Matskási István (szerk.): A Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum évkönyve 84. (Budapest 1992)

Kováts, D.: Waldstein and Kitaibel types in the Hungarian Natural History Museum in Budapest

under WALDSTEIN'S and KITAIBEL'S authorship. Thus they confirmed the generally accepted opinion of fellow botanists that WALDSTEIN was only a Maecenas, and the species were discovered and described by the botanist KITAIBEL (TUZSON 1919). GOMBOCZ (1936) and JÁVORKA (1957) already called the attention to the fact that WALDSTEIN was not only a patron of science. Later on it was also corroborated by CHRTEK & SKOCDOPOLOVÁ (1982). As JÁVORKA wrote (1957: 71-72): "Waldstein was a botanist with independent opinion, he was a competent collector, he purchased a large special library, he had a respectable plant collection and a small botanical garden. Wherever he travelled, he observed the plants and the life of forest, and he identified the plants very well." JÁVORKA wrote (1926: 435) the following: "The original specimens which the drawings were made after in Waldstein's and Kitaibel's Icones, Kitaibel gave to Waldstein, who donated them to the Czech National Museum in Prague. From most of the species a lot of specimens were left at Kitaibel, only from some species - like Euphorbia viridiflora W. et K - were the whole material sent to Waldstein and probably to Willdenow, because these are missing from Kitaibel's herbarium." GOMBOCZ (1936: 326) wrote about the Icones: "All the drawings were made, without any exception, after living plants which were sent by Kitaibel to Waldstein, who planted and grew up them with Host's help in the Belvedere Botanical Garden in Vienna. Most of the pictures were painted by János Schütz, who accompanied the authors on several trips, and spent a lot of time in the Botanical Garden in Budapest. He lived at Kitaibel's house, therefore he could immediately start to paint blossoming plants." CHRTEK & SKOCDOPOLOVÁ (1982) established on the basis of their knowledge of the WALDSTEIN collection that the plants on the sheets do not always correspond with the respective illustrations of the Icones, and stated that they could not find a plant in the Herbarium Kitaibelianum which would correspond exactly to the plants pictured in the Icones. The fact that the drawings of the Icones were made after living plants explains these differences. J. J. WINTERL, who was a professor of chemistry and botany in Budapest, published his Index Horti Botanici Universitatis Hungaricae quae Pestini est in 1788, in which the most characteristic and endemic species of the Pannon flora - about 50-60 species - appeared for the first time (PRISZTER 1969). According to GOMBOCZ (1936: 238), WINTERL'S Index could be one of the most important source of the WALDSTEIN'S and KITAIBEL'S Icones. WINTERL'S descriptions and nomenclatures were not valid, therefore the new species, which were discovered by him, in most cases appeared under WALDSTEIN'S and KITAIBEL'S, EHRHART'S, WILLDENOW'S and others' authority, who made valid descriptions and nomenclatures of these species. About 10-20 years before the publication of WALDSTEIN'S and KITAIBEL'S Icones, WINTERL had already discovered and described a lot of species. By comparing the corresponding descriptions and figures we might state that the following 32 W. et K. species appearing in the Icones under KITAIBEL'S and WALDSTEIN'S authority were previously described by WINTERL (WINTERL 1788, HABERLE 1830, GOMBOCZ 1936, PRISZTER 1969, 1972):