Ferdinand von Mueller

1

MS not seen; text given here is extracted from Tkach, Neubauer & Roser (2022), Brief 22.

Hamburg d. 15 Juni 54

Geehrtester Herr!

Ich übersende Ihnen hiermit für die Linnaea das Manuskript der von Prof. Meisner Bearbeiteten Müller’schen Pflanzen. Ich habe mancherlei hinzufügen müssen, wodurch das Manuskript etwas bunt geworden ist. Wollen Sie gefälligst mit den Atherospermeen anfangen lassen, dann folgen die Thymeleen u.s.w. Lieb wäre es mir, wenn die Standorte wieder wie sonst in eine besondere Reihe kämen, und darunter wieder die sonstigen Bemerkungen. Prof. Meisner hat alles zu dicht zusammengeschrieben, wahrscheinlich weil er glaubt, ich werde das Ganze noch kopiren lassen. Die Arten, welche er bei seinem Hiersein als richtig anerkannte waren ganz ausgelassen. Meisner schreibt: "es wäre mir lieb, wenn ich die Plantae Müllerianae noch im Prodromus citiren könnte." Wie er hinzufügt, beginnt der Druck der Polygoneen am Ende dieses Monats, als so grosse Eile hat es nicht. Ich sage Ihnen meine verbindlichsten Dank für die Zannichellia. Leider muss ich gestehen, dass ich immer noch nicht zu einem Resultate gekommen bin; ich habe deshalb alles was ich besitze, an Gay in Paris geschickt und ihn um Aufschluss über die Z. macrostemon, die ohne Zweifel auch in Deutschland ist, gebeten. Unter den Müller’schen Pflanzen habe ich ein neues Genus, der Zannichellia nahestehend, gefunden, das ich nachdem Gay seine Bestätigung ertheilt, beschreiben u vielleicht abbilden werden. Ich werde Ihnen als Gegengabe ein Exemplar davon zustellen.

Sie hatten früher die Güte mir das III u IV Heft des 25 Bandes der Linnaea zu schicken; letzteres enthält aber die Compositae nicht vollständig.Da ich alle Abdrucke der Compositen an Müller gesendet habe, so besitze ich selbst meine Arbeit nicht ganz u möchte Sie deshalb bitten, ob Sie mir nicht den Schluss der Compositae aus dem Heft V. mittheilen könnten.

Ich erwarte mit Spannung aus London Bericht über das Schiff, mit welchem ich die Hälfte der Abdrucke der Compositae nach Melbourne sandte; obgleich im Mai 53 von London abgegangen, hatte Müller am 29 Janr. 54 noch nichts davon gehört. Es wäre fatal, wenn es verunglückt sein sollte, denn das andere Schiff, mit welchem ich die zweite Hälfte der Abdrucke schickte, ist bei Sidney gestrandet, wobei alles zugrunde gegangen ist.

Müllers Brief ist aus dem Inneren von Lake Omeo datiert, nachdem er nicht ohne Gefahr die alpinen Gipfel der Bogong range, die noch niemand erklommen, überstiegen. Von dort wollte er nach Gippsland, um die Gegend am Mitchell river zu besuchen und Mount Wellington zu erklettern. Er hatte im Gebirge wieder viele Pflanzen gesammelt die auf Van Diemensland vorkommen. Im April wollte er wieder in Melbourne sein, so dass ich, wenn alles glücklich abgemacht, bald wieder einen Brief erwarten kann.

Nächstens werde ich wieder eine Parthie Manuskript senden, Hampe u. C. Müller haben die Moose der letzten Reise, die viele Interessantes u Neues enthalten, bestimmt. Ich bin mit den Algen zum grössten Theile fertig u will die gleich hinzufügen. Dann werde ich Ihnen auch die 5 Thaler für die mexikanischen Pflanzen mitsenden; ich habe augenblicklich kein Papiergeld im Hause.

Hamburg,15 June 1854

Most esteemed Sir,

I am sending you herewith the manuscript of the Mueller plants worked on by Professor Meisner for the Linnaea. I have had to add a number of things, which has made the manuscript somewhat chequered. Would you kindly start with the Atherospermeae, followed by the Thymeleae and so on.

2

In Linnaea, vol. 26, pp. 345-64, Schlechtendal followed the sequence suggested, although treatment of the single species in Atherospermeae, p. 345, is not designated as Meisner's work. See Meisner (1853), Meisner (1853a), Meisner (1853b); although dated 1853 on the title page, Meisner's treatments were published in August 1854 (TL2).

I would appreciate it if the locations were placed in a special row as usual, with the other remarks again below.

3

This requested layout of text was not followed.

Professor Meisner has written everything too densely, probably because he thinks I will have the whole thing copied. The species that he recognised as correct when he was here were completely omitted. Meisner writes: 'I would appreciate it if I could still cite the Plantae Muellerianae in the Prodromus'.

4

Meisner was contributing family treatments to A. P. de Candolle (1823-73), for example Meisner (1856).

As he adds, the printing of the Polygoneae will begin at the end of this month, so there is no great hurry.

I thank you most sincerely for the Zannichellia.

5

In a letter to Schlechtendal, 22 May 1854 (Tkach, Neubauer & Roser (2022), Brief 21), Sonder referred to a Zannichellia with very long stamens and 4-fold anthers found in Westphalia mentioned by Schlechtendal (1823-4), part 1, p. 458 (under Z. palustris). He requested a specimen, which Sonder thought was likely to be Zannichellia macrostemon described in Willkomm & Lange (1861-80), vol. 1, p. 26, using Gay's unpublished name.

Unfortunately, I must confess that I have still not come to a result. I have therefore sent all I possess to Gay in Paris and asked him for information about the Z. macrostemon, which is without doubt also in Germany. Among Mueller's plants I have found a new genus, close to Zannichellia, which I will describe and perhaps illustrate after Gay has given his confirmation.

6

Sonder evidently prepared a manuscript describing Hexatheca australis, as Bentham (1863-78), vol. 7, p. 180 quotes 'Sond. MS' in his synonyms for his Lepilaena cylindrocarpa, also including Zannichellia cylindrocarpa of Körnicke. Jacques Étenne Gay (1786-1864) worked on Zannichellia (IPNI).

I will send you a specimen of it as a return gift.

Previously you were kind enough to send me parts III and IV of the 25th volume of the Linnaea; the latter, however, does not contain the Compositae in their entirety. Since I have sent all reprints of the Compositae to Mueller, I do not possess my work in its entirety myself and would therefore like to ask you whether you could not send me the conclusion of the Compositae from part V.

7

Sonder (1852a); TL2 lists pp. 450-512 as published in April 1853, with pp. 513-30 in June 1853.

I am eagerly awaiting a report from London about the ship with which I sent half of the reprints of the Compositae to Melbourne. Although it left London in May 53, Müller had still not heard anything of it on 29 January 54.

8

In January 1854 Mueller was on his collecting and exploration trip that began on 1 November 1853 (M. to J. Foster, 1 November 1853 (in this edition as 53-11-01a)), having reached Albury by 15 January 1954 (M to J. Foster, 15 January 1854) when he reported that 'It is my intention to resume instantly my journey along the Mitta-Mitta to the Gibbo-range and thence to Omeo and the Bogong-mountains'. It is not known when he reached Omeo, (very few specimens in MEL collected on this trip have precise dating, and some have inferred months attributed to them in the absence of dates added by M, AVH acessed 31 July 2023). It is not clear whether M wrote the letter from Lake Omeo referred to in the following paragraph on 29 January, nor is it known how M could have learned that the vessel had not arrived by 29 January.

It would be fatal if it should have been wrecked because the other ship, with which I sent the second half of the reprints, ran aground near Sidney where everything was lost.

9

Sydney? Neither the vessel that ran aground nor that which had not arrived by 29 January has been identified.

Mueller's letter is dated from the interior from Lake Omeo, having ascended, not without danger, the alpine peaks of the Bogong range, which no-one had yet scaled.

10

M was in fact prevented by raging bushfires from scaling the main peaks of the Bogong Range on this occasion—he did so when he returned to area, later in the same year—but he climbed several other peaks in the vicinity.

From there he intended to go to Gippsland to visit the Mitchell River area and climb Mount Wellington.

11

Heavy rain when he reached Gippsland deterred M from attempting Mt Wellington until his next expedition, later that year.

He had again collected many plants in the mountains that are found in Van Diemen's Land. In April he intended to be back in Melbourne again, so that if everything succeeds well, I can expect another letter soon.

Next I will send another part manuscript, Hampe and C. Müller

12

Müller & Hampe (1853).

have identified the mosses of the last journey, which contain many interesting and new things. I have finished most of the algae and want to add them right away. Then I will also send you the 5 Thaler for the Mexican plants; I have no paper money in the house at the moment.