Between Calcutta and Kew: The Divergent Circulation and Production of Hortus Bengalensis and Flora Indica

Khyati Nagar*

This paper explores the divergent production and circulation of botanical knowledge between the ’s Calcutta Botanical Garden and its main centre for botanical data collection at the Royal Botanical Gardens at Kew in the early nineteenth century. Through the examples of two botanical catalogues, this paper argues that the networks of com- munication were not entirely controlled by powerful administrators in the Metropole and that the independent production of scientific knowledge in the colonies inhibited the global flow of scientific information. As the director of Kew Gardens, Sir (1743–1820) presided over a vast colonial network of botanical gardens from his private study in London. Banks was the driving force behind the founding of the Royal Institution and served as President of the Royal Society for forty-one years after being elected in 1778. But it was his involvement in Kew Gardens that led to his major role in colonial . The East India Company consulted Banks for all scientific matters concerning botanic gardens in the colonies. As a result Banks was able to influence the appointment of the Company’s first Superintendents in the botanical gardens at Calcutta ensuring that he retained direct contact between Kew and Calcutta.1 But Banks’ control was not absolute. William Carey (1761–1834), a missionary, publisher, and amateur botanist stationed in India, pointed in his intro- duction to Hortus Bengalensis, published in 1813, to an aspect of the net- work of colonial gardens that was beyond Banks’ control. He wrote,

* I am very grateful for the opportunity provided by the “Circulating Knowledge, East and West” conference organizers for presenting this paper at Halifax in July 2010. I can’t thank Bernard Lightman enough, who patiently read numerous drafts of this paper and provided intellectual and moral support to pursue this research. Many thanks also to Larry Stewart, Gordon McQuat and other referees for their comments that greatly improved this paper. Suggestions from Ann Shteir and Jonathan Topham were invaluable. 1 Richard Grove, Green Imperialism: Colonial Expansion, Tropical Island Edens and the Origins of Environmentalism, 1600–1860 (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 338. 154 khyati nagar

The labours of Tournefort, Linnæus, Smith, Jussieu, Cavanilles, D’Herritier, Gaertner, Bartonand many others deserving of notice, either never made their appearance, or would have appeared in a form very different, and probably much inferior to that in which they are now published, had such institutions never existed. But the Botanical Gardens and other noble collec- tions of plants in Europe could never have been brought to the perfection in which they now appear, had not public or private repositories of plants been formed in different settlements in Asia, Africa and America.2 Carey attributed the progress in European botanical research to public and private gardens in the colonies. In his introduction he went on to say that it was not absolutely necessary that the gentlemen who form smaller repositories of plants be scientific botanists. Carey advised ama- teur enthusiasts about the mode of collection and documentation as well. He asked them to number plants instead of giving names and include the vernacular name of the plant opposite the number. He stressed on the fact that vernacular names must be written by a native so as to retain the original format of the vernacular language. Carey’s intervention in the creation of a botanical catalogue thus refuted the exclusive reputation of Sir Joseph Banks. Even though Sir Joseph Banks supervised the creation of all botanic gardens in the Colonies, the circulation of knowledge about plant spe- cies was mediated by numerous plant collectors who weren’t necessarily scientifically trained botanists. While it was pertinent for Banks that the Superintendents of the gardens be trained Linnaean botanists like him, the Superintendents had the freedom to appoint plant collectors and amateur enthusiasts such as William Carey, who in this case also wrote the introductions to both Hortus Bengalensis and Flora Indica and pub- lished them without consent from Banks. These botanical catalogues were compiled by William Roxburgh (1751–1815) who worked on the manuscript for these catalogues during his appointment as the Superintendent of the East India Company’s Calcutta Botanic Garden from 1793 to 1813. Hortus Bengalensis was a one hundred and thirty page catalogue of plants docu- menting three thousand five hundred plant species growing in the Botanic Garden at Calcutta published in 1814 at Carey’s Serampore Mission press. Flora Indica was a catalogue of description of Indian plants collected by

2 William Roxburgh, William Carey, and East India Company Botanic Garden, Hortus Bengalensis, or, A Catalogue [by W. Roxburgh] of the Plants Growing in the . . . East India Company’s Botanic Garden at Calcutta. [Followed by] A Catalogue of Plants Described by Dr. Roxburgh in His MSS. Flora Indica but not yet introduced into the Botanical Garden (Seramp- ore Mission Press: 1813; 1814), iii.