An Annotated Bibliography on Southeastern American Botanical Explorers Prior to 1821 by Ronald W. Gilmour A Master's paper submitted to the faculty of the School of Information and Library Science of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Library Science. Chapel Hill, North Carolina March, 1999 Approved by: ___________________________ Advisor 1 Ronald W. Gilmour. An Annotated Bibliography on Southeastern American Botanical Explorers Prior to 1821. A Master's paper for the M.S. in L.S. degree. March, 1999. 133 pages. Advisor: Jerry Saye This paper lists published sources pertaining to the lives and work of seventy individuals who contributed to early botanical knowledge of the southeastern United States. General sources, primarily biographical compilations and scientific bibliographies, are listed at the beginning of the paper, followed by entries for the individual botanists. Each entry gives name (with any variants), place and year of birth and death, location of manuscripts and plant specimens, citations for published portraits and handwriting samples, and lists any plant or fungal genera which were named for the botanist. Works both by and about each botanist are listed with annotations. Headings: Botanical-literature-Bibliography Historical-literature-Bibliography Biography-Bibliography 2 Early Southeastern Botany: An Overview The earliest explorers to describe the flora of the Southeast were not trained botanists, and were often driven by economic rather than scientific motives. Consequently, their descriptions may be colored by the desire to either promote or discourage further exploration (see especially Lindgren, 1972, cited under John Lawson). Even Thomas Harriot, the earliest visitor with what we might call “scientific credentials,” seemed more interested in defending the economic viability of New World colonies than in floristic observations. Tragically, John Tradescant the Younger, the first visitor to whom we could apply the term “botanist,” left little record of his travels in Virginia. The observations made by certain of these imperialist-explorers are sketchy and may be intermixed with such things as sightings of sea-monsters (see Thomas Glover), which impart to them a certain lack of credulity in the eyes of the modern scientist. The final decades of the seventeenth century saw the beginnings of a more systematic treatment of the Southeastern flora, with the Catalogo of John Banister standing as the region’s first “flora” (using the word in its loosest sense). Banister met an untimely death during his explorations and was unable to see to completion his planned Natural History of Virginia. This period also saw the publication of Reverend John Clayton’s letters on various topics including natural history in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London and John Lawson’s New Voyage to Carolina. The content of both of these works was kindly “summarized” (read “plagiarized”) by John Brickell in his Natural History of North Carolina. During the middle part of the eighteenth century, John Clayton (no apparent relation to the above-mentioned Reverend) wrote the first true southeastern flora. Naively, he sent the manuscript to the esteemed Gronovius at Leiden, who promptly published the work 3 under his own name, a scandal which still rankled Benjamin Smith Barton fifty years later. Mark Catesby fared rather better in terms of recognition and produced in his Natural History of the Carolinas a masterpiece both of natural history and of copperplate illustration. Antoine Simon Le Page du Pratz wrote about the vegetation of Louisiana in his Histoire de la Louisiane, mentioning the rampant timber harvesting which he feared would decimate the cypress swamps of that region. Many of the British explorers discussed above were funded largely through the efforts of two prominent men: James Petiver (1663-1718), a London apothecary, and Sir Hans Sloane (1666-1753), a physician who served for a time in Jamaica. Joseph Ewan, in his Short History of Botany in the United States, refers to the time period from 1678 to 1730 as the “Sloane epoch,” in recognition of that gentleman’s sponsorship of botany. Petiver maintained a network of correspondents in the Southeast who sent him specimens and descriptions. These included Edmund Bohun, Robert Ellis, George Franklyn, Joseph Lord, and Hannah Williams. The contributions of Petiver and Sloane are thoroughly treated in Stearn, 1970 (cited in section IA). Ewan names the period from 1730 to 1791 the “Bartram Epoch,” honoring both John Bartram, generally regarded as the first American-born botanist, and his son William, who wrote the natural history classic Travels through North & South Carolina. The wide influence of the younger Bartram is demonstrated by Ewan’s fig. 1, (opposite p. 27), which shows Bartram’s name at the center of a web of botanical contacts. Unlike his son, the elder Bartram was not a man of letters and was criticized by Peter Kalm for his failure to publish his findings. John Bartram’s name is inextricably linked with the Philadelphia area, where he created the first American botanical garden, and his Southern travels were rather poorly documented prior to the work of Francis Harper, who published the Diary of a Journey through 4 the Carolinas, Georgia, and Florida in 1942. Some of Bartram’s notes on his Floridian travels had been published in 1766, but only as an appendix to a promotional work by William Stork. During the lifetimes of the two Bartrams there was a tremendous burst of botanical activity in the new United States. Practitioners ranged from physicians who botanized in their spare time (e.g. John Brickell in Savannah and Alexander Garden in Charleston); to planters or nurserymen like John Fraser, Thomas Walter, and William Young; to Moravian missionaries such as Rosina Gambold and Samuel Kramsch. Many of the important botanists of this period were visitors from Europe, prompting occasional tirades (especially from the fervent patriot Samuel Latham Mitchill, editor of the Medical Repository), that Americans should do more to document the flora of their own country. Visiting European naturalists of this period included Louis Narcisse Baudry des Lozières, Louis Augustin Guillaume Bosc, and André Michaux from France; Luigi Castiglioni from Italy; and Johann David Schöpf from Germany. The latter two, especially, produced some travel writing that belongs on a level with that of William Bartram. John Mitchell was among the few American-born botanists active in the Southeast at this time and is author of the first American work on taxonomic theory (although this was written in Latin and published in Germany). The earliest years of the nineteenth century were characterized, inevitably, by a higher proportion of American-born botanists. There were still many European contributors to the science, notably the Frenchmen Ambroise-Marie-François-Joseph Palisot de Beauvois, Alire Raffeneau-Delile, and François André Michaux (son of André); as well as the German Frederick Pursh and the influential Portuguese statesman José Francisco Corrêa da Serra. The Americans of this time included Benjamin Smith Barton, William Baldwin, 5 Stephen Elliott, John and Lewis Leconte, Thomas Nuttall, and Lewis David von Schweinitz. While Barton did not explore extensively in the Southeast, he was very significant for his support (some would say exploitation) of Pursh and Nuttall in their travels. He also represents one of the earliest academic botanists in America, and in fact wrote what may be the earliest American botanical textbook. In this era, botany finds a home in the academic institutions, and not merely as an appendage to medical studies. This trend would reach fruition in the career of Asa Gray at Harvard. Since colonial times, Charleston had been a capitol of culture and learning in the South, although it remained a poor relation to Philadelphia (see Gifford, 1975 and Johnson, 1936, both cited in Part IA). In the early nineteenth century, largely through the efforts of the banker Stephen Elliott and his Literary and Philosophical Society, Charleston became a true center of science, boasting not only Elliott, but also J. L. E. W. Shecut, James McBride, and Governor John Drayton among its botanical practitioners. The work which I have chosen as marking a closing date for this bibliography is Elliott’s Sketch of the Botany of South Carolina and Georgia, the first volume of which bears the date of 1821, although the Sketch was issued in parts beginning in 1816 (see Ewan’s introduction to the Hafner reprint for bibliographical details). This work is thoroughly modern in its conception and execution and is based on the collections of many botanists throughout the area described (this in contrast to Walter’s more solitary endeavors). With the works of Elliott, Schweinitz, Nuttall, and Pursh, we find ourselves at the threshold of what Ewan calls the “Torrey and Gray epoch.” This part of American botanical history is considerably more familiar to most modern botanists, and was truly dominated, rather than merely exemplified, by the botanists for whom Ewan named the era. In this better-documented period, we find botany firmly entrenched as an independent 6 science in the nation’s universities. Since this time, the importance of the amateur collector has declined and the explorer/naturalist of the nation’s youth has become extinct. The nature of botanical nomenclature, with its emphasis on priority, ensures that it is still necessary for working botanists to consult the publications of their pre-nineteenth century predecessors, and their characteristic fascination with the history of their profession ensures that they take pride and pleasure in doing so. Scope and Purpose The following bibliography contains contemporary and modern published works pertaining to the early description of the flora of the Southeastern United States. Geographically, it is limited to the current boundaries of Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Florida, Georgia, North and South Carolina, and Virginia.