|
Gardeners' Chronicle 3rd series 40(1019): 1 (July 7, 1906)
THE AUSTRIAN BRIER.
WHAT is the Austrian Brier, and whence did it come? These questions occurred to us in a singular way. Not long since a correspondent enquired about a yellow-flowered Rose occurring in Syria, where the profusion and beauty of the flowers were very noteworthy, as noted also on the slopes of Lebanon by Sir John Llewelyn. From the description given, we conjectured that the plant was the Rosa lutea of Miller, of the Botanical Magazine (tab. 363), and of Lindley's Monograph of Roses (1820, p. 84). This conjecture was verified by the inspection of Syrian specimens obtained subsequently by Mr. Arthur Sutton. This plant was called by Linnaeus Rosa Eglanteria, a name adopted in the Index Kewensis, which is unfortunate for many reasons, which we need not discuss here. When the Syrian flowers just mentioned were subsequently submitted to Col. Prain, the Director of the Royal Gardens at Kew, he at once recognised them as those of an Indian Rose—R. Eglanteria of Linnaeus, which is, as we have said, synonymous with R. lutea of Miller. It is described in Sir Joseph Hooker's Flora of British India (II., 1897, p. 360), and stated to be a native of the drier parts of the Himilayas from Kistwar westward, and in Western Tibet. Afghanistan, Asia Minor, and Siberia are also mentioned as countries wherein this Rose is found native. Hooker expressly calls this the Austrian Rose, and cites Jacquin, Hort. Vindob, I., t 1. Nicholson also calls it by this name. Sir Dietrich Brandis and Boissier both name it Rosa lutea. Boissier in his Flora Orientalis (II., 1872, p. 671), mentions the "Persian yellow " as possibly a form of this species (lutea), and in William Paul's Rose Garden, Rosa lutea is made to include the following varieties : Copper, double yellow, Harrisoni, a hybrid said to have been introduced from America, Persian Yellow, etc. In Gibelli's Flora Italiana (p. 677) Rosa lutea is mentioned as growing wild in hedges in Piedmont, Venice and Naples. Gremli, in his Flora of Switzerland, translated by Paitson, speaks of this species as apparently quite spontaneous on the gypseous rocks near Nax, Decaisne, and Naudin Manuel (p. 102) remarks that it (lutea or Capucine) seems to be indigenous to the centre and south of Europe, where, however, it may be merely naturalised. Coste in his Manual of the Flora of France does not mention it, nor is it entered in the Belgian floras. Nyman in his Conspectus Florae Europae tells us that R. lutea has been mentioned as occurring in Southern Europe, but that it is there only sub-spontaneous. Lindley in his monograph above cited mentions a variety punicea, "floribus bicoloribus," which we mention because he cites as synonymous R sylvestris Austriaca, flore phoeniceo, Hort. Angl. 66, 18, and R. lutea bicolor, Jacquin Hort. Vind., 1. t. 1.; Sims Bot. Mag., t. 1077, and others which it is not necessary for our present purpose to enumerate. Cedin included the species lutea in his section Luteae. Baker in these columns, August 15, 1885, p. 199, kept up Miller's name of lutea and arranged it in his group Rubiginosae, but in his more recent revision in the Journal of the Linnean Society, February 16, 1905, he alters his opinion, adopts Linnaeus' name of Eglanteria (giving Miller's name lutea as a synonym), and places it in his Group VII. Spinosissimae. We might pursue this part of the subject much more fully, but only at the risk of wearying the reader.--M.T.M.
|
REPLY
|
