ENUMERATION OF THE SPECIES 137 



introduced in 1734, but Catesby says in 1731 that "it has for several years pro- 

 duced its beautiful and fragrant flowers at Mr. Bacon's at Hoxton and at Mr. 

 Collinson's at Peckham," though it is somewhat doubtful whether the plant re- 

 ferred to is this species or R. viscosum or R. canescens, the species figured by Catesby. 

 It is certain, however, that it was in cultivation about 1750 in England, for Ehret's 

 colored plate in Trew, Plantae Selectae Ehretianae (t. 48) is certainly our species, 

 and about 1800 it was known on the Continent, as the excellent colored plate of 

 the typical form in Schmidt's Oesterreichische Baumzucht (III. t. 170) shows. 

 The first detailed description was given in 1787 by Wangenheim, who describes 

 the typical form, for he states that the leaves are glabrous and that the hairs on 

 the outside of the corolla-tube have no glands; he also mentions two pubescent 

 varieties and a form which he saw only cultivated in two gardens in the state of 

 New York with fringed or erose corolla-lobes. 



The nomenclature of the species presents some difficulties discussed by Blake 

 in Rhodora (XX. 53 [1918]). The oldest name for the species is A. lutea Linnaeus, 

 of which A . nudiflora is merely a synonym, but fortunately the name lutea cannot 

 be transferred to Rhododendron on account of the older R. luteum Sweet which is 

 the valid name of A. pontica Linnaeus under Rhododendron. Therefore the syn- 

 onym A. nudiflora takes the place of A. lutea. Those, however, who retain Azalea 

 as a distinct genus must, as pointed out by Blake, either adopt A. lutea for the 

 pink-flowered species or discard altogether both A. lutea and A. nudiflora and 

 adopt Michaux's A. peridymenoides. 



The form with pink or pinkish flowers should be considered the type of this 

 species *; it seems to be the most common and the one originally cultivated under 

 this name, as Trew's plate of 1750 which shows pink flowers tends to prove. The 

 form with white or nearly white flowers may be distinguished as f . album? Most 

 of the more highly colored forms probably belong to var. glandiferum, though this 

 variety also includes light colored forms. 



1 This is probably the form distinguished as : 



Rhododendron nudiflorum S. carneum Sweet, Hort. Brit. ed. 2, 343 (1830). 



G. Don. Gen. Syst. III. 847 (1834). 

 Azalea nudiflora y. carnea Aiton, Hort. Kew. I. 202 (1789). Ker in Bot. Reg. 



II. t. 120 (1816). De Candolle, Prodr. VII, 717 (1839). 

 ? Azalea carnea Dumont de Courset, Bot. Cult. III. 332 (1811), as var. of A, 



nudiflora. 

 Azalea peridymenoides y. carnea Pursh, Fl. Am. Sept. 152 (1814). 



Ker's figure and description represent apparently the typical pink-flowered 

 form of R. nudiflorum with pilose corolla and nearly smooth leaves; but it differs 

 from the original description in the calyx, which is described as f oliaceous by Aiton, 

 while Ker calls it small. Dumont de Courset describes the leaves as pubescent, 

 which would remove his plant from R. nudiflorum. 



2 Rhododendron nudiflorum a. album Sweet, Hort. Brit. ed. 2, 343 (1830) . G. Don, 

 Gen. Syst. III. 847 (1834), as var. 5. 



Azalea nudiflora d. alba Aiton, Hort. Kew. I. 202 (1789). 



Azalea alba Dumont de Courset, Bot. Cult. ed. 2, III. 332 (1811), as var. of 



A. nudiflora. Michaux, Jour. ed. C. S. Sargent, 111 (in Proc. Am. Philos. 



Soc. XXVI (1899). 



Dumont de Courset's description of the tube of the corolla as covered with short 

 hairs and of the scales of the winter-buds as glabrous shows that a form of typical 

 R. nudiflorum was cultivated under that name. 



