Journal Number 92
September 2004

EDITORIAL

How could Cunningham have sent T. longifolia to Kew in 1822?
By Ian St George

Thomas Duncanson would have been remembered as an important botanical artist, had he not
had a mental breakdown [1]. But because he did, and could not publish his work, little is known
about him.

He had been a gardener at the Royal Botanical Gardens in Edinburgh, but came to Kew, and in
1822 was employed by WT Aiton drawing the new plants for Aiton's proposed second volume
of the Epitome of Hortus Kewensis. This he did for four years until his breakdown in 1826.
The three hundred illustrations he executed in that time are in the Kew collection. They are
expertly done, beautifully coloured, clear and crisp.

One watercolour in the collection makes him especially interesting for us. Number 64 is of Thelymitra longifolia. It is annotated in ink "Received in 1822 from New South Wales from Mr Cunningham" - as are a number of the illustrations (Allan Cunningham sent many plants from Australia back to Kew).

Watercolour attributed to Thomas Duncanson, but probably painted by George Bond.

In a second hand, in pencil, is "?Bond. Thelymitra forsteri? June 1823". Under this is a penciled
note in a third hand, initialed by Robert Allen Rolfe, Director of Kew at the turn of the century:

"The name written here, `Thelymitra forsteri' should refer to a New Zealand plant. The date
penciled `June 1823' should indicate the date the drawing was made - presumably from a
plant at Kew.

Allan Cunningham in Hook. Comp. Bot. Mag. ii. 376, enumerates Thelymitra forsteri Sw. as N. Zealand, Northern Island, shores of the Bay of Islands in open fern-lands - 1826, A. Cunningham.... The ink record seems to have been done later, when a large collection of such drawings was made up, probably in part from memory, and may not be correct (from various sources), for the specific name is correct, and I see no evidence of this form growing in Australia."

Rolfe was suggesting that the Thelymitra longifolia must have come from Cunningham's visit to New Zealand in the spring of 1826 rather than from New South Wales in 1823. If that were true, Duncanson had already gone mad, and the drawing must have been made, as the pencil writer queried, by his successor, George Bond - of whose drawings 1,700 remain at Kew [2].

Clements recently stated "it is doubtful if this species occurs in Australia" [3], and Jones didn't
think it did either [4]. The plant certainly looks like T. longifolia (though the vestigial middle
lobes of the column are unusual for T. longifolia).

Was it an Australian plant sent by Allan Cunningham in 1822 and painted by Duncanson when
it flowered in the English summer of 1823? if so it probably isn't T. longifolia.

Was it a NZ plant sent in 1822? if so by whom? D'Urville collected plants from NZ in 1822, but
the French were still smarting from their defeat seven years earlier at Waterloo, and it is unlikely
he sent any of his specimens to Kew. Colenso arrived in New Zealand much later, in December
1834.

Was it a NZ plant sent by Cunningham in 1826 to flower at Kew and then be painted by Bond?
That seems likely, and if so Cunningham's other plants may be similarly among the subjects
of Bond's drawings at Kew. It's an exciting possibility.

References
1. Daniels, Gilbert S. Artists from the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. Pittsburgh, Hunt Institute for Botanical
    Documentation, Carnegie-Mellon University, 1974.
2. Blunt W. The art of botanical illustration. Collins, London, 1950.
3. Clements M.A. Catalogue of the Australian Orchidaceae. Australian Orchid Research, 1989. 1: 140.
4. Jones, David L. Native orchids of Australia. French's Forest, Reed Books, 1988. p 297.