7 1957 
* CRAT/EGUS coccínea. 
Scarlet-fruited Hawthorn. 
ICOSANDRIA MONO-PENTAGYNIA. 
Nat. Ord. ROSACEZZ, $ POMEZ. 
CRATZGUS. Supra, vol. 13. fol. 1128. 
C. coccinea ; foliis subrotundis oblongisve angulatis inciso-serratis basi cuneatis longè 
petiolatis, calycis laciniis pinnatifidis petiolisque glandulosis, spinis axillaribus arcu- 
atis petiolis longioribus, pomis spheericis corymbosis 3-4-pyrenis putamine crassis- 
simo osseo. 
C. coccinea. Linn. Sp. Pl. 682. Torrey Fl. 1. 474. De Cand. Prodr. 2.627. Loudon 
Arb. et Frut. Brit. p. 816. 
C. glandulosa. Willd. Sp. Pl. 2. 1002. Loud. Arb. Brit. p. 817. De Cand. Prodr. 2. 627. 
B. macracantha; spinis foliis sequalibus v. longioribus, pomis subminoribus. 
C. glandulosa macracantha. Supra vol. 22. t. 1912. 
C.macracantha. Lodd. cat. Loud. arb. Brit. p. 819. fig. 572. et 573. 
When the long-spined variety. of this plant was figured at fol. 1912, it did 
not occur to me to look very particularly into the synonyms, my object being 
chiefly to publish a figure of the species under some recognised name ; the critical 
enquiry into the entangled synonymy of the whole genus Crategus being left for 
a special discussion by whomever might be disposed so to amuse himself. A note, 
however, from Dr. Asa Gray of New York, has led me to look a little more par- 
ticularly into the matter. That gentleman says, “ C. glandulosa Bmacracantha, 
of Bot. Reg. t. 1912, is the most common species in the Northern States, and is 
here familiar to every one. It is the C. pyrifolia Torrey FI., and as we supposed 
of preceding authors.” Probably pyrifolia was written for coccinea, for upon 
turning to Torrey’s Flora, I find that excellent Botanist quoting Elliott, Pursh, 
and Muhlenberg as his authorities for C. pyrifolia, which he does not appear 
himself to have seen: and in my herbarium are excellent specimens of this C. glan- 
dulosa marked * C. coccinea auct. Amer. C. pyrifolia? common near New 
York,” sent to me by Dr. Torrey himself. 
. In referring this plant to C. coccinea the American Botanists are right, for it 
is certainly the plant meant by Linneus. Nor was I wrong in referring 1t to 
C. glandulosa of De Candolle; for it is as certainly the plant of the. us. 
It is not, however, C. glandulosa of Aiton, which was probably intended for 
C. spathulata, figured at fol. 1890, if we are to judge from its being compared 
m the Hortus Kewensis with C. flava and parvifolia. The confusion arose 
with Willdenow, who, with his usual ingenuity, first copied the rmi character 
of C. glandulosa from the Hortus Kewensis, and then added C. sanguinea of 
Pallas as a synonym : hence the latter plant ‘and C. glandulosa became identified 
in the eyes of systematic writers, and a fresh character was contrived to suit the 
erroneous combination. The genus Crateegus not having been studied ni Professor 
De Candolle himself, the error was transferred to the Prodromus, and has given 
rise to some most extraordinary confusion in writers who shall be nameless. 
The following adjustment of synonyms will help to put this matter straight 
for the future, to a certain extent at least. 
C. glandulosa of Willdenow, De Candolle, and Loudon is the sa 
of Linneus. 
me species as C. coccinea 
* See fol. 1161. 
