25, WILTON PLACE. S.W.
17 Decr 1872
My dear Sir
A box was sent off last week from Kew with your Coniferae and allied families as far as the box would hold. The large parcels of Cycadeae and the remaining Casuarineae and Urticeae will go in a box which I shall have made up in a few days. I have gone through the genus Ficus without waiting for the Prodromus as I find on correspondence with M. Bureau that he will scarcely begin upon the Australian and Indian ones for some months.1 I make out 33 or 34 species of which 8 are I think are identical with Archipelago species besides F. nesophila and F. Cunninghamii (Fraseri) which are perhaps varieties only of F. infectoria. I have sent the list with synonyms to M Bureau who is now regularly installed at the herbarium of the Jardin des Plantes It would be rendering a service to science if as soon as convenient after receiving back your specimens you would make up a set for the Paris Herbarium as well of Ficus and other Artocarpeae as of Casuarineae which M. Poisson of the Paris Herbarium has been studying with reference to the New Caledonian ones2
At the British Museum they have lately found the missing parcel of Brown's Thymeleae & Santalaceae I have gone them over and ascertained that we were mistaken about Browns Pimelea brevifolia. There is but a single specimen which is undoubtedly Meissner's P. modesta, and the species we called P. brevifolia must take a new name.
In Ficus I find that Dallachy had unfortunately confounded F. magnifolia and F. hispida (as he admits in later notes) and had sent you fruits of the latter with the large-leaved branches of the former, which is a Eusyce and not a Covellia
Your F. vesca appears to me to be precisely the F. glomerata Willd.
I have admitted as new and distinct species your F. colossea, F. validinervis, F. ehretioides, F. mollior, F. stenocarpa (with unisexual receptacles, the males cylindrical the females ovoid.-globose), F. fasciculata and F. casearia, besides two to which you had not given names and those which you or Miquel had already published, although I have had to suppress a good many of Miquel's
I have adopted Bureau's views as to Malaisia Cudrania Pseudomorus and Fatoua consisting each of a single species. In Trema (or Sponia) we must I think admit three Australian species — orientalis, velutina and aspera unless we unite as one species almost the whole of the Asiatic and African ones.
Celtis ingens and C. (Solenostigma) brevinervia3 Blume are certainly not different from C. paniculata. The specimens placed side by side from New Guinea Norfolk Island and Australia are identical
C. strychnoides cannot be distinguised from C. philippinensis
Your Taxotrophis rectinervis is identical with Aphananthe Philippinensis Planch.
I shall now go through the supplemental Euphorbiaceae Thymeleae etc and then begin upon Orchideae — but two days in the week are taken up with proofs of Genera Plantarum4
Yours very truly
George Bentham
Baron F. v. Mueller
Aphananthe Philippinensis
Artocarpeae
Casuarineae
Celtis brevinervis
Celtis ingens
Celtis paniculata
Celtis philippinensis
Celtis strychnoides
Coniferae
Cudrania
Cycadeae
Euphorbiaceae
Fatoua
Ficus casearia
Ficus colossea
Ficus Cunninghamii
Ficus ehretioides
Ficus fasciculata
Ficus Fraseri
Ficus glomerata
Ficus hispida
Ficus infectoria
Ficus magnifolia
Ficus mollior
Ficus nesophila
Ficus sect. Covellia
Ficus sect. Eusyce
Ficus stenocarpa
Ficus validinervis
Ficus vesca
Malaisia
Orchideae
Pimelea brevifolia
Pimelea modesta
Pseudomorus
Santalaceae
Solenostigma brevinervia
Sponia aspera
Sponia orientalis
Taxotrophis rectinervis
Thymeleae
Trema orientalis
Trema velutina
Urticeae
Please cite as “FVM-72-12-17,” in Correspondence of Ferdinand von Mueller, edited by R.W. Home, Thomas A. Darragh, A.M. Lucas, Sara Maroske, D.M. Sinkora†, J.H. Voigt† and Monika Wells accessed on 22 September 2023, https://epsilon.ac.uk/view/vonmueller/letters/72-12-17