Peter,
Again, my comments follow yours.
> This is rapidly degenerating into pointless a "I said, you said"
> situation, so unless you come up with a total corker, this is likely
> to be my last word on the matter.
No, I always provided what you said with my replies, so there was never any
Hi "icones".
This is rapidly degenerating into pointless a "I said, you said"
situation, so unless you come up with a total corker, this is likely
to be my last word on the matter.
I maintain that Schechter's "Die Orchideen von Deutsch-Neu-Guinea" is
not a flora. You kindly provided the definitio
Peter,
My comments follow yours.
> I'll try keep it short, and I'll refer to the Australian Orchid
> Foundation translation of Schlechter's book, ie The Orchidaceae of
> German New Guinea, not Die Orchidaceen von Deutsch-Neu-Guinea. You
> described this work as a "Flora", and criticised Schlechte
Hi "icones".
I'll try keep it short, and I'll refer to the Australian Orchid
Foundation translation of Schlechter's book, ie The Orchidaceae of
German New Guinea, not Die Orchidaceen von Deutsch-Neu-Guinea. You
described this work as a "Flora", and criticised Schlechter for not
confining himself t
Peter,
I do not really know where you are coming from with these comments as they
are just wrong. It is obvious that you have little actual knowledge of
Schlechter's monumental work, The Orchidaceae of German New Guinea (all
references are from the Australian Orchid Foundation's English translatio
In OGD V8 #193, "icones" said: "In fact Schlechter was so disappointed
in Kraenzlin's work on Dendrobium, that he published a complete
revision of the genus in Die Orchidaceen von Deutsch-Neu-Guinea,
notwithstanding that all dendrobiums do not grow in what was then
German New Guinea."
Sorry, but t
6 matches
Mail list logo
