1906] Robinson, — Filipendula rubra, a new Binomial 20.*^ 



in New England. As it is now a member of the flora of our region 

 and must be included in various local lists, the question of its correct 

 scientific name is likely to arise, and it may be in place to say a few 

 words on this point. 



From a general habital resemblance to Spiraea, the species and some 

 of its European allies were long referred to that genus. Maximowicz, 

 however, after long and critical study of the group, expressed with 

 great definiteness the view that the genus FUiipendula bore no close 

 affinity to Spiraea, but was rather to be placed near Geum, his state- 

 ment being as follows : 



"Genus hucusque inter Spiraeas receptum certe ab illis omnibusque 

 Spiraeaceis abhorret achaeniis indehiscentibus caducis 1-spermis, 

 stigmate amplo et staminibus post anthesin deciduis filamento sub 

 anthera subincrassato neque attenuato. Inter Rosaceas igitur ponen- 

 dum, ubi modo crescendi, foliis, stipulis, fragrantia qualitateque 

 rhizomatum, nee non inflorescentia (etsi multo divitiore ramisque 

 adventitiis aucta) cum Geo et affinibus ubi in nonnullis etiam iteratim 

 trichotomu flore centrali breviore occurrit, bene convenire videtur."^ 



For the genus, thus separated from Spiraea, Maximowicz takes up 

 Filipendula, a name dating from the sixteenth century. Maximo- 

 wicz attributes the name to Linnaeus, however, and cites his Genera 

 ed. 1, p. l-to and Species Plantarum ed. 4, p. 172. It is clear that the 

 latter reference is merely a clerical error for Linnaeus's Genera, ed. -i, 

 p. 172. Both of these editions of the Genera appeared before 1753, 

 the date now generally adopted as the starting point for modern botani- 

 cal nomenclature, and the plants in question were later referred by 

 Linnaeus in the several editions of his Species and Systema to Spiraea. 

 The first use of Filipendula subsequent to 1753 is by Adanson,^ whose 

 description, although brief, is accompanied by definite references to 

 the works of Tournefort and Linnaeus in such a manner as to leave 

 no doubt as to its precise application. It is to Adanson, therefore, 

 that the genus as a part of modern nomenclature should be ascribed. 



Although Maximowicz selected the earliest generic name, he unfor- 

 tunately adopted the specific name lobata from Spiraea lohata Gronov., 

 having apparently overlooked the earlier specific name rubra, employed 

 by Hill under Ulmaria. The Vienna rules of nomenclature require 

 the union of the oldest specific and generic names, as follows : — 



' Act. Hort. Petrop. vi. 246 (1879). - Families des Plaiites, ii. 295 (1763). 



