_Description._--Head flat, longer than wide; snout long, subovoid, slightly protruding beyond lower lip; loreal oblique, concave; canthus rounded, indistinct; diameter of eye about equal to interorbital space; tympanum large, about three fifths diameter of eye, smaller than internarial distance; supratympanic fold indistinct; arms short; fingers free of webs; subarticular tubercles distinct; median palmar tubercle large, bifid; inner palmar tubercle on base of first finger flat, elongate; disc of third finger about one half diameter of tympanum; legs moderately long; tarsal fold absent; inner metatarsal tubercle distinct, oval; toes about half webbed; web on fourth toe extending to disc; discs of toes about size of those on fingers; skin smooth above with small granules on head and in scapular region in some specimens; skin on flanks, throat, belly, and lower surfaces of thighs granular; tongue oval, longer than wide, not free behind; choanae small, oval; vocal slits long, lateral to tongue. In preservative, dorsum pale brown with darker dorsolateral stripes; narrow dark brown line from nostril to eye; groin, anterior surface of thighs, and posteroventral surfaces of shanks creamy tan with dark brown vermiculations; white spots present on thighs in some specimens; throat flecked with brown; belly creamy white or gray. _Remarks._--The taxonomic history of _Hyla rubra_ Laurenti is confused. Seba (1734:70) illustrated and diagnosed a frog for which he used the name _Ranula, Americana, Rubra_. Linnaeus (1758:213) considered Seba's frog to be a variety of _Hyla arborea_. Laurenti (1768:35) apparently examined the same individual that Seba called _Ranula, Americana, Rubra_. For this specimen, Laurenti used the binominal _Hyla rubra_ and provided a brief diagnosis. The type locality was given as America. Daudin (1802:26) redescribed the same specimen(s?) treated by Seba and Laurenti and provided a fairly good description and figures. Daudin restricted the type locality to Surinam and indicated that Marin de Baize was the probable collector. Daudin (1802:26 and 1803:53) neglected to consider Laurenti's work, but he applied the same name used by Laurenti. Most authors have credited _Hyla rubra_ to Daudin, but Rivero (1961:120) noted that _Hyla rubra_ Laurenti, 1768, has priority over _Hyla rubra_ Daudin, 1802. Since both Laurenti and Daudin worked on Seba's material, it is reasonable to assume that Daudin redescribed the same frog that was named by Laurenti; this was not an uncommon practice in the early nineteenth century. Thus I conclude that _Hyla rubra_ Daudin, 1802, is a junior synonym of _Hyla rubra_ Laurenti, 1768.