1 s.-) 



ON ROSA BRITANNICA Deskglise. 



By G. a. BouLENaER, LL.D., D.Sc, F.R.S. 



The Rose to which I desire to cbaw attention appears to have a 

 wide distribution in this country, but I have long been embarrassed as 

 to the name it should bear. It seems to have appeared as R. foment osa 

 Smith, fodtida Bastard, 1812 (non Herrman, 1762), Jundzilliana 

 Baker (non Besser), silvestris Woods (non Herrmann), scahriuscula 

 Smith ; and it would, I suppose, fall under R. fomentosa sub-group 

 ScahriusciilcB of Wolley-Dod's latest arrangement (Suppl. 1^20, 

 p. 18), but for the sepals being only exceptionally retlexed. 



The name scahriuscula is certainly inapplicable, as the type figured 

 by Smith has the pedicel scarcely longer than the calyx-tube. Christ's 

 R. scahriuscula (in Rosen der ScJuveiz) appears to be based on a 

 variety of R. micraiitJia, and Keller's definition in Ascherson and 

 Graebner's Sy)iopsis der Kitteleurop. Flora is clearly derived from 

 Christ's description. 



This Rose has been confounded by Woods with R. micranfha, a 

 specimen so named by him (from near Godstone, 1815) being pre- 

 served in the Kew Herbarium ; this explains Woods's statement 

 (Syn. Brit. Roses, p. 209) "once or twice I have observed the tur- 

 pentine odour which is generally to be perceived in the family of 

 R. tomentosay The Kew Herbarium also contains a specimen under 

 the name of R. caiiina, labelled as having been used in the pre- 

 paration of Miss Willmott's book. 



The name here used was first introduced by Deseglise in 1877 

 ( Catal. Rais. p. 30^) as a substitute for Baker's Jundzilliana, and I 

 propose to take it up as the only one about which there can be no 

 question. As it is necessary to be very cautious in the application of 

 names given by Deseglise, I wish to point out that two specimens 

 only (from Menai Bridge, Cheshire, F. M. Webb) are preserved in 

 his" herbarium with the label R. hrifannica ; the name was after- 

 wards withdrawn, as being in the author's opinion a mere synon-\aii of 

 Bastard's R. foetid a. An earlier name may some day be found, but 

 the application of Deseglise's R. hritannica to the following descrip- 

 tion is certainly correct in the strictest sense. 



The best way out of the difficulties which confront the student of 

 our Roses appears to me to provide him with careful and detailed 

 descriptions of the critical forms, based not upon fragmentary 

 herbarium specimens, but upon living bushes both in flower and in 

 fruit. Such a description I have endeavoured to draw up from 

 several bushes growing in Surrey, at Oxted and Limpsfield, in hedges 

 and thickets on the Lower Greensand. The type specimens in the 

 Deseglise Herbarium are embraced by it. 



Rosa britannica. 



Strong, not densely foliated bush, 2 to 3 metres high ; barren 

 vear's slioots stiff, erect; flowering branches not curved but with 

 . superposed internodes often forming angles, somewhat zigzag ; the 

 JouRKAL or Boi4>^T.— Vol. 58. [Ai gi'ht, 1920.] p 



