Colenso’s collections
|
|  Yüklə 8.28 Mb.
|
| PART 1
Colenso’s herbarium at Te Papa, Wellington Historical summary and introduction by Bruce Hamlin55 The collections of the Reverend William Colenso are possibly the most important in New Zealand systematic botany. Not only did he provide a large number of plants on which species were based, but he contributed a multiplicity of names to the flora. His extensive journeys took him to areas which had not previously been explored and certainly not collected. In some places, many years elapsed before another botanist followed him. Systematists, in nearly all groups of New Zealand plants, must consult Colenso’s work, but until recently the herbarium held by the Dominion Museum was relatively inaccessible. The entire collection, including the cryptograms, has now been put into some sort of order and it is hoped to enlist the help of specialists to identify the specimens, where this has not already been done. A catalogue of the vascular plants has been prepared, but as this does not take into account the Bryophyta, Fungi and Lichens, this account is presented to place on record the known facts concerning the collection and the steps taken to make it available to botanists.56
Writing to Cheeseman on December 25, 1882, Colenso stated: “Of specimens formerly sent to Sir W. Hooker I rarely kept specimens (duplicates), and I have no proper Herbarium.” Again, on November 9, 1883, to Cheeseman, he wrote “You wish for spns. of Carex spinirostris: unfortunately you are a little too late: I sent my last (few) to England by “Doric”. I do not collect anything largely, unless, it may be, Hepaticæ; I keep no regular Herbarium.” From this it is obvious that Colenso did not regard his collection as his herbarium. All his “specimens” went to Kew; what was retained was regarded as superfluous material of no importance. 57 It can then be taken that Colenso sent his type material to Kew and only in a few cases, at least until 1883 would he have retained any. It is notable that in spite of his statement to the contrary, there is a specimen of Carex spinirostris Col. in the herbarium, and named in his own hand (see C. vacillans Boott WELT 1213). As to the condition of the herbarium, Colenso wrote to Cheeseman on August 11, 1880, stating “In the summer I hope to have more spare time, and then I purpose going through my ferns, &c., (now in more than 40 parcels & packages! just as collected & dried during the past years).” This bulk would have increased considerably in the following years, but it seems to have been still in this state at his death. After being contracted to finish Kirk’s “Student’s Flora”, Cheeseman wrote on March 23, 1900 to George Hogben, Secretary for Education: “you will also be glad to know that I have arranged for the loan of the late Mr Colenso’s herbarium, which will doubtless prove very valuable for the identification of the numerous so-called species described by him.” The herbarium presumably reached Cheeseman some time during 1900, but before he could make any use of it he would have had to re-arrange it. Cockayne also appears to have examined the herbarium. In a notebook in the Auckland Institute and Museum (Notebook No. 3) appears a list of projected work. The first item for Thursday April 16th [1908?] reads “Dictate. Finish Colenso’s Herb.” There is no indication as to where the examination was conducted and the only evidence in the herbarium is on the sheet of Fagus truncata Col. where he has entered a comment on the back of a label. From the present condition of the herbarium, it can be surmised that the bulk of it was unlabelled. Cheeseman’s task would have included going through “more than 40 parcels & packages!” and labelling the specimens as best he could. Some of the bundles were presumably marked on the outside as to the origin of the plants contained. This must be the basis for the many labels, written by Cheeseman, bearing localities which otherwise have nothing to support his disposition. In a few cases, notes in Colenso’s hand can be found which appear to have been torn or cut from the wrapping and placed with a specimen. In the majority of cases, Colenso’s own labelling is not of the sort customary for herbarium specimens. Either no locality occurs, or it is given in a fanciful, highly personal form which is in itself unintelligible. The “localities” are frequently of the nature of personal reminders, “pet” names which he had given to favourite spots, such as “Dianella wood”, “Myrsine wood”, etc., but the context of these names is obscure. Cheeseman has avoided assigning more acceptable localities in such cases. Bagnall and Petersen (p. 431) mention that such names also occur in Colenso’s journals. In instances where the specimens have been the subjects of publications, the protologues have perhaps provided Cheeseman with data in assigning localities. Cheeseman returned the herbarium to Napier in 1904 (Annual Report 1905). As returned, the specimens were laid out on newspaper sheets, each sheet bearing a label in Cheeseman’s hand and giving his identification and any other data. If there were any Colenso authograph slips these remained with the specimens. Each species was contained in a manilla folder with its name. The folders were in three inch deep boxes measuring 12½ x 18½ inches. These boxes were white, the lid being edged in blue. The boxes were stored in wooden cabinets, each cabinet holding eight boxes. An exception to the unmounted state of the herbarium occurs in a bound volume containing specimens of ferns. This volume, approximately five inches thick, has more than 160 leaves 13 x 21 inches. Not all pages bear specimens, but the volume seems to be the only part of the herbarium which is in any way formal. Most of the species are those published by Colenso in Tasmanian Journal of Natural Science Vol. 1, 1842. The specimens are usually copious and the sheets bear neat labels giving data on name, locality, habitat and date of collection. With some of the specimens, there is a synonymy to the species. The sheets of this volume are of the same general size and quality of paper as that of the Allan Cunningham Herbarium as represented at Dominion Museum. It is possible that the book was prepared under the influence of Cunningham who had close contact with Colenso during his second visit to New Zealand. 58 After Cunningham’s death, much-lamented by Colenso, the style was apparently discontinued, largely from lack of time because of clerical and other duties. The contents of this volume are listed separately as many of the specimens are type material. They are also listed in the body of the catalogue under Cheeseman’s disposition of Colenso’s names. The greater part of the herbarium was forwarded to the Dominion Museum by the Hawke’s Bay Branch, Royal Society of New Zealand. The original intention was that the Museum should retain it for safe keeping, but at a subsequent date a suggestion was made that the herbarium should be purchased by the Museum. The basis, as suggested to Dr W. R. B. Oliver, was to be £1 per type specimen, with a minimum of £100. (Letter from H.P. Hole, Hon. Secretary, Hawke’s Bay Branch, Royal Society of New Zealand, to Dr Oliver, dated November 26, 1947.) Subsequently, the remainder of the herbarium, mostly cryptograms, was forwarded to the Museum and the sum of £200 was paid. The date of arrival of the vascular plants at Wellington has not been discovered, but they were available to V. D. Zotov who examined them in April, 1937. His task was to sort out the types where identifiable (Pers. comm.). From time to time, specimens have been extracted from the Colenso Herbarium for systematic study. These have not always been returned to the separate section maintained for this collection but have instead been placed in the main herbarium. It is hoped that most of these have been found and included in the catalogue, but there is no certainty of this. A complete search would be a major undertaking with no sure result. With this proviso, it is hoped that the catalogue is as complete as possible. Some Colenso specimens are to be found in the herbaria of Kirk, Petrie and Cockayne, all housed in the Dominion Museum. Where such specimens seem relevant, they are mentioned… . Specimens in other herbaria, such as those in the Cheeseman Herbarium in Auckland Institute and Museum, have not been consulted. It is hoped that the cryptogamic collections will be systematized and catalogued in the future. The specimens are in innumerable small paper packets, often inadequately labelled and now very fragile. Specialists in bryophytes, fungi and lichens would be required before an adequate basis can be found for such a project.
All specimens of vascular plants have now been mounted. The labels and all relevant written matter have now been attached to the sheets. For the most part, the specimens are copious and excellently preserved. Each collection is numbered with a Dominion Museum (WELT) registration number, and where more than one sheet has been necessary, the sheets have been designated A, B, C, etc. Labels are usually attached to sheet A in such a series. The number is entered in a rubber-stamp mark which identifies it on a sheet in “Herb. W. Colenso”. Nearly all specimens bear a label in Cheeseman’s handwriting. The label bears the name of the specimen as identified by Cheeseman, and such other information as could be attached, such as locality, collector and date where these are known. It is not always clear where Cheeseman got the information for the labels. The assumption is that the plants were in bundles with a general label on the outside of each bundle. Cheeseman seems to have transcribed this information on to the individual tickets, but probably left the general label on one of the specimens. This is very possibly the origin of many of the scraps of newspaper which are now found on several sheets, e.g. under Polygonum plebeium R. Br. WELT 22508. This assumption is made on analogy with the cryptogams in Colenso’s herbarium which are, in many cases, bundled in groups with a single number or brief information on the wrapping.
The arrangement of the herbarium was prepared by Cheeseman and his identifications of the specimens are in accordance with the nomenclature and classification used in his Manual of the New Zealand Flora, 1906. To avoid substantial cross-reference, the nomenclature and classification have been retained in this catalogue. This will cause some inconvenience, but it avoids the intrusion of a lot of editorial comment. The nomenclature, in particular, is very much out of date, but the index will allow users to refer to Cheeseman’s Manuals of 1906 and 1925, and through these to modern works. To have tried to bring the nomenclature up to date, would have involved the compiler in much taxonomic judgement which at best would be an expression of opinion. It is desirable that such judgements should be made by specialists. All specimens are listed, the order of entry within a species being based largely on the importance of the specimens or on the documentation. Editorial comment is confined, except in a few instances, to the interpretation of the written matter. Opinion on the systematic position of names or specimens is not deemed part of this work. On listing the specimens, the species names as given by Cheeseman are used as headings. The names do not appear again in the listings if they are only on Cheeseman’s labels. This means that where a label in Cheeseman’s handwriting is indicated by “[TFC:]”, the species name only appears on it. Where no label by Cheeseman is indicated, the specimen is placed under the species heading on the basis of Cheeseman’s disposition as given in the Manual 1906. Labels, in handwriting other than Cheeseman’s, are copied in full, including errors of spelling, etc., where these occur. This has caused some difficulty as abbreviations are freely used. The same piece of paper may also bear items written at different times. The order in which such items appear in the transcriptions is somewhat arbitrary, but will not, it is hoped, cause any difficulty. To avoid duplication, slight variations between labels have been ignored. Colenso’s training as a printer has produced problems for the editor. Printing marks appear frequently on his labels. The single underline, meaning italics to a compositor, cannot be reproduced conveniently in type. Italics have therefore been used to indicate a single underline on the labels. Similarly, a double underline, meaning small capitals, has been used. The double hyphen =, is an old style of indicating that a word, broken or carried over to the next line, is to be set in type as a single unbroken word. This double hyphen has been left in the transcriptions. 59 Fortunately, Colenso did not use brackets, [ ],60 although he used parentheses, ( ), commonly. Where recent workers have added determinative slips or comments, these are given in full or indicated. Among the most important specimens are the series of numbered specimens, the number being written on small scraps of paper, the paper being slotted and slipped in to the specimens. In nearly all cases, these are duplicates of specimens sent to Kew. The numbers correspond to those on the lists of specimens sent with Colenso’s letters to Hooker. These lists, with some of the accompanying letters, are bound and in the library of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. Photographs of these lists are in the Dominion Museum and in Botany Division, D. S. I. R., Lincoln. As there is no provenance listed on Colenso’s specimens either at Kew or in Dominion Museum, it is hoped that these lists can be published. They are essential in ascertaining the type localities for many species based on Colenso’s collections.61
The bulk of the labels are in Cheeseman’s hand on shiny paper labels. The handwriting is consistent and easily recognized. Colenso’s labels are numerous and varied in style and content, the handwriting showing change with age, with the medium… and with the purpose for which it was done. The notes may be brief, such as “Dvk” (= Dannevirke) with or without a date, or may be more or less elaborate descriptions of the habitat or characters of the specimens. They are written in both pencil and ink and in many cases are merely jottings rather than formal labels. A few specimens have been mounted on card or paper and labelled with the name, rarely with a locality. These are probably specimens presented for display at meetings of the Hawke’s Bay Philosophical Institute, (later the Hawke’s Bay Branch, Royal Society of New Zealand). The specimens have apparently not been put back with the collections from which they were selected, and their provenance is now in doubt. Other handwritings are those of collectors who sent specimens to Colenso, or of those who annotated the sheets. The commonest of these annotations are by V. D. Zotov who examined the entire collection in 1937. The annotations are all initialled and dated. A few specimens are labelled in what is believed to be the handwriting of Allan Cunningham. A comparison of these labels with those occurring in Cunningham’s herbarium in Dominion Museum tends to confirm this, although there is room for doubt. The samples of handwriting in the Colenso Herbarium are limited to identifications with the additions of a date and what appear to be the initials “A.C.” It would seem that some of these are specimens given to Colenso by Cunningham as some dates are too early for the plants to have been collected by Colenso. Specimens collected by the following people are found: Andrews, Horace Baker, W.K. Chambers, Howlett, Lascelles, Locke, P.L. Maclean, C.J. Norton, Peacock, R.W. Rowson, Sturm. No autographs of these collectors have been recognized. Collectors whose handwritings appear on labels are J. Buchanan, A. Hamilton, A. Olsen, T. Kirk, H. Suter. C.P. Winkelmann. H. Hill, who sent many specimens to Colenso, has not left any autograph which can be identified.
Labels are transcribed as accurately as possible, and all written matter is by the person whose initials precede the transcription. ________________________________________________ Catalogue of the vascular plant herbarium Clematis indivisa Willd.
C. indivisa var lobulata Kirk
Clematis indivisa var linearis
Clematis hexasepala DC
Clematis colensoi Hk. f. var.
Clematis foetida Raoul
Clematis parviflora A. Cunn.
Clematis parviflora var. trilobata Kirk
Clematis afoliata Buch.
Clematis quadribracteolata Col.
Myosurus aristatus Benth.
Ranunculus insignis Hook. f.
Ranunculus nivicola Hook.
Ranunculus geraniifolius Hk. f.
Ranunculus rivularis Banks and Sol. – [=1892=] 3941 – [=1912 swampy ground nr. Huariki Hairy stalked
– [TFC: 1912 swampy ground near Huariki] 3942 – [=1940 high ground above Ororewa Palliser Bay
– [: 4271, 4272, 4274] 24369 – [ : 4283] 24370 – [TFC: Norsewood 1883] 3944 – [TFC: Matamau, H.B. Feb. 1884] 3943
Ranunculus macropus Hook. f.
Ranunculus hirtus Banks & Sol.
|