Abstract
Francesco Cupani, a pre-Linnaean Sicilian botanist, would have liked to produce a volume of “Natural History” of Sicily. Since 1692 he had been preparing the drawings and the engravings that were destined to constitute the illustrations of Panphyton Siculum. This particularly ambitious work was not completed partly because of the author’s premature death. During the eighteenth century a number of attempts were made to complete and publish this work, but none succeeded. The various exemplars of these limited trial editions were made up of collections of variously collated printed papers with differences of layout and content. At present, few exemplars of Panphyton are known to exist. The aim of this article is to indicate the presence in the Civica and A. Ursino Recupero joint Libraries of Catania of a hitherto unregistered four-volume copy, which reveals significant handwritten annotations. The comparison with the one volume edition, which is kept in the same library, with the one volume edition in the Palermo Municipal Library and with that of the Catania Regional University Library allows us to eliminate the uncertainties of the literature concerning a hypothetical Panphyton in four volumes. Moreover, it provides us with useful elements for reconstructing the history of the book after Cupani’s death. This copy is of particular importance in that it constitutes documentary proof of the re-elaboration of Cupani’s work on the part of Antonio Bonanno, his pupil, in an attempt to bring about its definitive publication.
Introduction
The present work must be placed in the context of a research project the aim of which is to judge the influence of Francesco Cupani on eighteenth century Sicilian botany. In previous papers (Pulvirenti, Costa, and Pavone Citation2015; Pulvirenti et al. 2015) we investigated this pre-Linnaean botanist, placing him in the cultural panorama of his time. When he travelled around the natural habitats of his island, he did not study only plants, but was also interested in animals and minerals. In fact, it was his intention to produce a natural history of Sicily: Panphyton Siculum. This particular ambitious work was not completed both because of the difficulties encountered in the course of the realization and because of the author’s premature death.
The specific aim of this article is to compare the copies of Panphyton Siculum (Figure A) that are kept in the Regional University Library, in the Civica and A. Ursino Recupero joint Libraries (both of Catania) and in the Palermo Municipal Library, among the manuscripts. In particular, the object is to make a contribution to the knowledge of the events linked to the spread of Panphyton Siculum with the announcement of the rediscovery of a copy in four volumes (mentioned in the literature of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries but of which there was no trace for two centuries) found among the Cupani papers in the possession of the Civica and A. Ursino Recupero joint Libraries of Municipality of Catania.
Figure 1. (A) Title page of the 1713 edition. (B) Plate 213/II of exemplar in Catania Regional University Library. (C, D) comparison between plates 436/III of exemplar in Catania Civica and A. Ursino Recupero joint Libraries (copy in four volumes) and 120/II of exemplar in Catania Regional University Library.
Francesco Cupani’s Panphyton Siculum is a collection of engravings of plants, animals and minerals, provided with polynominal denominations, and presented without any expository order (Figure B).
We are speaking of a work of which there are few exemplars of the 1713 edition (made up of several hundred plates, each with a different number). Regarding the edition of 1719, there are a few fragments (made up of a few dozen sheets) and about 30 copies of the one volume.
Panphyton, with its complex history, has been studied on several occasions by numerous naturalists (Brocchi Citation1822; Scinà Citation1824; Bertoloni Citation1829a; Maccagnone Citation1833; Mira Citation1873; Lanza Citation1927). In 2003 the Sicilian Region sponsored the publication of the reproduction of one of the two copies in the possession of the Palermo Regional Library (the more complete one, in three volumes). In this work we find a table that compares the plates of the copies present in Palermo (the Regional Library A/B and the Municipal Library, a copy in two volumes of the 1713 edition) and the plates of the Catania Regional Library (Pastena, Anselmo, and Zimmardi Citation2003; Greuter Citation2004).
No complete analysis of the specimens shown exists. Priolo (Citation1996) was responsible for the taxonomy of the birds. Massa (Citation2009) limited himself to a review of some particularly significant animal species. There is no complete taxonomic picture of the vegetables, even if there are numerous contributions concerning single species (Troia 1997; Wearn and Mabberley Citation2009; Raimondo and Spadaro Citation2012). Bernardino da Ucria used the iconography of Panphyton for his studies (Bernardino da Ucria 1793) and Gussone made continual references to the pictures of Panphyton in his works (Gussone 1842–1844).
The presence in the libraries of Catania of remains connected with Cupani induces us to verify the reasons, the period of time and the routes that brought such rare materials to Catania and the scientific use that has been made of them in the course of nearly three centuries. This study is useful for reconstructing the stages of the development of botanical science in modern day Sicily. It allows us to verify the influence of Cupani in the formation of Sicilian botanical thought at the time of the turning point of Linnaeus’ innovations and during the successive phases of positivism.
Here we will limit ourselves to making a contribution to the history of the materials and their use as a significant indication of the evolution of local scientific interests in relation to the cultural processes of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.
Methodology
In preparing the text of this article we consulted Cupani’s works, in particular the methodological premises in which the realization of Panphyton is announced.
We examined the bibliographical references from which it was possible to deduce useful elements for the reconstruction of the various changes of ownership of the printed material, the manuscripts and the exsiccata, which are present in the public libraries of Catania and which are attributed to Cupani.
We consulted and compared the copies of Panphyton which are kept in:
| • | Catania Regional University Library, | ||||
| • | Catania Civica and A. Ursino Recupero joint Libraries, | ||||
| • | Palermo Municipal Library (one-volume edition), | ||||
| • | Palermo Regional Library (three-volume edition). | ||||
In addition we compiled two synoptic tables in which, to make it easier to refer to the volumes, the copies studied were indicated thus:
| • | Catania Regional University Library: BRU (copy in two volumes), | ||||
| • | Catania Civica and A. Ursino Recupero joint Libraries: BCUR – 1 (copy in one volume) and BCUR – 2 (copy in four volumes), | ||||
| • | Palermo Municipal Library: BCP (copy in one volume), | ||||
| • | Palermo Regional Library: BCRS-A (copy in three volumes). | ||||
Table summarizes the correspondence between the plates in BCUR – 1, BCUR – 2 (first volume) and BCP. Table indicates the correspondence between the plates in BCUR – 2, BRU and BCRS-A.
Table 1. Correspondence between the plates in BCUR–1, BCUR–2 (first volume) and BCP.
Table 2. Correspondence between the plates in BCUR–2, BRU and BCRS-A.
Discussion
Panphyton Siculum: the “never issued” book
Cupani, in the introductions to his writings, announced the preparation of a work that would be an illustrated catalogue of vegetables, animals and minerals. He gave his readers accurate information about the phases of its realization. In the conclusive note of the Syllabus plantarum Siciliae nuper detectarum (Cupani Citation1695) he announced for the first time his plan for an iconographic publication (Panphyton Siculum) and also announced that the drawings of the specimens marked in the text with “sc” (sculpta) had been engraved on copper plates. In Hortus Catholicus, cum supplemento ad eundem Hortum (1696) we find the second announcement of Panphyton as a complete work containing detailed information about each plant, with the distinction between those collected and described for the first time by Cupani himself and those already described by other authors. The Franciscan botanist declared, moreover, that for every plant he would specify its denomination (according to the indications of C. and J. Bauhin, R. Morison), its place of origin, its curative powers, its etymology, the synonyms in Latin, its vernacular name, its celestial sign, its dominant star and the time at which it should be collected. In addition, he gave precise information about the progress of the printing of the work, pointing out that nearly 600 plates, out of the 800 planned, had been engraved, with an extraordinary commitment in favour of the correction of the engraver’s work. Lastly, in the Supplementum alterum ad Hortum Catholicum (Cupani Citation1697) we find more information. To be precise, in the prologue to the reader, he wrote that more than 800 plates had been engraved, that he hoped “God willing” to complete the work in a few months and that he intended to insert the descriptions of the graphic representations according to the methodological plan that he had described in Hortus Catholicus (Cupani Citation1696).
The work was, however, particularly demanding both because it was meant to be a “general natural history” (while the author was, in practice, in possession of botanical materials and knowledge), and because of the difficulties encountered in the course of the engravings.
Cupani himself, as is clear from the introductions, implied that his writings were only a foretaste of the great work that he was preparing. In this sense, the exchanges of seeds and of exsiccata, as well as the acquisition of printed works, which he arranged by corresponding with famous contemporary botanists, were preliminary instruments for the realization of Panphyton.
Cupani’s ambition was to compete with the writers of the great illustrated works that were circulating in Europe and that made possible the correctness of plant names, without the need for recourse to the complex technique of the exchange of exsiccata or of seed cultivation. The whole scientific community was awaiting the edition, above all because he had announced the presence of a huge quantity of pictures. Because of the difficulties of communication of the time, some, also on the basis of erroneous indications on the part of Mongitore (Citation1707), were convinced that the work had already been issued (Brocchi Citation1822).
In reality, Cupani did not succeed in completing the work because he died prematurely in 1710.
After his death, the Prince of Cattolica found himself with a serious problem. For 20 years he had invested in botanical research and in the preparation of a work that should have been famous all over Europe. Although not in possession of the accounts, we must suppose that the costs were enormous. Cupani in his writings made some references to the hard work of herborization, exchange of exsiccata, drawing and reproduction on copper plates to which he had devoted the last 20 years of his life. For this the Prince had invested large sums of money. The contemporary examples, in Europe, of similar works were the result of scientific investments promoted by universities, important religious institutions and royal courts. In this case, in contrast, one patron supported one researcher in the pursuit of a project of extraordinary dimensions. As often happens in the case of such demanding enterprises, the death of the scholar in question put an end to the project. Instead, probably because of the Prince’s desire, the plates that had already been engraved were printed in 1713 in Palermo by Antonino Epiro’s press.
Later, the Prince, in possession of an inheritance of such precious material (which, however, still needed a long process of arrangement) tried to complete the operation. In fact, he decided to entrust Antonino Bonanno, the son of Vincenzo (who collaborated with Cupani), with the continuation of the work and handed over to him the manuscripts of the Franciscan botanist and the copper engravings.
Bonanno was a druggist and, probably, was interested in the possible profits deriving from the results of the great work in which he too possibly had taken part. He undertook the job, revising and completing the nomenclature of the specimens, which were drawn on the plates of Panphyton (Bivona Bernardi Citation1806; Brocchi Citation1822).
The Prince considered the publication of this work very urgent. He realized that European botanical science was making rapid strides and that the great work that had been carried out for many years ran the risk of becoming obsolete. In 1719, the first volume of Panphyton, revised by Bonanno, was published. It contains 187 plates (in reality the last one is numbered 198 but 11 are missing) of the first edition with the polynomial nomenclature completed and/or modified.
Once again, however, it was not possible to complete the work because Bonanno died in 1719 (Bertoloni Citation1829a).
The Prince himself died in 1721 without any direct heirs.
The copies printed in 1719 have no title page and are different from the originals because they are printed on both sides of each sheet (Pastena, Anselmo, and Zimmardi Citation2003).
Of this edition, which is thought to be limited to about 30 copies (Bertoloni Citation1829a), there are at present about 10 on the web and in the possession of libraries in every part of the world. It is certain that there are other, on-line unregistered copies, such as, for example, those present in Sicilian libraries.
The transfer of the Cupani’s material from Palermo to Catania
The transfer of the Caruso’s material
In addition to the Cupani papers that were handed over to Bonanno for the continuation of the work, some were kept by Giambattista Caruso, a learned scholar of great distinction who frequented the Prince’s court in Palermo. In 1755 the urge to found a large library on the part of the University of Catania led to the acquisition of Caruso’s library (Bosco Citation2012), with the works and material that it contained, including a copy of Panphyton and a collection of dried plants that was attributed to Cupani. (Scinà Citation1824; Pulvirenti et al. 2015). It was, obviously, an “involuntary” transfer from Palermo to Catania due to the purchase en bloc of all the material, as can be gathered from the documents, which are kept in the Archives of the Archdiocese of Catania. The copy of Panphyton is still in the Catania Regional University Library whereas the herbarium was entrusted in 1912 to the Director of the (then) Botanical Institute, Prof. Luigi Buscalioni (Pulvirenti et al. 2015).
This copy of Panphyton, often considered the most complete, was never the object of any particular attention on the part of the botanists of Catania of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. It is mentioned by almost all the Cupani scholars without any particular comment.
The transfer of the Bonanno’s material
The history of the copy of Panphyton which was passed on to Bonanno, on the other hand, turned out to be much more troubled and mysterious than that of the copy in the possession of Caruso, which was subsequently transferred to the Catania University Library.
After Bonanno’s death in 1719, the Cupani papers were inherited by the Chiarelli family (Bivona Bernardi Citation1806).
The Chiarelli family, made up of the father, Giuseppe (a chemist), his son Francesco Paolo (demonstrator at the Palermo University since 1805 and responsible for the Museum of Natural History) and his son Stefano (chemist and apothecary), was an important point of reference for the scientific culture of eighteenth century in Palermo. Inventors, chemists and natural science scholars were related to Bonanno and, thanks to this connection, had come to possess some of the Cupani papers. In fact, the Chiarellis themselves declared that they “jealously guarded” a copy of Panphyton Siculum in four volumes that had belonged to Bonanno together with “a draft description of the vegetable kingdom”; this latter is a collection of handwritten notes in 16 volumes with the analytical descriptions of the plants represented in the same volume (Pasqualino Citation1785; Chiarelli Citation1789). In spite of repeated promises, the Cupani and Bonanno documents were never published. Certainly the enormous cost (in terms of scientific work and of money) of the work could not be borne by a family of apothecaries in the absence of patrons or public support. At the same time other reasons cannot be ruled out. While the scientific value of Cupani’s research diminished, a significant professional and commercial value of the information contained in the documents, which could justify the maintenance of the secret, survived.
The only initiatives known to us are the translation of the letters sent to Cupani by important European botanists (subsequently published by Dollo in 1979) and an agreement with Rafinesque which, in the event, would not seem to have been implemented (Rafinesque Schmaltz Citation1810). In fact, in 1812 Rafinesque (Bertoloni Citation1829b), free of all commitments with the Chiarellis, announced the imminent publication of Panphysis Sicula, which was to be made up of prints of copper plates copied from the exemplar in the former Jesuit library in Palermo (now Regional Library) which was the work of the engraver D’Ippolito. It would seem that this attempt also failed because of a dramatic shipwreck (Lentini Citation2012).
However, beyond the reconstruction of the misadventures and the (more or less well founded) accusations of plagiarism (Bivona Bernardi Citation1806, Brocchi Citation1822, Bertoloni Citation1829a) the most plausible explanation of the non-publication, after Chiarelli’s (perhaps) opportunistic delays, must be sought in the change of the scientific and cultural climate (Maccagnone Citation1833).
While in Palermo attempts were made to publish the work, in Europe the debate on taxonomy and on the construction of the concepts of genus and species were reaching a certainty with Linnaeus. The search for invariable elements, to which Cupani had already tried to refer, found a solution with the prevalence of Linnaean criteria and, for this reason, the polynominal nomenclature (qualified as “polylogus” by Cupani in the Prologue of his Hortus Catholicus, 1696) was replaced by the new nomenclature (Pulvirenti, Costa, and Pavone Citation2015).
We are not in possession of certain information about when the Chiarellis died. From the bibliographical references available to us, we can conclude that F.P. Chiarelli was the last to die, in about 1810 (Di Blasi e Gambacorta Citation1818; Algeri Fogliani Citation1836).
It is certain that when he died his heirs sold the scientific heritage coming from Bonanno (and Cupani) to various buyers. Consequently, the traces of Panphyton that belonged to them, became more and more uncertain.
The cultural climate had changed profoundly and the Chiarelli heirs had neither any scientific nor any professional interest in the publication or the private preservation of Panphyton.
The 16 volumes of handwritten notes and some other papers were acquired by Bivona Bernardi and, subsequently, sold to the Palermo Municipal Library, where they are currently to be found (Scinà Citation1824): Bonanno’s handwritten notes at s.m. 2QqD 49-65; Cupani’s manuscripts at s.m. 2QqF32 and 2QqH186.
Brocchi (Citation1822) met the Chiarelli heirs in order to try to acquire some residual materials, but found only some mineralogical remains and failed to obtain information about the copy of Panphyton.
Brocchi himself attempted an identification of the copies of Panphyton printed in 1713, but succeeded only in verifying the copy in the former Jesuit Library in Palermo, the one in the Catania Regional University Library and a few fragments in the Palermo Municipal Library. He declared the, in Catania, he had found two copies of the Bonanno edition of 1719, one in the possession of Baron G. Recupero and another in the possession of Father Emiliano Guttadauro.
The latter was a figure of some importance in the field of natural sciences in Catania between the end of the eighteenth century and the beginning of the nineteenth. He devoted an important part of his life to the expansion of the Benedictine Library in Catania with a series of acquisitions, which have come together in the Guttadauro collection of the Civica and A. Ursino Recupero joint Libraries.
Guttadauro recovered part of the Cupani remains from the Chiarelli inheritance in about 1810 (Tornabene Citation1847) but the information is vague and seems to be covered by his reticent declarations. In various conversations with Cupani scholars he implied that he was in possession of a copy of Panphyton, but did not give any precise indications (Brocchi Citation1822).
The authors who took an interest in Panphyton never saw the one that had been in the possession of the Chiarellis and the debate on the existence of a copy in four volumes was founded on conjecture.
It is certain, however, that among the rare books of the Civica and A. Ursino Recupero joint Libraries with the shelf marking that is typical of the Bene-dictine Library of San Nicolò L’Arena, to the community of which Guttadauro belonged, there exists a copy of Panphyton in four volumes.
The events of that Library certainly helped to make it difficult to single out the work. As a consequence of the laws concerning the acquisition of the property of the religious congregations (Royal decree no. 3036 of 7 July 1866) the Benedictine Library became the property of the Municipality. It was opened to the public in 1898 by Federico De Roberto (honorary librarian). Many documents, however, were irremediably lost (Figure ).
Figure 2. Graphical scheme of the Cupani’s transferred materials from Palermo to Catania.
On the other hand for two centuries nobody had taken any interest in the acquisition of that copy of Panphyton.
This fact chimes with the corresponding lack of interest in the copy in the Caruso Library and is an indication, once again, of the obsolescence of the scientific conception which upheld Panphyton and of the prospects for professional use which, perhaps, had led Guttadauro (and others too) to recover the Cupani remains.
In particular, nobody took the trouble to verify if the copy of Panphyton that was so secretively possessed by Guttadauro was the one so jealously kept by the Chiarellis.
Results
In the Regional University Library we find:
| • | an exemplar of Panphyton Siculum, in two volumes, coming from Giambattista Caruso’s Library (shelf marking: rari-arm. 5-64 ter.). It is made up of two volumes with 658 plates in all, with only one duplicate. Compared with the copy that is kept in the Central Library of the Sicilian Region in Palermo only one plate is missing (Pastena, Anselmo, and Zimmardi Citation2003). The first volume, which also includes a title page and a portrait of Cupani, is made up of 334 plates, numbered from 1 to 334, including one duplicate (sheets 303 and 308 are identical). The second volume is made up of 324 plates, numbered from 1 to 323 (number 124 indicates two different plates). It is, therefore, one of the most complete copies, confirming what is stated in the literature (Brocchi Citation1822; Bertoloni Citation1829a; Mira Citation1873; Pastena, Anselmo, and Zimmardi Citation2003). | ||||
In the Civica and A. Ursino Recupero joint Libraries among rare books, we find:
| • | an exemplar of Panphyton Siculum (shelf marking: Preg.C.35), in one volume, which bears the inscription “Frammenti del Panphyton Siculum del Cupani. Edizione A. Bonanno” and, therefore, officially attributed to the Bonanno edition of 1719. It comes from the Baron Ursino Recupero collection. It lacks the portrait of Cupani and the title page; the plates with odd number have the library stamp. It has 187 plates which are printed on both sides and numbered from 1 to 198 (11 plates are missing: 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 193, 194 and 199); inside and at the end there are some blank pages (Table ). | ||||
| • | an exemplar of Panphyton Siculum, in four volumes (1713), not cited in literature, the rediscovery of which should be reported. This copy should be the one that belonged to the Chiarelli family. It comes from the library of the Benedictine Monastery of San Nicolò La Rena in Catania and so should be Guttadauro’s copy. | ||||
This exemplar is made up of 670 plates (including those with unprinted drawings). The names that were originally indicated were corrected by hand and/or reprinted; sometimes, next to the polylogus the inscriptions “Cupani”, “Hortus Catholicus” or “Supplementum alterum” were added (Figures C, and D). A number of plates have extra drawings that are not to be found in the Regional University Library copy (Table ).
The pages of this copy, printed on one side only, were glued to each other in twos (except for the plates 193 and 194 of the first volume which turned out to be separated and still in folio); between the two pages, there appears to be a paper underlay that confers great solidity. The underlay is clearly visible both through the rips of the previous binding and through the worm holes, which preceded the restoration. On the other side of plate, 193 one can see the remains of a print of another work, which leads one to believe that we are in the presence of trial editions on recycled sheets. The thinness of the paper is particularly evident.
On the back cover there is a printed label with the following words: “Biblioteca del Monastero Basiliano – Mezzojuso – Palermo – 1978”; it indicates the last restoration.
| • | The first volume (shelf marking: Preg.F.30, formerly 1.23.1501) is made up of 199 printed plates, numbered from 1 to 199, in addition to two more handwritten plates, with watercolour drawings, both numbered 200 (201 plates in all). On the first page there is the portrait of Cupani, on the second the printed title page, followed by plate no. 1. The polylogus has very few handwritten corrections, but a number of printed ones (Table ; Figures A, and B). | ||||
| • | The second volume (shelf marking: Preg. E.31, formerly 1.23.1502) is made up of 185 plates, numbered from 201 to 383 (number 337 is marked twice and after plate no. 347 one is not numbered). On the first page there is the printed title page, on the second the portrait of Cupani followed by plate no. 201 which, unlike the first volume, is glued at the back. The polylogus has a large number of handwritten corrections but no printed ones (Table ). | ||||
| • | The third volume (shelf marking: Preg.E.32, formerly 1.23.1503) is made up of 120 plates, numbered from 384 to 503. The first page bears the title page copied with tracing paper, while the portrait of Cupani is lacking. The polylogus has a large number of handwritten corrections but no printed ones (Table , Figures C, and D). | ||||
| • | The fourth volume (shelf marking: Preg. E.33, formerly 1.23.1504) is made up of 164 plates (including those with drawings), numbered from 504 to 666 (number 648 is marked twice). On the first page there is the title page copied with tracing paper, while the portrait of Cupani is lacking. The polylogus has a large number of handwritten corrections but no printed ones (Table ). | ||||
Figure 3. (A, B) Comparison between plates 178/I of exemplar in Catania Civica and A. Ursino Recupero joint Libraries (copy in four volumes) and 183/I of exemplar in Catania Regional University Library; (C, D) comparison between plates 398/III of exemplar in Catania Civica and A. Ursino Recupero joint Libraries (copy in four volumes) and 82/II of exemplar in Catania Regional University Library.
From this analysis we conclude that the edition in one volume of the Civica and A. Ursino Recupero joint Libraries, the first volume of the copy in four volumes belonging to the same library and the copy of the Palermo Municipal Library (shelf marking: 2QqD65) are identical, with the exception of the pages with unprinted drawings and blank pages inside and at the end (Table ).
Furthermore, in the edition in four volumes of the Civica and A. Ursino Recupero joint Libraries, compared with the copy in the Regional Library (both libraries of Catania) we find (Table ):
| • | 13 plates with printed and/or hand drawings added on printed plates (Figures A to D); | ||||
| • | 9 plates with variously modified images (Figures A, and B); | ||||
| • | 27 more plates, of which 18 with only hand drawings (Figures C, and D). | ||||
Figure 4. (A, B) Comparison between plates 16/I of exemplar in Catania Civica and A. Ursino Recupero joint Libraries (copy in four volumes) and 16/I of exemplar in Catania Regional University Library; (C, D) comparison between plates 422/III of exemplar in Catania Civica and A. Ursino Recupero joint Libraries (copy in four volumes) and 108/II of exemplar in Catania Regional University Library.
Figure 5. (A, B) Comparison between plates 428/III of exemplar in Catania Civica and A. Ursino Recupero joint Libraries (copy in four volumes) and 141/II of exemplar in Catania Regional University Library; (C, D) Plates 200/I and 638/IV of exemplar in Catania Civica and A. Ursino Recupero joint Libraries (copy in four volumes).
On the other hand 20 plates, which are present in the Catania Regional Library copy, are lacking.
At last, from the comparison between the volumes of Palermo Regional Library and of Catania Regional Library it is clear that the plates are identical concerning nomenclature and drawings, but 43 plates, which are present in Catania Regional Library copy, are lacking.
Conclusions
The analysis of the material that is to be found in the Catania libraries allows us to arrive at some considerations that can throw light on the discussions among historians of the work and, at the same time, can single out some elements that are significant for the history of eighteenth century Sicilian botany.
A comparative study of the copies of Panphyton in the Civica and A. Ursino Recupero joint Libraries (one copy in one volume and the other in four volumes) and of the copy (kept with the Bonanno papers) in the Palermo Municipal Library allows us to conjecture that the one volume version (1719) is Bonanno’s almost definitive version (in that a few handwritten corrections are still present in addition to many printed ones).
The copy in four volumes is only one of those of the 1713 edition, bound in four volumes and used as a working basis by Bonanno for the revision of the nomenclature (corrections to the polylogus); the first of these is made up of the plates that were re-engraved by Bonanno to replace the Cupani originals. This conjecture is strengthened by the fact that the first volume of the copy in four volumes, the copy in one volume in the Ursino Recupero Library and the copy (also in one volume) in the Palermo Municipal Library are absolutely identical (except for the 11 missing plates, some blank pages and some hand drawings, which are different among themselves).
In particular, the four-volume edition of Panphyton, which can with certainty be identified with the one used by Bonanno, is an important and documentary testimony of the continuation of the research after Cupani’s death. The very story of the jealous custody of the copy on the part of the Chiarelli family and of its acquisition by Guttadauro are a sign of the interest shown in Cupani’s drawings and denominations.
It is therefore possible to state that Panphyton, with its wealth of iconographic documentation, constitutes an important element of the cultural process of the time. Probably its intricate history and the specific events connected with its publishing “failure” are proof of the hard work involved.
Representing many plants that are “individuals” of what would later be classified as a single species was not a mistake, but the expression of an empirical research that marked the transition from “natural philosophy” to “natural history.”
All those who were to try to publish Panphyton, in toto, were destined to fail. The specific events are accidental elements of the failure of a work which was no longer in tune with the successive taxonomic criteria (Maccagnone Citation1833).
The most fascinating aspect of the tormented matter of this (non-)book is certainly that of the search for copies of the first trial edition, for the reconstruction of the transfers of ownership, for the events which marked its very limited circulation and for the “karst” character of the appearance of the various copies.
In the history of Panphyton there is something that goes beyond a mere “history of books.” The story of the tenacity of Cupani, a scholar isolated in his buen retiro (the Botanic Garden he founded in Misilmeri), but at the same time, in touch (by exchange of seeds, illustrated publications and herbaria) with a world of great figures (such as Sherard, Commelin, Tournefort, Böhm, Triumfetti, Viali, Volkamer), who respected and appreciated him (Pulvirenti, Costa, and Pavone Citation2015).
The question of Panphyton is tied up with attempts at hoarding, with the desire to speculate, with failures and with the inexplicable disappearance of the proofs and the preliminary material, as has been further demonstrated by the history of the exemplar, which was rediscovered in the Civica and A. Ursino Recupero joint Libraries.
The irresistible fascination of Panphyton, independently of the specific events, derives, however, from the wealth of analytical research that was free of prejudices and schemes and that led Cupani, like all the “Curious” (Linnaeus Citation1736) to observe, portray and describe the differences of the “natural objects” and their “material substance.”
From a more practical and modern point of view, the extraordinary number of samples represented in Panphyton constitute, even today, an instrument for the reconstruction and verification of the vegetable and animal biodiversity of the period.
Notes on contributors
Rosanna Maria Stefania Costa PhD in “Environmental Science – Catania University. Master II level in Landscape Ecology and Environmental Planning – University “La Sapienza” Rome. Research Assistant at the Department of Biological, Geological and Environmental Sciences – Catania University. Contribution: Sections: The transfer of the Cupani material from Palermo to Catania is by Rosanna Maria Stefania Costa. All the authors agreed on theoretical framework, methodology and conclusions of the present paper.
Pietro Pavone Professor of Systematic Botany, currently in service at the Department of Biological, Geological and Environmental Sciences – Catania University and Director of the Catania Botanical Garden. National Coordinator of the Working Group “Botanical and Historical Gardens” of the Italian Botanical Society. He is author or co-author of more than 150 scientific papers; he holds a particular interest to historical gardens of eastern Sicily. Contribution: Sections: Introduction, Methodology are by Pietro Pavone. All the authors agreed on theoretical framework, methodology and conclusions of the present paper.
Rita Angela Carbonaro Professor of Letters, currently Director of the Civica and A. Ursino Recupero joint Libraries of Catania. Tutor for apprenticeships and stages for students and graduates from many Universities. She is author or co-author of scientific papers and books. Contribution: Sections: Panphyton Siculum: the "never issued" book is by Rita Angela Carbonaro. All the authors agreed on theoretical framework, methodology and conclusions of the present paper.
Santa Pulvirenti Researcher (BIO/02), professor of Naturalistic Museology and Floristic, currently in service at the Department of Biological, Geological and Environmental Sciences - Catania University. She has done research on the history of botany (particularly on botanical Gardens and Herbaria) and the Mediterranean flora (particularly on Sicily and Calabria, primarily on the orchid family). Contribution: Sections: Results, Conclusions are by Santa Pulvirenti. All the authors agreed on theoretical framework, methodology and conclusions of the present paper.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Prof. A. Brayley for the English translation of the original manuscript.
References
- Algeri Fogliani, G. 1836. ““Necrologia del Professore Antonio Furitano”. Effemeridi Scientifiche e Letterarie per la Sicilia.” Tomo XVI, fascicolo 44: 124–127.
- Bernardino da Ucria (al secolo Aurifici, M.) 1793. “Plantae ad Linnaeanum opus addendae et secundum Linnaei systema noviter descriptae a patre Bernardino da Ucria.” In Nuova raccolta di opuscoli di autori siciliani. Tomo VI. Palermo: Solli.
- Bertoloni, A. 1829a. “Discorso del prof. Antonio Bertoloni sopra la storia, ed i progressi della botanica insulare italiana.” Annali di Storia Naturale – Accademia delle scienze dell'Istituto di Bologna. Tomo I: 1–16.
- Bertoloni, A. 1829b. ““Il rimanente del discorso del prof. Antonio Bertoloni sopra la storia, ed i progressi della botanica insulare italiana.” Annali di Storia Naturale – Accademia delle scienze dell'Istituto di Bologna. Tomo II: 239–270.
- Bivona Bernardi, A. 1806. Sicularum plantarum centuria prima. Panormi: apud Philippum Barravecchia.
- Bosco, S. 2012. Una ricostruzione possibile. La libreria di Giambattista e Francesco Caruso: il metodo e le idee. Collana Biblioteca digitale. Cataloghi e inventari 3. Palermo: Regione siciliana-assessorato beni culturali e identità siciliana. Archivio elettronico IT/ICCU/PAL/0249872.
- Brocchi, G. B. 1822. “Notizie bibliografiche intorno al Panphyton Siculum del Cupani. Memoria (inedita) del sig. Brocchi.” Biblioteca italiana o sia Giornale di letteratura, scienza ed arti 27: 190–202.
- Chiarelli, F. P. 1789. “Discorso che serve di preliminare alla storia naturale di Sicilia sull’origine della decadenza di questo studio; su i suoi vantaggi, e i mezzi di promuoverlo con sicurezza.” In Nuova raccolta di opuscoli di autori siciliani. Tomo II. Palermo: Solli.
- Cupani, F. 1695. Syllabus Plantarum Siciliae, nuper detectarum. Panormi: Ioannis Adamo.
- Cupani, F. 1696. Hortus Catholicus, cum supplemento ad eundem Hortum. Neapoli: Franciscum Benzi.
- Cupani, F. 1697. Supplementum alterum ad Hortum Catholicum. Panormi: Joseph Gramignani.
- Di Blasi e Gambacorta, G. E. 1818. Storia civile del regno di Sicilia. Tomo IX, libro XIII. Palermo: Reale Stamperia.
- Dollo, C. 1979. Filosofia e scienze in Sicilia. Padova: Cedam.
- Greuter, W. 2004. “Panphyton Siculum - Francesco Cupani.” Optima newsletter No. 37 (2): 100–101.
- Gussone, G. 1842–1844 [ma 1845]. Florae siculae synopsis, exhibens plantas vasculares in Sicilia insulisque adjacentibus huc usque detectas secundum systema Linnaeanum dispositas. Neapoli: ex typis Tramater.
- Lanza, D. 1927. “Disegno storico dello sviluppo delle scienze biologiche in Sicilia.” In Atti del II congresso nazionale di chimica pura ed applicata. Palermo e Sicilia, 22 maggio-1 giugno 1926. Volume III: 1457–1561. Roma: Associazione Italiana di Chimica Generale ed Applicata.
- Lentini, R. 2012. “Gli scritti del periodo siciliano e lo specchio delle scienze (1814) di Constantino Samuel Rafinesque Schmaltz.” Naturalista Siciliano Serie IV 36 (2): 253–278.
- Linnaeus, C. 1736. Bibliotheca Botanica. Amstoledami: apud Salomonem Schouten.
- Maccagnone, F. 1833. “Intorno ad un frammento del Panphyton Siculum del Cupani donato alla biblioteca del Comune di Palermo dal Principe di Granatelli.” Effemeridi Scientifiche e Letterarie per la Sicilia. Tomo V: 253–260.
- Massa, B. 2009. “La fauna illustrata da Francesco Cupani nel Panphyton Siculum.” Naturalista Siciliano Serie IV 33 (1–2): 213–224.
- Mira, G. M. 1873. Bibliografia Siciliana ovvero Gran dizionario bibliografico. vol. I. Palermo: Gaudiano.
- Mongitore, A. 1707. Bibliotheca sicula sive de scriptoribus siculis. Tomus primus. Panormi: Didaci Bua.
- Pasqualino, M. 1785. Vocabolario siciliano etimologico, italiano e latino. Volume I. Palermo: Reale Stamperia.
- Pastena, C., A. Anselmo, and M. C. Zimmardi. (edizione a cura di). 2003. Panphyton Siculum - Francesco Cupani. Palermo: Tipografia Lussografica Caltanissetta.
- Priolo, A. 1996. “Uccelli della Sicilia raffigurati da Cupani nel Panphyton Siculum.” Naturalista Siciliano Serie IV 20 (3–4): 321–410.
- Pulvirenti, S., R. M. S. Costa, and P. Pavone. 2015. “Francesco Cupani: the “scientific network” of his time and the making of the Linnaean “system”.” Acta Botanica Gallica: Botany Letters. 162 (3): 215–223.
- Pulvirenti, S., M. M. Indriolo, P. Pavone, and R. M. S. Costa. 2015. “Study of a pre-Linnaean herbarium attributed to Francesco Cupani (1657-1710).” Candollea 70 (1): 67–99.
- Rafinesque Schmaltz, C. S. 1810. Caratteri di alcuni nuovi generi e nuove specie di animali e piante della Sicilia con varie osservazioni sopra i medesimi. Palermo: Sanfilippo.
- Raimondo, F. M., and V. Spadaro. 2012. “Nomenclatural and taxonomic remarks on Prunus cupaniana (Rosaceae) from Sicily.” Bocconea 24: 319–326.
- Scinà, D. 1824. Prospetto della storia letteraria di Sicilia nel secolo decimottavo. vol. I. Palermo: Lorenzo Dato.
- Tornabene, F. 1847. Quadro storico della botanica in Sicilia, che serve di prolusione all'anno scolastico 1846 e 1847 nella Regia università degli studi in Catania. Catania: Tipografia del Reale Ospizio di beneficenza.
- Troìa, A. 1997. “Taxonomic and eco-geographical notes on Celtis tournefortii Lam. (Ulmaceae, Celtidoideae) in Sicily.” Naturalista Siciliano Serie IV 21 (1–2): 83–92.
- Wearn, J. A., and D. J. Mabberley. 2009. “Iberis violacea R. Br. (Brassicaceae).” Flora Mediterranea 19: 261–266.