. 2. 48. Pursh am. septr. 1. n. 7. Smith in Rees in l. ‘Hab. in America septentrionali, (Michaux). Stem erect, smooth, armed beneath the stipule with 1-3 short, recurved prickles. Stipules subulate ; petiole rough with setz and little recurved prickles ; leaflets 3-(rarely)-5, oval, usually with a point, acutely serrated, smooth. Flowers numerous, or sometimes solitary, rose-coloured ; stalks long, rough with sete ; tube of the calyx round, rough; sepals with a very nar- row, sharp point, somewhat pinnatifidly setigerous, downy and glandular: petals broad, obcordate ; styles twice as long as the tube of the calyx, twisted toge- ther into a smooth column. Fruit globose, rough. Ach, Richard's MSS. For the foregoing account of this very little known species, I am much indebted to M. Achille Richard, who has taken the trouble to examine the herbarium of Michaux for the purpose. Its united styles distin- guish it from the rest of this division. ea it a i ia at on ie | Di BR dev niesritvinn 9 8, - Bibi fie A Be ee edodie way oh ee i a a cng Ot hy Rett Hi M Dy, 4p sal \ wf J i } bys | an Oe mS Ee mals i 96/2" } thay wih 9 eee nie wef oh 1 2 Sealey ‘tes re |) UP miieis + 9 ernie) Spates Ses ear Beh eu en ela at ae nega Bi, eon oe tM ae yo OP-ED ee . i cae , A co Naat ai a —_ geen aie » fa sia %. a a te os Mey 4 dh a a oe ere AF eae. a 144, Pcie. af ef (Wire : > pt ar 4 *< et 7 ROSA HYSTRIX. 129 74. ROSA hystrix. Tab. 17. R. armis ramulorum confertis: majoribus falcatis, fo- liolis ovatis, fructibus hispido-muricatis. Hab. in Chine provincia Kiangsi, Staunton; Japonia, herb, Lamb. (v. s. sp. herb. Banks et Lamb.) Branches green, flagelliform, armed with nume- rous, very small and stiff, unequal, straight prickles, a few large, falcate ones being scattered among them ; the scars only of the small ones remain on the old stems. Leaves distant; stipules very narrow, united halfway, their disengaged part deciduous and leaving a considerable scar; petioles without down, with a few falcate prickles; leaflets 3 together, ovate, flat, shin- ing, simply serrated, pedicellated, dark green above, pale beneath with a prickly rib. Bractee none; pe- duncle and oblong purple fruit bristly with dense, needleshaped, stiff prickles and setz; sepals persistent, rigid, converging, ovate, pointed, nearly entire, with a few stiff slender prickles, some of which are marginal; disk flat, fleshy ; styles hairy, included. Flowers large. Of this very rare species I have only been fortunate enough to examine two specimens; one with fruit, from which the figure is taken, in the herbarium of Sir Joseph Banks; and the other in flower, but in a very imperfect state, in the possession of Mr. Lambert, who obtained it, with a considerable number of other Japan plants, from a Dutch prize taken in the course of the last war. Its branches are covered with little, short, stiff sete and a few larger falcate prickles mixed among them. From the ticket of Mr. Lambert's spe- cimen it appears that the collector took it for the R. canina of ‘Thunberg. 180 ROSA MICROCARPA. 75. ROSA microcarpa. Tab. 18. ~ . R. floribus corymbosis, fructibus pisiformibus inermi- bus. R. cheusan glabra, juniperi fructu Pet. gax. 57. t. 30. fill. Hab. in Chine Provincia Canton, Staunton (v. s. sp. herb. Banks & pict. in icon. Sinens.) Branches flagelliform, slender, defended by a few small, scattered, deciduous, hooked prickles, when young a little downy. Leaves distant, deciduous ; stipules subulate, quickly falling off; petioles downy or naked; leaflets 3 or 5, oblong, or ovato-lanceolate, naked, simply crenato-serrate, above shining, dark green, beneath paler. Flowers very numerous, small, white; bractee deciduous; stalks smooth; fruit scarlet, the size and form of that of Crategus oxyacantha ; styles 15, hairy, very little exserted; disk flat; sepals deciduous ; pericarps 2-3 roundish, naked, very shining. There can be no stronger evidence of the very im- perfect knowledge of Linnzeus in Asiatic Roses than his citing this, which is very well figured in Petiver, to so dissimilar a plant as R. indica. ‘This error has been continued by Willdenow, who probably, on that ac- count, considered Linnzeus’s R. indica to be something with which he was unacqaainted. It has a near affinity to R. Banksie, from which its prickly stem, in a young state slightly downy, and dif- ferently shaped leaflets, sufficiently distinguish it. Ft A9, os < ? it . i : \ . \ : a ei * php sR nS Yale Sip ewe 1) ‘ a aids on Pty ' PRISE trae ee tiie) sat spe ry . a ‘ ‘ - ‘ a. « i ae ors y ; . i \ The - ; ; j 7 é YG | 7 wee i) Vy Ph oy f MOG" be Lt > wn NE ‘ au ' aiid fe a 4 Nee ¢ ‘ ¢ + PA ye el pe Oe ‘ e See afte Vm ed ab panes per vy ah ROSA BANKSLA. 131 76. ROSA Banksiz. . ramis et fructibus inermibus. . Banksiz Brown! in Ait. kew, ed. alt. 3. 258. Smith! wn Rees in 1. Curt, mag. t. 1954. Lindley in Ker’s reg. t. 397. Redout. ros, R. Banksiana Abel chin. 160? R. inermis Roxb. MSS? Hab. in China, Ker. (v. v. c.) ~ a Branches unarmed, weak, climbing, dull green. Stipules subulate, quickly deciduous, somewhat hairy ; petioles naked, rarely hairy; leaflets 1-5, flat, oblong- lanceolate, obtuse, often waved, simply serrated, en- tirely free from pubescence except at the base of the middle nerve, where they are very hairy. Flowers nod- ding, numerous, small, white and very double, with a weak but very pleasant scent ; bractee minute, quickly deciduous ; peduncles naked, very slender, a little thick- ened upwards ; tube of the calyx hemispherical; sepals ovate, pointed, entire; styles distinct, little exserted. Fruit unknown. This is the most elegant of the genus, growing with great luxuriance in the open air, and producing its charming blossoms in the utmost profusion. Mr. Brown first noticed it in the last edition of the Hortus Kewensis, and honoured it with the name of Lady Banks. An excellent figure of it is published in the Botanical Register. R. nermis of Roxburgh’s unpublished Flora Indica is probably this species; and if so, a variety of it called Wong-mouc-heuong, with double yellow flowers, is cultivated in the Botanic Garden, Calcutta. s 2 132 SPECIES INCERTA SEDIS. * SPECIES INCERTZE SEDIS. 77. Rosa pseud-indica. Hab. in China (v. ic. pict. bibl. Lambert.) Habit of R. indica. Prickles nearly equal. Stiputes very hairy. Peduncle without bractez, covered with little short prickles. Tube of the calyx and sepals very hairy? Flowers double, deep yellow. Leaves more finely serrated and coriaceous than of R. indica. 78. Rosa xanthina. Hab. in China (v. ic. pict. Bibl. Lambert.) A Rose with all the appearance of R. spinosissima except having no setze and double flowers the colour of R. sulphurea. SPECIES DUBIZ. 133 ** SPECIES DUBLA, QUIBUSDAM PRIORUM FORTE. REFEREND. 79. R. agrestis Gmel. bad. als. 2. 416. R. germinibus subglobosis pedunculisque hispidulis, foliolis rotundis obtusis, zequaliter dentatis subtus venosis albido-tomentosis, caule aculeolis raris rec- tis, floribus solitariis. Gmel. ” Hab. in agris argillaceo-lutosis calcareis apricis inter segetes nec alibi (Gmel.) Shrub a foot or foot and half high, erect. Branches slender, smooth, green, unarmed at the base, upwards covered with a few, little, straight, unequal prickles. Leaflets sessile, round, obtuse, equally toothed, smooth and deep green above, veiny and white with down be- neath. Petioles nearly smooth. Stipules narrow lan- ceolate, acute, smooth, entire. Flowers solitary, large, white. Tube of the calyx roundish, rough. Sepals compound, hispid, white at the edge with down, shorter than the petals. Fruit roundish, smooth, red, fuscous. Gmelin. Perhaps allied to Re tomentosa. oe 80. R. hispanica Mill. dict. n. 7. R. foliis utvinque villosis, calycis foliolis acute serratis, fructu glabro. Mill. Hab. in Hispania. Stem four feet high. Prickles strong. Flowers bright red, appearing in May. Adil. 154 SPECIES DUBLE. 8]. R. gemella. Willd. enum. 544. R. germinibus depresso-globosis pedunculisque glabris, floribus subzeminatis, foliis obtongis acutis, petiolis venisque subtus pubescentibus, aculeis caulinis ge- minatis. Willd. l. c. Hab. in America boreali. Aculei breves uncinati geminati infra axillares, non stipulares. Petala rubra. Media inter R. lucidam et carolinam, sed folia nullo modo nitida. Willd. This is adopted by Pursh without addition or any further remark, than that it is a low shrub with a large flower, growing on dry sunny hills from New England to Carolina. R. gemella may be a distinct species, but by the preceding account can be distinguished from R. carolina only by the smooth fruit. The native country of the Linnzan specimens de- scribed by Sir James Smith in Rees’s Cyclopedia is unknown. They are very incomplete; but as far as any opinion can be formed of them, are European and probably of R. cinnamomea, the leaflets being only a little broader than usual. Certainly they answer in no way to Willdenow’s description, ‘“‘ Media inter lucidam et carolinam.” 82. R. Lyonii Pursh am. septr. 1. 345. R. germinibus subglobosis glabriusculis, pedunculis hispidis, petiolis subaculeatis, caule glabro, aculeis sparsis rectis, foliolis (3-5) ovato-oblongis acutis serratis, supra glabriusculis, subtus tomentosis, su- perioribus simplicibus, floribus subternatis, stipulis linearibus, calycis laciniis tomentosis linearibus vix laciniatis. Pursh l. ec. Hab. in Tenassee, Lyon. Flowers pale red; leaves small, with coloured veins. Pursh. SPECIES DUBIA. 135 Described by Pursh from specimens in Lyons’s her- barium. This is another plant evidently very like R. carolina, although perhaps sufficiently distinct on account of the seattered prickles. But when Pursh saw Mr. Sabine’s Roses at N. Mimms, he pointed out a plant growing there as his R. Lyon. This I unfortunately have not seen with leaves on; but in its leafless state it differs in no respect from &. carolina except in having smooth fruit and some of the prickles falcate. 83. R. polliniana Spreng. plant. min. cogn. pug. 2. pag. 66. R. calycum tubis ovatis, pedunculisq. hispido-glandu- losis; petiolis aculeato-glandulosis; foliolis ovato- subrotundis utrinque glabris serratis; dentibus glan- duloso-serrulatis, trunco aculeato. Pollin. plant. veron. 13 ex Poir. This species is related to R. sempervirens, which has white flowers; leaves simply serrated; petioles smooth; the divisions of the calyx entire. The present plant has a stem 4 to 6 feet high, covered with hooked prickles; the branches hispid, reddish, panicled, with three flowers or more; petioles very bristly and glandular; leaflets 5-3, roundish oval, somewhat obtuse, green, shining above, paler beneath; the denticulations glandular and toothed; stipules ciliated, glandular; bracteze amplexi- caul, reddish, lanceolate, pointed, glandular beneath, two often opposite with a third larger and lower down; peduncles reddish, hispid, glandular; divisions of the calyx pinnatifid; the flowers large, purple; petals oval, rounded, slightly scented; tube oval, hispid; styles distinct, twice as short as the stamens; fruit oval, globu- lar. Grows in hedges at the foot of Mount Baldo. Pollin. ex Poiret. A mere variety of rubiginosa? Pollin probably means to compare it with the R. sempervirens of some German botanists, not of Linnzus. 136 SPECIES DUBIA. 84. R. hispida Poir. enc. bot. n. 15. R. germinibus globosis pedunculisque hispido-aculeatis; foliolis ovatis, subtus albido-tomentosis; caule acu- leis sparsis, floribus solitariis. Poir. d. c. To this M. Poiret cites R. pomo spinoso, folio hir- suto J. Bauh. hist. 2. 35. with a mark of doubt. This figure seems to be &. villosa, and so I should have guessed R. hispida to be also; but it is described with leaves smooth above, which has never been noticed in villosa: possibly it may be some variety of tomentosa; but in that case Bauhin’s synonym is wrong quoted. 85. R. evratina Bosc. dict. R. germinibus ovatis hispidissimis; ramis petiolisque subinermibus; foliolis quinatis ternatisve; pedun- culis hispidis, fasciculato-subumbellatis, terminali- bus. Poir. enc. suppl. 714. Hab. in Carolina (Poir.) This species is related to multiflora and yet more to alba in the form of its leaves. Its stems and branches are smooth, usually unarmed, as are the petioles; the leaves are composed of 5 and sometimes 3 leaflets, which are largish, oval, obtuse, nearly equally toothed, green above, paler and somewhat glaucous beneath; stipules entire with two sharp teeth. The flowers are usually terminal, in bunches, almost umbellate; pedun- cles straight, one-flowered, very bristly and glandular, as is the oval tube of the calyx, and its limb at the base; its divisions are oval, entire, acute, with a very long point; the flower somewhat large, of a pale red. This plant grows in Carolina and is cultivated in most gardens of Europe. Poiret. If this had not been compared with multiflora and alba I should have taken it for some partially unarmed variety of R. carolina, which varies prodigiously in size and form of leaves, prickles and pubescence. SPECIES DUBL. 137 86. R. Redutea glauca Thory in Red. Roses. tom. 1. t. 38. p. 101. This, as M. Thory observes, looks like an hybrid production between R. rubrifolia and spinosissima, hav- ing the colour of the former with something of the habit of the latter. Yet the two remarkable varieties of sys- tyla and arvensis which I have described, incline me to refer this to rubrifolia; from which in reality it does not differ, except in being less and having a few sete. The aculei at the base of the shoot in the figure are very similar to those of rubrifolia. M. Thory has two varieties of this. With 6 Iam not acquainted. The variety y is R. nitida!!; with which the « has not two characters in common. 87. R. clynophylla. Thory in Red. ros. 1. 43. f. 10. Stem shrubby, silky with hairs. Branches slender, hairy. Prickles stipulary, two together. Leaves hang- ing down; leaflets oblong elliptical doubly serrated, shining above, hairy beneath; petioles glandular, hairy, somewhat. prickly; stipules narrow, fringed, pointed. Flowers solitary. Peduncles very short, hairy. Tube of the calyx roundish,. hairy, sometimes underset with floral leaves. Sepals undivided, pointed, silky. Petals white, somewhat cordate, yellowish at the base. Fruit roundish. Thory l. c. Of this I can only judge from Redouté’s figure and Thory’s description. That it belongs to my Bracteate there is no doubt, and I should have added that it is the same as involucrata if I had not Mr. Sabine’s au- thority for their being very different. I can perceive nothing in the figure in which they disagree, except in the absence of bractez in clynophylla, which, as they are not noticed in the description, I conclude really not to be present. - 138 SPECIES DUBLA. 88. R. triphylla Rows. fl. ind. ined. Scandent, armed. Leaves ternate, leaflets lanceo- late. Brought from China to the Botanic Garden, Cal- cutta, where it thrives luxuriantly. It is an extensive rambler, and is known to the Chinese labourers in the Garden under the name of T'shate-boy-fa. No figure of this species has been sent home by Roxburgh. It may be R. microcarpa; at least 1 know no other Chinese species to which the above account can be applied. 89. R. cinnamomea Lour. Coch. 323. Hoa K6é Cochinchinens. Mai hoa Sinens. Hab. ubique culta in Cochinchina et China. (Lour.) Stem shrubby, tufted, 3 feet high, branched, prickly; petioles prickly. Flowers very red, single. Tube of the calyx round; stalks unarmed; scent scarcely any. Loureiro. 90. R. spinosissima Lour. Coch. 323. Hoa hoting tat Cochinchinens. Hab. ubique in Cochinchina (Lour.) Stem shrubby, 6 feet high, somewhat climbing, very prickly. Flower blush-coloured, scentless. ‘Tube of the calyx roundish, smooth. Petioles and peduncles prickly. Perhaps R. sinica. Loureiro. It is very evident from the above description of Loureiro that his plant is not what it calls itself; nor is there any Chinese species to which it is referable. SPECIES DUBIA. 139 91. R. adenophylla Willd. enum. 546. R. germinibus ovatis calycibus pedunculisque glandu- loso-hispidis, petiolis glanduloso-pubescentibus in- ermibus, foliolis simpliciter serratis subtus glaucis, margine glandulosis, aculeis ramorum sparsis. Willd. 1. c. Flos magnus ruber, petalis emarginatis. Hec flore simplici est. A duabus przcedentibus (turbinata et pulchella) figura germinis, foliis rigidioribus minute simpliciter serratis, diversa. Willd. Perhaps something allied to R. parvifolia, if distinct from it; but that species has never been heard of ina single state. 92. R. tuguriorum Willd. enum. 544. R. germinibus subrotundis glabris, calycibus pilosis, pedunculis hispidis, petiolis villosis aculeatis, caule aculeis sparsis. Waitlld. l. c. Species ad extruendum casas v. tuguria aptissima. In vernacula lingua Tapeten Rose audit. Willd. I should have guessed this to be R. arvensis, but nothing is said of its styles, and Willdenow would scarcely describe the same species twice over. , 2 140 SPECIES DUBIA. 98. R. pulchella Willd. enum. 545. R. germinibus subrotundo-obovatis pedunculis calyci- busque glanduloso-hispidis, petiolis glanduloso-pu- bescentibus inermibus, aculeis caulinis sparsis. Willd. l. c. Pane ets Affinis preecedenti, (R. turbinate), sed caulis tripld minor, flores parvi, germinis forma diversa, petioli non aculeati, et foliola subrotunda, qué in preecedente subrotundo-ovata. Willd. Is this the Rose de Meaux of the gardens? or some variety of gallica? 94, R. velutina Clairv. man. dherbor. 163. Fruit round, leaves cottony beneath, edges glan- dular. C7. Hab. in Helvetia circa Bruel, Winthertour. Perhaps R.myriacantha D. C. Clairv. But this can- not be, because that species has leaves smooth on both sides. 95. R. glandulosa Decand. suppl. 539. This elegant species of Rose forms a dense shrub 7 or 8 feet high; the prickles are few, straight, and to- lerably slender; those of the petioles are small and hooked, intermixed with glandular hairs; leaflets 5-7, perfectly smooth, somewhat glaucous, oval, obtuse, small, doubly serrated with glandular teeth; altogether like those of Burnet; flowers solitary, of a bright rose ; stalks and tube of the calyx covered with long spini- form and glandular hairs; stipules fringed with glands; calyx with an oval tube, its segments almost always SPECIES DUBLA. 141 entire, a little glandular beneath. This fine Rose grows in hedges and thickets in the neighbourhood of Briangon, especially below the town and along the val- ley leading to Lantaret. It flowers in July. De- cand. l. e. Is this distinct from rubiginosa? or is it a variety of tomentosa with smooth leaves? 96. R. arborea Pers. syn. 2. 50. R. caule arboreo, foliis pinnatis, foliolis ovatis. Hab. in Persia, Olivier. Plantulas juveniles e seminibus apportatis tantum- modo vidi. .Pers. l. c. 97. R. farinosa Rau enum. 147. R. calycis tubo oviformi pedunculisque superne glabris; foliolis ovalibus utrinque villosis mollissimis, du- plicato-serratis ; petiolis tomentosis cauleque acu- leatis: aculeis rectiusculis Raz J. c. R. farinosa Bechst. forstb. p. 243. n. 159 et p. 1646. Hab. circa Wirceburgum, Rau. Three or four feet high. Prickles strong, straight. Young branches armed with slender, straightish, some- what deflexed prickles; towards the extremities un- armed. Petioles hoary and glandular. Leaflets on both sides hoary and soft, above shining like silk, be- neath glandular at the midrib. Peduncles 1-3, naked upwards, downy at the base. Sepals compound with- out Som Flowers pale red. Fruit turgid, dull red. Rau l. c. Can this be a good species? Or is it not rather a stunted R. tomentosa? or perhaps the same as our hoary Sussex variety of R. Sabini G? 142 SPECIES DUBL#. 98. R. sempervirens Rau enum. 120. Probably a variety of R. rubiginosa with prostrate shoots, naked leaves and stipule. It is astonishing that so well-known a plant as R. sempervirens with evergreen, shining leaves, united styles and white flowers, should be confounded with a plant having de- ciduous leaves, disunited styles and red flowers. 99. R. trachyphylla Raw enum. 124. Undoubtedly referable to some variety of R. rubi- ginosa, differing, however, in having unusually com- pound serratures to the leaves, and prickles infrastipu- lary. It can scarcely be R. sepium, as its leaflets are said to be rounded at the base. 100. R. Orbessanea Redout. ros. 2. 21. c. fig. Appears to be some garden production and possibly a variety of R. gallica; with which it agrees in sepals, habit, and in some measure in prickles; but differs in shape of fruit. R. turbinata has the same sort of fruit, but disagrees with this in so many respects that they can scarcely be considered the same species. 101. R. fraxinea Willd. enum. suppl. 37. R. germinibus ellipticis glabris pedunculis glanduloso- hispidis petiolis sub-aculeatis glanduloso-hispidis, foliis glabris, caule aculeis sparsis Willd. L. c. Petala obcordata saturate rubra. ew ea ee ee ee Be) SPECIES NOMINE TANTUM NOTA. 143 *** SPECIES NOMINE TANTUM NOTA. ae . macrocarpa Maur. cat. 15. . mutabilis Maur. cat. 15. . lutetiana Leman in journ. phys. vol. 87. urbica zbrd. . rustica zd. . tomentella bid. . pubescens zbid. . hystrix zbid. . nemoralis ibid. subvillosa zbid. . cymbifolia zbid. foliosa ibid. ambigua zbid. . poterium rbid. celsii ¢bid. eriocarpa ibid. . parvifolia zbed. . ancistrum bid. neglecta tbid. . balsamica Willd. enum. suppl. 38. . apiifolia tbed. . corallina zbid. . millesia Linn. amoen. acad. 4. 484. wei | WTO MOA OO 2aTOste al TOV moran wAnneors gay vara aa nipbippsn ante mi iy Me f mW el eee as has | 5, WOT ee 41 nn Kobi ‘beak i? ‘ + Piss ce ye ae | AY oe SMA hy es ae. Pet wd 188 a Pil. ‘ hay } ‘A ’ Cel adh Bd iM ‘ _ a ‘ ne) ‘ ¢ ’ at, i w$ i Pat by r } i) if 1% 4 j rt “ate W r i Pheu ' , t = TAD, ith Ip ne 3 Wink ot i wit ea (hid Nh ren wns. al cy la boxe sa ayia nh TT adtod | eo ae: bik, alee ae: Meme one Re Srila : a Sah co a se 4 Ai Dandie Pree trol tote ediaaitl ? Se ap MAL rh A Wet: THK ay hi penin'y, ees qn ee, eit Ma mee Ae lei ai Ht NC ae da mie % POT at Aik | y ADDENDA. p- 9. ROSA microphylla. Since my remarks upon this species were printed, of which I had no other knowledge than was derived from a drawing made in the East Indies, Mr. Lambert has kindly communicated specimens received by him from Dr. Wallich. It proves, notwithstanding its apparent resemblance to R. bracteata, to be more nearly allied to &. sericea, to the vicinity of which it must be transferred. p. 40. insert as synonym of R. rubella R. Candolleana Red. ros. 2. p. 45. c. fig. p. 44. line 20. After Bell insert “ Pallas (v. s. sp. comm. cel. Lambert.)” p. $8. KR. rubiginosa. 1. parvifolia, pamila, ramis setigeris, foliolis subro- tundis. Hab. in vepretis Tauriz montose, Pallas. (v. s. sp. comm. cel. Lambert.) A curious stunted variety of R. rubiginosa, found by Pallas growing in the mountainous part of Tauria. Its branches are slightly setigerous and its leaves small and round, like those of R. myriacantha. U 146 ADDENDA. p- 105. 56-57. KR. microphylla. . foliolis nitidis arguté serratis, ca aculei nsis- R. foliolis nitidis argut tis, calyce aculeis de simis muricato, sepalis brevibus late ovatis apicu- latis. R. microphylla Roxb. fl. ind. ined. Hoi-tong-hong Sinensium. Hab. in China, Roxb., Wallich. (v. s. sp. comm. cel. Lambert.) A little, compact, bright green plant. Branches naked, slender, somewhat flexuose; prickles under the stipules, straight? Stipules very narrow, spreading at the tip. Petioles somewhat prickly, very slender ; leaflets 5-9, very small, shining, roundish ovate, point- ed, quite free from pubescence, finely serrated. Flowers solitary, with a narrow pointed bractea, very double, pale red; calyx covered all over with very close set, straight prickles; fwbe round; sepals very short, dilated, pointed, downy at the edge (like those of R. bracteata in shape). A charming little shrub resembling the Macartney Rose in general appearance; and particularly in the shape of the divisions of its calyx. It differs from all in this section in its very densely muricated calyx and narrow stipulz. See p. 9. INDEX SPECIERUM abyssinica Brown acicularis actphylla Rau adenophylla Willd. affinis Rau agrestis Gm. . agrestis Sav. alba Linn. alpina Linn. . alpina Pall. . alpina lavis Red. ET Sypronpmorunt, p- alpina pendulina Red. alpina 3 Ait. altaica Willd. ambigua Lem. ancistrum Lem. andegavensis Bat. . apiifolia Lem. arborea Pers. aristata Lapeyr. arvensis Huds. arvensis Schr. arvensis Linn. arvina Krock. atrovirens Viv. . austriaca Cr. balearica Desf: . balsamica Willd. Banksiz Brown Banksiana Ab. . Eee 116 | belgica Mill. 44 | belgica Brot. 99 || bengalensis Pers. 139 | berberifolia Pall. 99 | biflora Krock. 133 | bifera Poir. 88 | biserrata Mer. 81 | blanda Ait. 37 | blanda @ Sol. 40 | blanda Brot. 26 | blanda Pursh 37 | Borreri Was. 26 | bracteata Wendl. 51 | bracteata Monch 143 | bractescens Was. ‘143 | brevistyla D.C. 98 | Brunoni . 143 | burgundiaca Pers. . 141 | burgundiaca Ross. 33 112 | casia Sm. in 98 | calendarum Munch. 28 | campanulata Ehr. . 69 | candida Scop. . 117 | Candolleana Thory 69 | canina Linn. | canina Thunb. 117 || canina 6 Suter . 143 || canina BP D.C. 131 | capreolata Neill. 131 | carolina Linn. Uw 148 carolina Du Roi. carolina y & 3 Ait. . carolina « Ait. carolina @ Ait. caroliniana Mich. . caroliniana Big’. caryophyllea Poir. . caucasea caucasica Pall. Celsit Lem. : centifolia Mill. . centifola Linn. centifolia minor Ross . centifolia + Redout. cerea Ross. ee. chameerhodon Vill. cherokeensis Donn. chinensis Jacq. : chlorophylla Ehr. . cinnamomea Linn. . cinnamomea Roth. cinnamomea Lour. . cinnamomea Herm. cinnamomea y. Red. clynophylla Red. collina Jacq. collina Smith. collina Schr. collincola Ehr. . corallina Willd. corymbifera Gm. corymbosa Bosc. corymbosa Ehr. Crantzit Schultes . cuprea Jacq. cuspidata Bieb. . cymbifolia Lem. damascena Mill. davurica Pall. . dibracteata D.C. diffusa Roxb. diversifolia Vent. divionensis Ross. Doniana Woods. dubia Wib. dumalis Bechst. ‘ p- 20 20 18 INDEX SPECIERUM dumetorum Thuill. dumetorum Sm. dunensis Dod. eglanteria rubra Ross. eglanteria Mill. eglanteria Linn. eglanteria punicea Thory enneaphylla Raf: eriocarpa Lem. evratina Bosc. Seecundissima Munch. Jetida Herm. Jetida Bat. Jastigiata Bat. . farinosa Rau Jenestrata Donn. ferox Lawr. flava Donn. flexuosa Rau florida Donn. florida Poir. fluvialis Fl. dan. Joliosa Lem. Srancofurtana M: unch. Srancfurtensis Ross. fraxinifolia Bork. Sraxinifolia Dum. . fraxinea Willd. . Susca Monch. gallica Linn. gallica hybrida Ser. gemella Willd. geminata Rau . glandulifera Roxb. glandulosa Bell. glandulosa D. C. glauca Desf: glauca Lois. . f glaucescens Wulf. . glaucescens Mer. glaucophylla Winch glaucophylla Ehr. . glutinosa Sm. : gracilis Wds. 99 88 50 87 86 84 85 ET SYNONYMORUM. grandiflora. 53 grandiflora Wally. 88 ‘Garou: Hort. 120 Hlallert Kr. . . 12 helvetica Hall. f- 88 hemispherica Herm. 46 herporhodon Ehr. 112 heterophylla Was. . a7 hibernica S%m. 82 hibernica Hook. 51 hispanica Mill. . 133 hispida Poir. 136 hispida Munch. 68 hispida Sims AT hispida Krock. ¢ 37 Hoi-tong-hong Sinens. 9 holosericea Ross. 68 hudsoniana Red. 23 humilis Marsh. 20 hybrida Vill. 37 hybrida Schl. 113 hystrix 129 hystrix Lem. 143 indica Linn. . oe 106 indica Burm. 108 indica Red. . 106, 108 indica Forsk. 99 imermis Roxb. 131 inermis Mill. Ot inodora A gardh 88 involucrata Roxb. . 8 involuta Sm. 56 involuta Winch mA 59 kamchatica Vent. 4 6 kamchatica Donn. . . 45 kamchatica Red. 3 laevigata Mich. 125 lagenaria Vill. . 37 Lawranceana Swt. 110 laxa A 18 leucantha ee 99 leucochroa Desv. 99 149 longifolia Willd. . p- 106 lucida Ehr. ‘ 17 lucida Lawr. 10 lurida Andr. 104 lutea Mill. 84 lutea Brot. 46 _ lutea bicolor Jacq. 85 lutea nigra Promv. Q1 lutescens Pursh . 47 lutetiana Lem. 143 Lyellii : 12 Lyon Pursh 134 Macartnea Dun. 10 macrocarpa Maur. cat. 143 macrocarpa Mer. 88 macrophylla . 35 maialis Ietz. 34 maiaks Ferm. 28 marginata Wadlr. 58 micrantha Sm. 87 microphylla Desf. . . 117 microphylla Roxb. 145, 146, 9 microcarpa 130 | millesia Linn. 143 | mollis Sm. esas 77 mollissima Bork. . . ir monspeliaca Gou. 37 montana Vill. 113 montana D. C. 88 Montezume Hi. & B. 96 moschata Mill. 12] multiflora Thunb. . 119 multiflora Reyn. 104 muscosa Mill. 64 mutabilis Maur. cat. . 143 mutica Fl. dan. 34 myriacantha D.C... 65 myrtifolia Hall. f. . 88 nankinensis Lour. 54 neglecta Lem. 143 nemoralis Lem. 143 memorosa Lej. . . 87 natens Mer... 4: 98 nitida Willd. . : . 13 nivalis Donn. 150 nivea D.C. . p. 126 nuda Wads. ; 98 obtusifolia Desv. 99 odoratissima Sweet 106 odoratissima Scop. 87 olympica Donn. 69 opsostemma Ehr. 1922 Orbessanea T'hory 142 palustris Marsh 95 palustris Buch. . 8 parviflora Ehr. . 20 parvifolia Ehr. . 70 parvifolia Lem. 143 parvifolia Pall, 55 pendula Roth. 40 pendulina Linn. 42 pendulina Linn. herb. 37 pensylvanica Mich. 23 pimpinellifolia Linn. . 50 pimpinellifolia Pall. 51 pimpinellifolia Vill. 37 pimpinellifolia Bieb. 53 pimpinellifolia > Red. 50 platyphylla Rau 99 Pollmiana Spreng. 135 polyanthos Riss. 64 polyphylla Willd. 40 pomifera Herm. 74 pomponia D. C. 64 Poterium Lem. . 143 prostrata D.C. . 118 provincialis Mill. 64 provincialis Bieb. 55 provincialis B Sm. . 64 provincialis y Sm. . » 65 pseud-indica Log Bs pseudo-rubiginosa Le). 87 pstlophylla Rau 99 ubescens Lem. . 143 pulchella Widld. 140 pulchella Wds. . . . as pulverulenta Bich. . 93 pumila Linn. . 68 punicea Mill. 85 pusilla Maur. cat. . . 110 INDEX SPECIERUM pygmea Bieb. pyrenaica Gouan. pyrenaica B Sm... p- 38 37 38 Ramanas Jap. . . . 5 rapa Bosc. 15 recurva Rob. RT: Redutea Thory . 137 Redutea rubescens Bhor. 138 remensis Desf: . 70 repens Gm. . . 113 repens Munch. . 68 reversa W. et K. 57 Reyniert Hall. . : Roxburghii Hort. . . 120 rubella an. 40 rubicunda Hall. feet 104 rubifolia Brown . 123 rubiginosa Linn. 145, 86 rubiginosa cretica Red. 95 rubra Lam. . 68 rubra lucida Ross. . 17 rubrifolia Vill. 164 rubrispina Bose. } 13 rugosa Thunb. . . 5 rupestris Crantz. . . 37 rustica Lem. . 143 Sabini Wds. ‘ 59 sanguisorbifolia Donn, 51 sarmentacea Woods. 98 sativa Dodon. 81 scabriuscula Sm. wire scandens Monch. 112 scandens Mill. aw hy scotica Mill. . §1 semperflorens Curt. 108 semperflorens carnea Riss. 106 | semperflorensminima Sims 110 | sempervirens Linn. . 117 sempervirens Raw . 142 sempervirens Ross. . 113 sempervirens Roth . 87 senticosa Ach. 98 sepium Thuill. . 88 sepium Bork. 99 sericea 6 3 TEAS 105 ET serpens Ehr. setigera Mich. shirazensis Kampf. simplicifolia Salish. sinica Ait. sinica Linn. . solstitialis Bess. spinosissima Linn. . spinosissima Lour. . spinosissima Gort. . spinosissima Monch. stipularis Mer. . stricta Muh. stylosa Desv. stylosa 8 Desv. . suaveolens Pursh. SUuari ifolia Lightf: . suavis Willd. . . sulphurea Ait. subvillosa Lem. . surculosa Woods . , sylvatica Gat. sylvestris Herm. systyla Bat. . taurica Bied. teneriffensis Donn. . tenuiglandulosa Mer. ternata Poir. tomentella Lem. SYNONYMORUM. 151 112 || tomentosa Sm. . . p. 77 128 || trachyphylla Raw . . 142 61 || trifoliata Bose. . . . 126 1 || triphylla Rozd. . . . 198 126 || tuguriorum Willd... . 139 106 || turbinata 4it, 2. ., 73 99 || turbinata Vill. . . . 37 50 || turgida Pers. . . . 15 138 os varians Pohl. . . , 64 88 velutina Clairv. . . 140 wllosa Du Hot... oF f 49 villosa Linn. ee 3 74 me villosa Vill. . . 2 | OY 87 melon Pal. ..\ . 88 87 villosa minuta Rau Cie 49 viminea . . ines 49 4G virginiana Du Teo : 23 143 virginiana Mill. . . 26 98 | virginiana Herm. . . 42 Gg || wmbellata Leys, . . 99 112 | umbellata Leers eo, 87 liq | U7guiculata Desf. . . 64 i aenbece Lem. 6. «ve. 148 3] | usitatissima Gat. . . 81 i 8 | S iV OOUSTT 5) ed 21 126 | 143 | Ra, cy ge 1h * } ie } : , . aa mS ‘ eh 7 LOM at Was (cit= | ok pity cite walsned uF ue T a yy wel ‘ Jo aw Nhe sth \ 1g : atest ‘a \ Wins ’ ‘3 see (NE RAR e495 4 POTN e Tels ‘ 4 é . tae, errands ‘7 ; in } bs P ’ ‘ atts + aS ‘ \ iM? a Arle AWs apart lia), ah iv . 5] Sea ! 4 | acl we ot ‘nea dle “4 Tia ee , he 5 G Kir i Pols gp Abs ith } er Eat) ae ee “a ‘ "Ji ent a 3 , ’ ah wa + 2” ah Pa AY nr se ee F ee Wi ay 2 Car ' pele ee ‘ Avy . dha s ein’. ere an TT ake : “tye A lh y . ath \ “ a , l an ov ; Ve aye. Oy is “hy ee | he Bi (Ay Ae yr bn 6 oh A BAPMRS ) ilien th His o - Poth i " . ris) os) Ot De De oti SE 77. b bi Var her A tale > oa hy an : 4 Wox B . . ot by ; iy i a Hts . ait ie ‘ oy vce hi; bel? i 4 i Aye Se ate xa We syaules id on ae wie. w A esd pe 4 * Oh Wi, okt OCA, SEHR HY ; ij ee etl - f WAT Iy tC ee “Ty r | i) ye Wee A 7 in] ! *. ‘ . Wey Way nine ae hen At by acd oft. a y.: a UR ajdt pee ME Se Loa) £ ea Arana ® i é : 7 ? i in| : \ Bee att ote tae ie ty ns eee nS wi Sey en aa j iL Py : . ® ie f ei ln oye (aire aeRO ii oe a —" * 7 i? ®. Ls eal > ' a Ri v ' ‘ i a hy aa | ‘ vt) ro etal i ni 4 1% 3 ene.’ | ry hh Ao Ay a Mi Li ae Verbs 6 ove oe aoe font Ps ty fa] * i) wie jth Hs y Wes hth APPENDIX.