Documentation

Letters

-Search for letters
-Search in texts

Manuscripts

Editions

Links

Contact

C18

Link: linnaeus.c18.net/Letter/L0185 • Carl Linnaeus to Albrecht von Haller, 8 June 1737 n.s.
Dated Jun. 8 1737. Sent from Hartecamp (Netherlands) to GŲttingen (Germany). Written in Latin.

Viro Celeberrimo,
ALB[ERTO] HALLERO,
Professore [sic] Bot[anices] Gottingens[ium],[1]
Soc[io] Sci[entiarum] Reg[iae] Suec[iae],
S[alutem] pl[urimam] d[icit]
Carolus Linnaeus.

Tot Tantisque me cumulas beneficiis, ut quo me vertam nescio, et ego aliquando me gratum praestabo, ni nimis cito moriar. Accepi Dissertationes, Programma, &c., omnia a Domino Chatelain.[2] Distribui omnes dissertationes. Grates agunt omnes dignissimas. AlbinusAlbinus, Bernhard Siegfried
(1697-1770). German. Professor of
anatomy at Leiden.
, dum ante octiduum hic me visitaret per diem, Te optime nosse retulit; D[ominus] Gaubius etiam. Si ad Te non pervenere mea missa, per WaesbergiosWaesberge, (?-?). Dutch. cum curru publico, quaeso, adhuc moneas et e novo mittam. Scripsi ad Waesbergios de ea re, cum nec LudwigioLudwig, Christian Gottlieb
(1709-1773). German. Physician.
Professor of medicine in Leipzig. One of
Linnaeusís early opponents.
Correspondent of Linnaeus.
, quae eadem hora transmisi, reddita sint.

Scias nullos in orbe majores Bibliopolis esse nebulones, isti nec reciperent nisi velles exspectare praemium usque dum divenditi sint. Hic in Belgio non magni aestimatur Botanica, nec a studiosis, nec ab aliis, ratio clara est. Quaesivi apud aliquos, sed nullus adhuc haec in se suscipere voluit.

Utinam mihi Tua constaret methodus! Lubentissime communicarem, si quas haberem observationes Tibi dignas. An sub diangiis comprehendas & Pediculares & Saxifragias? Nonne distinguas biloculares & bicapsulares? Certe debes!

Diangiae Tibi erunt, ni fallor, genera omnia in Didynamia Angiospermia nostra enumerata. Ista constituunt classem naturalem, nec excludi debent ulla. Dubius tamen adhuc sum de selagine & limosella, sed iis addi debent Veronica, Paederota, Clandestina, Pinguicula, Lentibularia, Verbena, Collinsonia, an Morina? (An Protea, Dipsacus, Scabiosa, Globularia?) Certe Coris, Belladonna, Mandragora, Nicotiana, Hyoscyamus, Lonicera nostra, Diervilla, Mirabilis, Ruellia. Inquiras dein, num sufficienter distinguantur hae a verticillatis. Considera, quot notae communes cum praedictis habeant verticillatae in calyce, staminibus, petalis, pistillis, eorum figura, situ, structura, quibus differunt ab aliis in universum omnibus, an conveniunt cum Diangiis. Dein, num unica nota distinguens sufficiat resecare, quas tot connectunt, considera verbenas et alias, quae conjungunt has classes. Loquor Tecum uti cum Botanico, qui solas classes naturales quaerit. An ab his Valerianae separandae? Perpendas Valerianellas. Vellem certe videre, quo Salicarias referas. An ad Cassias, Bauhinas, Siliquestra?

Dum Tu vides, ego me caecum fateor. Perplacet observatio de Clathroide. Doleo me non examinare potuisse minima. Gratissima est observatio de farina equiseti elastica. Ego nil scio in imperfectis. Num sint semina vel farina antherarum, quae video, me nescire fateor. Dehiscit capsula equiseti exacte, ut anthera. Taxi flores duplices, quosTournefort de, Joseph Pitton
(1656-1708). French. Botanist and
explorer, professor of botany at Paris.
Tournefortius recensuit, non vidi. Quid sibi velit genitura absque ovo, non capio. Ergo nec theoriamDillenius, Johann Jacob
(1684-1747). German/British. Studied at
Giessen. Sherardian professor of botany
at Oxford. Correspondent of Linnaeus.
Dillenii de farina antherarum, absque pistillo. Farina ista in Marchantia mihi non videtur antheris constare. Omnis anthera dehiscit, nec credo umquam, quod farina ista sit semen, ovum,[a][a] : MS1 [added above the line] sed genitura, cum isti orbiculi in calicibus certo certius crescunt, et seminum vices gerunt. Si in Marchantia orbiculi isti vera semina, utique et peltati et radicati ac pedunculati isti calices masculinos proferant flores, et flava ista corpora antherarum farina erunt, si hoc in Lichene, annon idem in Muscis proprie dictis?

BurmannusBurman, Johannes (1707-1779).
Dutch. Botanist, professor of medicine
in Amsterdam. Close friend of Linnaeus.
Correspondent of Linnaeus.
adhuc aegrotat. ColumnaColonna, Fabio (1567-1650).
Italian. Botanist, painter and engraver.
hic non haberi potest; emitur horrendo pretio in auctionibus, si prostet, uti praecedenti anno. Si in Sueciam pervenero, forte Tibi Columnam comparare possum. CliffortiusClifford, George (1685-1760).
Dutch. Banker and merchant in Amsterdam,
Linnaeusís benefactor. Owner of
Hartecamp and its botanical garden
outside Haarlem. Correspondent of
Linnaeus.
ipse Columnam non habet. Caesalpinam reperire non potui. Ille mihi maxime placet, ejusque breves descriptiones, quibus discedit ab omnibus aliis, tamen semper habet aliquid singulare.

Bacciferas absolute expunges. Vides calycem baccam in Moro, Morocarpo, Ephedra, receptaculum annulare in Taxo, receptacula communia in Fragaria. Item et in Rosa N[ota] B[ene] vides Baccam siccam in Ulmo, Amygdalo, Juglande, Strobilum, [b][b] : MS1 [added above the line] Conum in Anona, etc.

Filago ab Elichryso certe nullo modo distingui potest a sano. Hieracium ab Hieracoide dubius fere sum. Si Taraxacon, Hieracium, Hypochoeridem distinguas & Hieracoidem distinguere potes,[c][c] : MS1 <potest> potes si vero has omnes conjungas, non paradoxon introduceres. Ego sub jacceis comprehendo Centaurium majus, Cyanos, Calcitrapam, Calcitrapoides, Rhaponticon, Rhaponticoides, Amberboi, &c., uno verbo omnes, quae gaudent radio sterili, cum calycis figura nunquam limites admittat, et corona seminum falsissimas det divisiones. Classe a Carduis distingui absolute non debent, cum tam prope accedant, ut vix distingui queant. Carduus galactites J. B. flore gaudet Jaceae. Cynarocephalarum genera omnia in VaillantioVaillant, Sébastien
(1669-1722). French. Botanist and
surgeon. Professor at the Jardin des
plantes. His theory on plant sexuality
influenced Linnaeus who regarded
Vaillant as one of the most important
botanists.
bona sunt, nec unquam genere naturali distingui debent excepto Xeranthemo, quod ad elichrysa propius accedere mihi videtur.

Petasites, Cacalia, Elichrysum, Conyza, Eupatorium, Senecio, Absinthum, Artemisia, Santolina, Abrot[anum], Gnaphal[ium], Tanacetum, cum radiatis misceri debent, Carlina autem a radiatis expungi.

Cur -oides displiceat? Quia est asylum ignorantiae. Botanici recentiores vix alia nova introduxere nomina, quam in[d][d] : MS1 [added above the line] -oides desinentia. Adeoque si mille mihi ostendebantur nova genera modo addito -oides, extemplo omnia nomina absolverem. Vidisti forte abusum apud recentiores. Non amo nomina caudata; caudae obruunt & confundunt memoriam, e[xempli] gr[atia] Alsine, Alsinoides Raj[i], Alsineta D[illenii], Alsinastrum Vai[llantii], Alsinastroides Kr[ameri] Alsinastriformis Pluk[enetii], Alsinanthenos [sic] [Raj[i], Alsinanthemum Kr[ameri]Kramer, Johann Andreas
(1710-1777). German. Chemist and
physician, member of the scientific club
in Leiden of which Linnaeus was
president.
. Possis haec nomina distincta tenere? Ego non possum haec et similia, annon abusus?

Cur Rapunculum diangium et Lychnidem triangiam Rapunculoides vel Lychnideam?

Quia genera naturalia servanda erint, nec liceat ob unicam partem differentem novum introducere genus. Botanicus omnis, qui genus constituit, characterem essentialem inquirere debet.

Loculamentorum numerus non absolute distinguit genera. Vidisti hoc ipse in Ruta, Evonymo, Moschatellina, Orobanthoide, etc. Qui defendis Classes naturales et genera naturalia adhuc magis nullus dubito, minus enim damni adfertur Botanicae ex classibus non naturalibus, quam ex generibus non naturalibus. Dein, si genera distincta sint, cur non quoque bene distinctum nomen, cur non Cerasa Prunoidem, Malum Pyroidem, &c? An sic veteres? Adeamus regnum animale. Dicamus Anatem Anseroidem, Cygnum Anserastrum, vel fingas in regno animali simile, ubi praejudicia non vexant. Certe risum tenere non valui, dum videbam Botanicem quendam constituisse novum genus ob solum nomen, Convolvuloidem a Convolvulo ob caulem erectum!

Post 14 dies meam Criticam mittam.[3] Quaeso, interim scribas, num mea priora, uti Genera,[4] Floram Lapp[onicam],[5] Musam,[6] &c. acceperis vel non. Alias mittam simul e novo. Scio te ab innovatione Nominum esse alienum. Scio Te proxime scripturum contra. Videntur mihi Botanici ne tetigisse doctrinam nominum, adeoque adhuc non incepisse tractare istam Botanices partem. Si colligas omnia nomina generica a Tournefortiano tempore in hunc diem mutata, mille plura erunt, licet insensibile introducta. Quae causa innovationum nominum? Certe nullam aliam concipio quam quod leges, secundum quae confici debeant et defendi, datae non sint. Omnia nomina specifica falsa esse, certo certius est. Alia certe videbit serior aetas. Si specifica mutari debent, cur non et hoc tempore simul generica falsa? Authoritatibus ab[e][e] : MS1 [added above the line] antiquis receptis nunquam subscribent futuri in libera republica Botanici, cum retineamus nomina sesquipedula, Monolasiocallenomonophyllorum, Hypophyllocarpodendrum, cur barbara, cur caudata, cur hybrida?

Quantum ex Dissertatione Tua divinare licet, videris mihi adversarius Botanicorum, qui varitates pro speciebus obtrudunt. Utinam esses, quem[f][f] : MS1 [read quo] vellem! Utinam Tecum loqui possem per diem! Utinam Te in hoc argumento a meis haberem partibus, cum scio omnes Botanici alii mihi adversarii in hoc argumento erint. Si Michelii species sunt verae, nec varietates ex maxima parte, certe ego hoc die vellem 5 000 novarum specierum exhibere. Philosophia Botanica neglecta concessit hanc Phantasiam Botanicis.

Trollium refers ad Populaginem. Debet associari Helleboris. Confer nectaria essentialem characterem, uti Adonis a Ranunculo solis nectariis, sic et Populago ab Helleboris.

Examines adhuc has plantas.

In meis generibus deleas, quaeso, Melianthum, cuius characterem fallacem dedi. Debui enim examinare flores nondum explicatos, quos hyems delevit. Mox praestabo alium propediem.

Immortales gratias pro tot raris plantis, quas promisisti. Utinam eas haberem! Quot stamina & pistilla in Aphyllanthe, quot in Tribuloide T[ournefortii]? An mas et femina in Salicornia, et quot stamina et pistilla?

Ex Mus[eo] Cliff[ortiano], Jun[ii] 8 1737, festinanti calamo.

upSUMMARY

Linnaeus thanks Albrecht von Haller for all his kind deeds. He received the dissertations, the Programma by Chatelain and he distributed all the dissertations. Bernhard Siegfried Albinus spent a day with Linnaeus a week ago and said that he was well acquainted with Haller; so did Hieronymus David Gaub. Linnaeus sent something to Haller through the Waesbergs. He wants to know if he has received it yet. He wrote to the Waesbergs about the problem, since he sent something to Christian Gottlieb Ludwig at the same time and he has not received it.

Linnaeus considers booksellers the greatest villains in the world. They donít want to pay until the books are sold. In Holland botanical works are not appreciated.

Linnaeus wishes to know Hallerís method. He wants to know if Haller classifies the Pediculares and Saxifraga among the Diangae, if he distinguishes biloculares from bicapsulares; he should! He thinks that Hallerís Diangae genera have been classified as Didynamia Angiospermia by Linnaeus. They constitute a natural class, but he is doubtful about Selago and Limosella. But should Veronica, Paederota, Clandestina, Pinguicula, Lentibularia, Verbena, Collinsonia and perhaps Morina be added to them or Protea, Dipsacus, Scabiosa, Globularia? But certainly Coris, Belladonna, Mandragora, Nicotiana, Hyoscyamus, his Lonicera, Diervilla, Mirabilis, Ruellia. He wants Haller to consider if these are distinguishable from the Verticillatae and how many characters Verticillatae have in common with the above mentioned in the calyx, stamens, petals, pistils, in the form, situation, structure. He wants to know if they agree with Hallerís Diangiae. He wants him to consider the Verbenae and others which combine these classes. Should Valerianae be separated from these? What about the Valerianellae? The Salicariae, are they referred to the Cassiae, the Bauhiniae and the Siliquestra?

Linnaeus is pleased wih Hallerís description of Clathroides and with his observation of the pollen of Equisetum. He confesses that he does not know whether it is the seed or the dust of the anthers that he sees. He has not seen the two kind of flowers in Taxus described by Joseph Pitton de Tournefort. He does not understand Johann Jakob Dilleniusís theory of the dust of the anthers without a pistil. The dust of Marchantia does not seem to be anthers. He does not believe that the dust is an egg, but of a fecundating nature. The small disks growing in the calyces perform the function of the seed. If the small disks of the Marchantia are the seed and those calyces bear masculine flowers and the yellow thing is the dust of the anthers, and if this is the case in Lichen, is it not the same in mosses?

Johannes Burman is still ill. It is impossible to buy Colonna; it is very expensive. If he comes to Sweden he might be able to buy Colonna for Haller. Linnaeus has not seen the work of Andrea Cesalpino.

Haller should expungate the Bacciferae. Linnaeus wants him to consider the calyx a berry in Morus, Morocarpus, Ephedra, etc.

No sensible man can distinguish Filago from Elichrysum. He is doubtful about Hieracium from Hieracoides. If one distinguishes Taraxacon, Hieracium and Hypochoeris, one can do the same with Hieracoides. But if you join all together, you would not introduce a paradox. Linnaeus includes Centaurium majus, Cyanus Calcitrapa, Calcitrapoides, Rhaponticum, Rhaponticoides, Amberboi in Jacea. They should not be distinguished as a class from the Carduus. Carduus galactites I.B. has the flower of a Jacea. All genera of Cynarocephala of Sébastien Vaillant are good and should not be distinguished as natural genera, except Xeranthemum, which seems closer to Elychrysa.

Petasites, Cacalia, Elichhrysum, Conyza, Eupatorium, Senecio, Absinthum, Artemisia, Sannolina, Abrotanum, Gnaphalium, Tanacetum should be referred to Radiati; Carlina, however, should be expunged from them.

Linnaeus is displeased with the botanists who use the ending -oides too much, for instance Alsine, Alsinoides of John Ray, Alsinella of Dillenius, Alsinastrum of Vaillant, Alsinastroides of Johann Kramer, Alsinastriformis of Leonhard Plukenet, Alsinanthenos of Ray and Alsinanthemum of Kramer.

Why Rapunculum diangium and Lychnis triangia, Rapunculoides or Lychnidea? The natural genera ought to be kept entire and one should not introduce a new genus because of only one different part.

The number of loculares does not distinguish the genera as can be seen in Ruta, Euonymus, Moshatellina, Orobantoides, etc. Less injury is done to Botany with artificial classes than artificial genera. Why should names not be distinct if the genera are, e.g. Cerasa Prunoides, Malus Pyroides, etc? Compare the animal kingdom: Anas Anseroides, Cygnus Anseraster. Linnaeus could not help laughing when he saw a botanist make up a name Convolvuloides from Convolvulus because of its upright stem.

Linnaeus will send Haller his Critica botanica and wants to know if he has received his Genera plantarum, Flora Lapponica, Musa Cliffortiana, etc. He knows that Haller is against the change of names. Botanists seem to have neglected the doctrine of nomenclature. More than a thousand names have been changed since TournefortÕs time. All specific names are incorrect and if the specific names require correction why not change the incorrect generic ones at the same time. Future botanists will not accept half-a-yard long names like Monolasiocallenomonophyllum or Hypophyllocarpodendrum only because they are confirmed by antiquity.

From Hallerís dissertation Linnaeus understood that he dislikes botanists who force varieties on us instead of species. Linnaeus would like to have Hallerís support, since all other botanists are against him. If Pietro Micheliís species are genuine and not only varieties, Linnaeus could show 5,000 new species.

Haller refers Trollius to Populago, but it should be referred to Helleborus. Just as Adonis is different from Ranunculus in their nectaries only, Populago differs from Hellerborus. Linnaeus wants Haller to erase Melianthus from his genera.

He is very grateful for the rare plants, which he has been promised. He wants to know how many stamens and pistils are in Aphyllantes and in Tournefortís Tribuloides. Are the two sexes separate in Salicornia and how many stamens and pistils?

upMANUSCRIPTS

a. original holograph (© Musťe royal de Mariemont, Belgium, Aut. 1070). [1] [2] [3] [4]

upEDITIONS

1. Epistolarum ab eruditis viris ad Alb. Hallerum scriptarum I-VI (1773), vol. 1
2. Collectio epistolarum (1792), p. 11-16 .
3. A selection (1821), vol. 2, p. 252-260   p.252  p.253  p.254  p.255  p.256  p.257  p.258  p.259  p.260.
4. Vie de Linnť (1832), vol. 2, p. 92- .

upTEXTUAL NOTES

a.
MS1 [added above the line]
b.
MS1 [added above the line]
c.
MS1 <potest> potes
d.
MS1 [added above the line]
e.
MS1 [added above the line]
f.
MS1 [read quo]