REVIEWS, BOOK NOTICES, ETC. 55 
sun has developed in the highest degree the glandulosity, and that 
the dryness, combined with the heat, has reduced the corolla, and 
has caused to grow out from the epidermis of the whole plant that 
enormous quantity of prickles, long, shining, slender, in the shape of 
sickles and sabres, which give to these roses the strange aspect of a 
thorny bush of the desert.” It is enough to say that R. Burnatz is 
one of the varieties peculiar to this region. ‘To another species of 
the same district, 2. Aeatricis, Burnat and Gremli, M. Sudre 
assigned an English specimen. Curiously, Major Wolley-Dod re- 
jected this determination, but has applied the name to some other 
specimens from Surrey. It is a pity these had not also been sub- 
mitted to Dr. Dingler, for then we should not have had 2. Beatricis 
figuring as native in four vice-counties of England. 
There is one other point which needs clearing up. At the middle 
of page 37 we find, “2. caryophyllacea, Chr. forma (non Bess.). 
Two specimens from Catsworth, Hunts (Ley.), are considered by 
Dingler to agree almost exactly with a form of this species, which he 
believes may be a hybrid with some Rubiginosa form, but to which 
he has given the name of &. ‘fomentella, var. anonyma in his 
herbarium.” On the strength of this Major Wolley-Dod, disregard- 
ing Dingler’s 7. ¢omentella, var. anonyma, gives R. caryophyllacea, 
Chr. forma (non Bess.), as occurring in three vice-counties. But 
what does 2. caryophyllacea forma (non Bess.) mean in this case? 
We know what Dr. Christ himself thought, viz. that his species was 
identical with Besser’s. We know what Crépin thought, viz. that 
its chief varieties were merely very glandular forms of 2. glauca or 
R. coritfolia. His opinion was shared by Keller, but the latter in his 
synopsis takes a different view, though he still believes, except for 
one variety, in its close relation to A. glauca and R. cortifolia. That 
variety he joins to Besser’s species. The others he gives under the 
name of &. Rhetica, Gremli= R. caryophyllacea, Chr. (non Besser). 
This &. Rhetica he describes as a “ Berg” rose, with the woolly 
styles and rising sepals of &. glauca or coriifolia. It is scarcely 
found outside of the Lower Engadine and the Tyrol. But there is 
one variety given by Dr. Christ which is seemingly not noticed by 
Keller. This was founded on specimens sent from near Griindstadt 
in Rhenish Bavaria, by Dr. Fries, and was called var. Friesiana. 
This variety has been studied by Dr. Dingler in the living state in 
its native district. As the result of his examination he dissociates 
it from 2. caryophyllacea, Chr., and considers it, no doubt correctly, 
as a peculiar variety of 2. zomente//a, Lem., giving it in the meantime 
the provisional name of . Zomentella, Lem., var. anonyma. To this 
variety he considers the English specimens from Catsworth closely 
allied. It is highly probable that the Catsworth specimens, and the 
others associated with them by Major Wolley-Dod, do belong to a 
variety of 2. ¢omentella, Lem., but it is doubtful if they can be joined 
as one variety to the Bavarian plant, and it is certain that they can 
have no relationship to the Berg rose of the Unterengadin, the 
varieties of which formed the basis of 2. caryophyllacea, Chr. 
