326 PROCEEDLNGS OP THE AMERICAN ACADEMY 



R. parvijiora, aud Willdeuow so understood them twenty-four years 

 later. 



lu 1785 we I'ukI the first deterniinutions of American roses by an 

 American botanist, in the Arhiistum Americanum of Humphrey Mar- 

 shalL He mentions and partially describes four species as found in 

 Pennsylvania, li. Carolinensis, R. paluslris, R. humilis, and R. Penn- 

 sylvanica plena. Tiie first, or the " Wild Virginia Rose," is given in 

 all probability simply to cover the ground already occupied, for the 

 description, as evidently as the names, is taken wholly from Linua?us 

 and Miller. The second species, the "Swamp Pennsylvania Rose," is 

 the true R. Carolina, and his description is a better one than had before 

 been made. The R. humilis, or " Dwarf Pennsylvania Rose," is witii- 

 out doubt what has usually beeu regarded as P^hrhart's R. parvijiora, 

 and his name has every right to recognition in preference to the latter. 

 It is not easy to account for the double-flowered form of this, of which 

 he makes his last species. 



Wangenhcim, who as a captain in the Hessian forces had been from 

 1777 to 1780 in this country, after his return to Germany published 

 in 1781 a description of some North American trees and shrubs, and in 

 1787 a more elaborate account in his Beytrag zur teutschen Forstwis- 

 senachdff.. In the first he describes only the R. Carolina, but in the 

 latter, in adtiition to a good description and I'ecognizable figure of that 

 species, he gives descriptions of " R. Vii-giniann " and of " R. Penn- 

 sijlvanica jiure pleno, mihi," the first not recognizable, the other a 

 myth as respects any wild native species. 



Walter in his Flora Caroliniana (1788) mentions only R. Carolina, 

 with varieties " calycibus laciniis brevibus integris ; et longis, lacinia- 

 tis." This is the earliest reference to the rose which Michaux after- 

 wards described as R. setigera. 



Aiton's Hortus Keivensis (1789) refers everything previously pub- 

 lished to R.Carolina, under a half-dozen varieties. Here first appears 

 R. blanda, with a good description, stated to be a native of Newfound- 

 land (wiiere it was collected by Sir Joseph Banks) and Hudson's Bay, 

 cultivated since 1773 by James Gordon. In the same year Eiirhait 

 publislied, in his Beitrage zur Naturhunde, three species then in cultiva- 

 tion in the gardens at Hannover; viz., R. parvijiora, of which he knew 

 only a furm with double flowers, R. corymbosa, which lie rightly con- 

 sidered the same as the Linna^an R. Carolina, and R. lucida. He 

 gives R. Carolina of DuRoi as a synonym of R. parvijiora, and ap- 

 j)ears to have had DuRoi's description in mind in drawing up iiis own. 

 There was probably some connection between this double-flowered 



