no previous
no next

12. Part XII

11. L. Eucalyptus Raveretiana, F.v.M.

Description  61 
Notes supplementary to the description  61 
Range  61 
Affinities  62 

  ― 61 ―


L. E. Raveretiana, F.v.M.

Fragmenta phytographiæ Australiæ, x, 99 (1877). Figured and described in English in the “Eucalyptographia.”

Notes supplementary to the Description.

The figure in the “Eucalyptographia” is not a very good one. While the tree has many leaves of the shape depicted, yet there are also numerous long lanceolar leaves, as figured at fig. 3a, Pl. 53 of the present work, while the juvenile leaves, figured at 1a and 1b of the same Plate, have not previously been figured or described.

They vary from obovate to broadly lanceolate and elliptical in shape. Texture rather thin but tough, underside pale, intramarginal vein rather distant from the edge.

The tree is very large and sturdy, and the timber is very hard. It has flaky or hard scaly bark on the trunk and main branches. The flakes or furrows are not deep. The smaller branches are dirty blue grey in colour.

It is a “Box” tree.


NEAR Rockhampton, Queensland (Thozet and O'Shanesy); Dawson and Nercool Creek (Bowman); near Port Denison (Fitzalan) [Eucalyptographia]. I have no additional localities other than those quoted. The type came from valleys within the tropic of Capricorn in Eastern Australia, but no definite locality. It doubtless came from the neighbourhood of Rockhampton.

Moore's Creek, north of Rockhampton, is the nearest locality to Rockhampton where this species occurs.

“Occasional trees along creeks and borders of scrubs in Mackay and Bowen districts.”

  ― 62 ―


1. With E. microtheca, F.v.M.

Mueller (Eucalyptographia) says these two species are closest related. The inflorescence and fruits of E. Raveretiana are, however, smaller, being almost minute, the foliage is different, while the barks of the two trees are very different, and while the timber of E. microtheca is red, that of E. Raveretiana is of a brown colour. The latter species is a much larger tree.

2 and 3. With E. brachyandra, F.v.M., and E. Howittiana, F.v.M.

Mueller (Eucalyptographia) points out the resemblance of it to the former species as regards size of fruits. Being a minute-flowered species, E. Howittiana, F.v.M., naturally also occurs to one in this connection.

From the point of view of anther-form, the closest affinity of this species is with the two Ironbarks E. crebra and E. Staigeriana, and an Ironbark Box, E. leptophleba.

12. LI. Eucalyptus crebra, F.v.M.

Description  63 
Notes supplementary to the description  63 
Synonyms  63 
Range  64 
Affinities  66 

  ― 63 ―


LI. E. crebra, F.v.M.

Journ. Linn. Soc., iii, 87 (1859).

AGAIN described in B.Fl. iii, 221, and also in Eucalyptographia. Some of the trees referred to in the supplementary paragraphs (B.Fl. iii, 222) belong to E. melanophloia, F.v.M.

Notes supplementary to the Description.

It would have been better had the figure in the Eucalyptographia been placed upside down, as the foliage is pendulous. It is, indeed, the most graceful of the Ironbarks. It has often quite thin leaves, but this is not an unfailing character. The foliage often dries whitish, particularly when from drier localities.

The fruits are quite small, perhaps not quite so small, on the average, as those depicted in the Eucalyptographia. Sometimes they are so large as to cause possible confusion with E. paniculata.

Sometimes the fruit has a rounded rim and has valves which are exsert.


  • 1. E. racemosa, Cav. (probably).
  • 2. E. hæmastoma, DC., non Sm.
  • 3. E. gracilis, Sieb., non F.v.M.
  • 4. E. angustifolia, Woolls.
  • 5. E. terminalis, Britten, non F.v.M.

1. Eucalyptus racemosus.

377. Eucalyptus foliis lanceolatis, acumine acutissimo valde producto; florum umbellis in racemum dispositis.

Caulis arboreus 20 et amplius pedes altus antequam ramis ornetur longis alternis iterum ramosis: folia obscure punctata, acumine acutissimo valde producto: nervus unicus longitudinalis, ex quo plures alternatim adsurgunt, parum ab ipso divergentes: umbellae 7–9 florae, pedunculo communi brevi, alternae in racemum foliosum dispositae.

Obs.—D. L'Heritier habeo 1. et 2. fasciculum Serti Anglioi ubi est character genericus Eucalypti; tabulam non vidi. (Cav. Ic. iv, 24.)

“Far too imperfectly described to render identification possible.” (B.Fl. iii, 200.) I concur, unless a specimen is available. The following, however, has been named racemosa by a good botanist.

A specimen in Herb. Vindob. is labelled “Eucalyptus haematostoma, Smith; E. racemosa, Cav., with a note ‘No. 476, Sieber.’ ” It is E. crebra, F.v.M.

  ― 64 ―

2. E. hæmastoma, DC. non Smith.

Operculo hemisphaerico mucronulato cupula breviore, pedunculis axillaribus subterminalibusque subangulatis petiolo longioribus, aliis umbellam unicam aliis umbellas plures racemosè digestas gerentibus, floribus 5–10 pedicellatis, foliis lineari-lanceolatis acuminatis. In Novâ-Hollandiâ. E. racemosa Cav. Icon. 4, p. 24, n. 377. White, Itin. 226, cum icon. ex Smith et Willd., Sieb. Plant. Exs. n. 476. Folia basi subaequalia 3 poll. longa, 6 lin. lata (v. s.). (DC., Prod. iii, 219).

3. E. gracilis, Sieb., ex Benth., B.Fl. iii, 222.

To this form (specimens of E. crebra from New England) appear to belong also Sieber's specimens of E. gracilis, Pl. Exs. No. 476, referred by De Candolle to E. hæmastoma, but very different from Smith's plant of that name. They are in young bud and in fruit.

I have examined the specimen in Herb. Kew on which Bentham based the above remarks. It is in young bud, as stated, and has but one fruit, not quite ripe. I have since been able to examine better specimens of Sieber's No. 476 (notably those in the Vienna Herbarium), and believe that Bentham's view is a correct one, and that it is correctly referred to E. crebra, F.v.M.

At the same time I desire to emphasise the fact that herbarium specimens in mature leaf and half-ripe bud of E. crebra, are very difficult to discriminate between those of E. hæmastoma var. micrantha.

Indeed, I do not attach much importance to Sieber's No. 476. They are incomplete; perhaps they are mixed.

4. E. angustifolia, Woolls.

Description.—E. angustifolia is regarded as a variety of E. paniculata, but the workmen, judging only from the wood, call it a distinct species, by the name of the Narrow-leaved Ironbark. (Lect. Veg. Kingd., 123.)

This is E. crebra, F.v.M., according to Mueller (Eucalyptographia). It is found in the Grose Vale and Lower Kurrajong, and I collected it there as directed by Dr. Woolls himself.

5. E. terminalis, Britten non F.v.M., in Ill., Bot. Captain Cook's Voyage (Banks and Solander). Determinations by James Britten, ii, 39, with Plate 117.


THE type was apparently from no specific locality, but from the area between the Newcastle Range to Moreton Bay, both in Queensland, say from the Etheridge River, in 18' N. lat. and 143° east longitude, to the Brisbane.

It is confined to New South Wales and Queensland, so far as we know at present.


A specimen received from Kew, and examined by Bentham for the Flora Australiensis, bears the following label in Mueller's handwriting, “Eucalyptus crebra, Ferd. Mueller. Ironbark tree. Burdekin River. Dr. M.” This is probably as near a type specimen as we shall get.

  ― 65 ―

Following are additional Queensland localities mostly represented in the National Herbarium, Sydney:—

Brisbane River (Leichhardt), tips of valves exserted; Enoggera, Brisbane, and Taylor's Range (F. M. Bailey); “A Grey Ironbark,” Maryborough (W. H. Williams); Brian Pastures, Gayndah, “Narrow-leaved Ironbark” (S. A. Lindeman).

The foliage inclined to be glaucous, and some of it broader than usual. The fruits with a rounded rim. Rockhampton (R. Simmons). Fruit with a distinct rim, and valves slightly exsert. Rockhampton (Thozet).

I have seen similar specimens from Rockhampton (No. 1431, Amalia Dietrich), of the Museum Goddefroy, of Hamburg. There are similar specimens, Rockhampton (F. J. Byerley), who called it “Black Box.”

North Rockhampton (A. Murphy), with almost linear juvenile leaves. I cannot see any difference whatever between these specimens and those occurring near to Sydney.

Duaringa, 70 miles west of Rockhampton (J.H.M.).

“Ironbark.” A tree up to 100 feet, and 2 feet in diameter; some of the fruits rather large, with a distinct angle when unripe. Valves slightly exsert. Stannary Hills (Dr. T. L. Bancroft); Cape River (S. Johnson).

Northern Queensland (?), Lizard Island or Thirsty Sound; Banks and Solander, 1770. Received from the British Museum, under the name “E. terminalis, F.M.” (See p. 64.)


South.—“Mokaarago,” of the aborigines of the County of Camden. “Narrow-leaved smooth or red Ironbark, 24–48 inches in diameter, 50–90 feet high. From Camden. “The most picturesque of the different species of Eucalyptus called Ironbark” (Sir William Macarthur, in Catalogues of N.S.W. Timbers for the Paris Exhibition, 1855, and London, 1862); “Narrow-leaf Ironbark,” Camden (A. Rudder); Brownlow Hill, Camden (F. W. A. Downes); near Menangle (H. Deane); Thirlmere and West Bargo (J.H.M.); Smithfield (Woolls in B.Fl., iii, 222); Bankstown and Cabramatta (J. L. Boorman).

West.—Blacktown (R. T. Baker); Baulkham Hills (W. Woolls); Windsor (J. S. Allan); Grose Vale and Lower Kurrajong (J.H.M), urceolate and distinct rim to young fruit; Mulgoa (R. H. Cambage and J.H.M.), the leaves varying in texture; Capertee (J.H.M. and J. L. Boorman); Goulburn River, Murrumbo (R. T. Baker); Murrumbidgerie (A. Murphy); Dubbo (H. Deane, J. V. de Coque, J.H.M., and others); Minore (J. L. Boorman); Midway, near Dubbo (J. L. Boorman); Coonamble (Forest Ranger E. Taylor); Pilliga, with almost linear juvenile leaves (J. L. Boorman).

  ― 66 ―

“Narrow-leaf Red Ironbark” (in contradistinction to the Broad-leaved or Silver Ironbark, E. melanophloia). Aboriginal name, “Boobyinba.” “One of our best timbers, useful for many purposes, durable and strong. Habitat, open forests. Plentiful in places where soil is sandy. Flowers January-May.” (Forest Ranger McGee, Narrabri).

The largest forest of crebra in New South Wales (back country) is between Narrabri and Coonabarabran. There are fully two million acres of it. The forest commences at Gunnedah and goes to 25 miles from Coonamble.

North.—Paterson River (J. L. Boorman); “Black Ironbark,” Clarence Town (A. Rudder); Booral (A. Rudder), who says of it, “it is a much smaller tree than either paniculata or siderophloia, and, as far as I have seen, is of spreading and somewhat drooping habit. Leaves very narrow; fruit and flowers very small. Timber in colour, when fresh, either red or dark brown. Suitable for railway sleepers and girders, &c., and for use in bridges and culverts generally, where long lengths are not required. It does not, as a rule, approach so near the coast as the above two species. I have seen a little of it near Clarence Town, and it is fairly plentiful on the tributaries of the Upper Hunter.” Cooloongoolook (A. Rudder).

Branxton (J. L. Boorman); Wybong Creek (A. Rudder); Denman (W. Heron); Merriwa, with broadish leaves like the Rockhampton specimens (J.H.M. and J. L. Boorman); Gungal (J. L. Boorman); Murrurundi (J.H.M. and J. L. Boorman); Page River and Gundy (J.H.M.). Tips of valves exserted; Scone (J.H.M. and J.L. Boorman).

Bentham's No. 3 (in part).—“Specimens from New England, C. Stuart, described as having the bark white, separating in thin strips, the colour of the specimens not at all glaucous, and the inflorescence rather less compound, but the shape of the leaves, their venation, and the flowers and fruits precisely those of E. crebra.” .… (B.Fl. iii, 222.) I have examined this specimen, which is in bud and flower, and concur in Bentham's view that it is E. crebra, F.v.M.

At the same time C. Stuart's bark notes are those of E. hæmastoma, var. micrantha (his specimens have got mixed in some way), and herbarium specimens of the variety and of crebra are often much alike, unless a complete suite be available.

“Red Ironbark,” Glen Innes (Forest Guard N. Stewart); western slopes of Dividing Range, County Clive, Tenterfield (A. S. O. Reid); hills about Warialda (J.H.M., J. L. Boorman, Forest Guard Edward Julius); Acacia Creek, Macpherson Range (W. Dunn).


THIS is one of the Ironbarks with porantherous anthers (the others are E. melanophloia and E. siderophloia), which sharply separate them from those with truncate anthers, which include E. paniculata and E. sideroxylon.

  ― 67 ―

1. With E. melanophloia, F.v.M.

The narrow-leaved form of this species often displays considerable resemblance to E. crebra. See B.Fl. iii, 222, where a number of specimens of E. melanophloia are referred to E. crebra by Bentham, and discussed by me at p. 71 of the present Part. Mueller refers to the subject in Eucalyptographia, under E. crebra.

2. With E. leptophleba, F.v.M. (E. drepanophylla, Benth.).

In the Eucalyptographia, under E. crebra, Mueller expresses some doubt as to the specific value of the former species, and to its difference from E. crebra. He refers to the matter again in the same work under E. siderophloia. See p. 334, Part X, of the present work.

Reference to my notes on E. leptophleba at p. 332, and the figures on Plate 48, show it to be markedly different from E. crebra. Seeing my note (p. 333) to the effect that the juvenile leaves of E. leptophleba were unknown, Dr. T. L. Bancroft, of Stannary Hills, North Queensland, where the species is abundant, obligingly sent me juvenile leaves. They are huge, and as different from those of E. crebra as it is possible for them to be.

They are elliptical or nearly oblong in shape, very coriaceous, equally green on both sides, and 4½ inches in breadth by 7 inches in length are common dimensions! The veins are prominent, roughly parallel, and often nearly at right angles to the midrib. The intramarginal vein is at a considerable distance from the edge.

Mr. F. M. Bailey, in the Queensland Agric. Journ., xxiii, p. 259 (1909), has redescribed these specimens, which in my view are E. leptophleba (E. drepanophylla) as a new species, under the name of E. Stoneana.

3. With E. hæmastoma, Sm., var. micrantha, Benth.

E. crebra is a small-flowered, often small-leaved species, and therefore it becomes necessary sometimes to compare it with other small-flowered species. It is sometimes very difficult, with the incomplete specimens often found in herbaria, to distinguish between the two plants. In the field their appearance is, of course, quite different, E. hæmastoma being a White Gum and E. crebra an Ironbark.

4. With E. microtheca, F.v.M.

In flower this species (crebra), especially in the thicker-leaved specimens, is sometimes difficult to distinguish from E. brachypoda (E. microtheca is meant in this instance; see page 51, Part XI, of this work); the leaves are generally, but not always, thinner, with more oblique veins, and the flowers not so glaucous, with the calyx less open; the fruit is, however, very differently shaped. (B.Fl., iii, 222.)

The above remarks were doubtless written partly in contemplation of those specimens of E. crebra found in dry localities (see p. 68), and partly of those lanceolar-leaved forms of E. melanophloia formerly considered (on herbarium specimens only) to belong to E. crebra. See also my remarks at p. 53, Part XI, of this work.

  ― 68 ―

The two trees could not be confused in the bush, E. crebra being an Ironbark with more or less of a boxy bark as the tropics are approached, while E. microtheca is a Black Box, with flaky black bark on the butt, or it is a White Gum in Western Australia, where, however, there is no E. crebra, so far as we know.

5. With E. bicolor, A. Cunn., (E. largiflorens, F.v.M).

No. 4731, Robert Brown's Collections (1802–5), distributed by order of J. J. Bennett, is labelled E. bicolor, A. Cunn., in many collections.

Mueller refers to the similarity of the two species, and says:—

E. bicolor (largiflorens) recedes by its paler, less furrowed bark; the leaves more conspicuously and darker dotted; the lateral veins less copious; the circumferential vein much more removed from the edge; the anther-cells opening through a pore-like aperture; and the lid perhaps generally shorter and blunter.

E. crebra is an Ironbark, although the furrows get shallower as the tropics are reached. E. bicolor has black scaly bark; the wood of the two species is a good deal alike. The juvenile leaves of the two species are very narrow, and both trees have a drooping habit. The leaves of E. bicolor are glaucous, and those of E. crebra, as has been more than once pointed out, get glaucous also in dry localities. The foliage and branchlets of E. crebra are usually thinner and the fruits smaller. The filaments of E. bicolor are shorter.

6. With E. acmenioides, Schauer.

4. Gum-tree from the Brisbane, Leichhardt, with small globular fruits, much contracted at the orifice, but no flowers; the leaves those of the common Moreton Bay E. crebra. (B.Fl. iii, 222, under E. crebra.)

The leaves are nearly black, particularly on the upper surface, an appearance which is often occasioned through specimens having been wet and having become heated in that state, before drying. The under-surface is pale. I have been unable to find any Queensland specimens (Brisbane River or otherwise) precisely similar to Leichhardt's, but am of opinion that they are a narrow-leaved form of E. acmenioides, probably taken from the top of the tree, where the smallest leaves are usually found.

The affinity between E. acmenioides and E. crebra is not close, and I quote the present example of supposed affinity for what it is worth, as I think we should endeavour to elucidate all specimens referred to in Bentham's classic.

13. LII. Eucalyptus Staigeriana, F.v.M.

Description  69 
Notes supplementary to the description  69 
Synonym  70 
Range  70 
Affinities  70 

  ― 69 ―


LII. E. Staigeriana, F.v.M.

Ex Bailey in Syn. Queensland Flora, 176 (1883).

THE original description is as follows:—

Lemon-scented Ironbark tree of medium size; foliage glaucous. Leaves obovate to almost lanceolate, 2 to 5 inches long, ½ to nearly 2 inches broad, petiole about 1 inch; oil-dots numerous; veins not prominent, the intramarginal one near the edge. Peduncles lateral, about 1 inch long, each bearing from 3 to 6 small flowers, often forming terminal panicles. Operculum conical. Calyx-tube about 1 line diameter. Stamens 1 to 2 lines long, inflected in the bud; anthers globular. Fruit about 2 lines diameter. Seeds disk-like. (Palmer River.)

The foliage of this tree, which was first discovered by P. F. Sellheim, yields a large quantity of oil, equal in fragrance to that of lemons, and for which it forms an excellent substitute. The percentage of oil from dry leaves obtained by Mr. Staiger is 2¾; the specific gravity 0·901.

Notes supplementary to the Description.

The species was named in honour of Karl Theodore Staiger, Government Analytical Chemist of Queensland for some years, and who made many experiments in regard to the chemistry of native plants.

The present work only touches incidentally upon matters of economic botany, but since this is not a New South Wales species, and I, therefore, cannot deal with it in my “Forest Flora of New South Wales,” I give brief particulars concerning its essential oil. Mr. Staiger first examined it, reporting that:—“The leaves possess an odour very like the Scented Verbena (Lippia citriodora); and yield an oil similar to the verbena oil (from Andropogon citratus) of commerce. He found the dried leaves to yield 2¾ to 3 per cent. (other figures give 1,290 oz. to 1 ton of dry leaves) of volatile oil of specific gravity ·901.”

Then Messrs. Schimmel & Co., of Leipzig, reported:—

Its leaves yield upon distillation 2·75–3·36 per cent. of an oil smelling pleasantly like lemon and verbena. It has the sp. gr. 0·880–0·901 and boils from 170–230°. The lemon-like odour is due to citral; which, besides terpenes, forms the principal constituents of the oil.note The same firm subsequently stated:—

Percentage of yield of oil from raw material, 3·7; specific gravity at 15° C. ·880; contains Citral; boils between 223° and 233°.note

Finally, Messrs. Baker and Smith published a paper, entitled “The Lemon-scented Ironbark (Eucalyptus Staigeriana, F.v.M.) and its essential oil.”note They find the oil to contain:—

Limonene  60·00 
Geraniol  12·72 
Geranyl Acetate  8·32 
Citral  16·00 
Undetermined  2·96 

  ― 70 ―


E. crebra, F.v.M., var. citrata, F.v.M.

Fruit-bearing twigs of an Ironbark tree, with lemon-scented foliage, were obtained by Mr. Bailey on the Palmer River; these seem referable to E. crebra also, although the leaves are shorter and blunter, and the peripheric vein is slightly removed from the edge; the fragrance of this supposed variety, which might be called citrata, is so exquisite that the leaves can be used as a culinary condiment. (“Eucalyptographia,” under E. crebra.) The idea of flavouring food with a citronella-like oil is amusing.


ITS range appears to be very limited, being confined to a not very extensive area in Northern Queensland, chiefly on the Palmer River (south-west of Cooktown). Hence its seed is sought after as a commercially valuable oil-bearing Eucalyptus tree for tropical countries.


1. With E. crebra, F.v.M.

The affinity is very close. The shape of the juvenile foliage and the odour of the leaves separate them. There is no citral in E. crebra. The flowers and fruits of E. Staigeriana are, generally speaking, coarser than those of E. crebra. The wood, bark, and habit of the two trees are very similar. The fruit is sometimes conoid and with a rounded rim, like that of E. crebra.

2. With E. melanophloia, F.v.M.

The affinity is even closer to the lanceolate-leaved form of this species than with E. crebra. There is no citral in the leaves of E. melanophloia.

14. LIII. Eucalyptus melanophloia, F.v.M.

Description  71 
Notes supplementary to the description  71 
Range  72 
Affinities  73 

  ― 71 ―


LIII. E. melanophloia, F.v.M.

In Journ. Linn. Soc., iii, 93 (1859), in Latin.

DESCRIBED in English by Bentham in B. Fl. iii, 220, with a doubt (p. 221), but subsequent investigations have confirmed its claim to specific rank.

It was not figured by Mueller in the “Eucalyptographia,” but it was included by him in his “Second Census” (1889).

Notes supplementary to the Description.

Bark.—The bark varies. Mueller, in the original description, says: “persistent bark thick, deeply furrowed, rough and blackish.” He then speaks of Leichhardt (Overland Expedition, &c.) having found a second form, about the Gulf of Carpentaria, with dirty greyish, flaky bark.

Leares.—The shapes of the leaves vary. The original description of them is “1½ to 3 inches long, 1–2 broad, obtuse or cuspidate-acuminate, occasionally cordate-lanceolate or entirely cordate.”

Let us now study some specimens examined by Bentham for the Flora Australiensis.

1. Box-tree of the Mackenzie River, Leichhardt, also on the Suttor River, Bowman, described by both as having the bark persistent and fissured. The specimens are somewhat glaucous, the leaves rather thin and broad, and often obtuse. The flowers quite those of E. crebra, the fruit not seen. This is very probably an alternate-leaved state of E. melanophloia. (B. Fl. iii, 222, under E. crebra.)

The above two specimens are on one sheet in Herb. Kew. A note on the first is “Bark fissured,” and on the second “Bark fissured, not shedding.”

2. Gum-topped Box from Suttor River, Bowman, described as having the bark furrowed and persistent on the trunk, coming off in layers on the branches. Flowers of E. crebra. Fruits of the same shape, but rather larger, much smaller, however, than in E. drepanophylla. (B.Fl. iii, 222, under E. crebra.)

These three specimens are, in my opinion, identical. They were presented to me by the Director of Kew early in 1901 as the result of an application made by me during my visit to Kew in 1900.

They are the lanceolate-leaved form of E. melanophloia, F.v.M., that species having frequently lanceolate leaves and leaves of the ordinary shape on the same tree.

As regards the term “Box,” as E. melanophloia approaches the warmer parts of Queensland its bark assumes less of the Ironbark character, and takes on that of a Box. (See my remarks on E. crebra at p.68.)

These specimens are interesting, as the identical ones which caused Bentham (B.Fl. iii, 221 and 222) and Mueller (Eucalyptographia) to hesitate as to the relations between E. crebra and E. melanophloia.

  ― 72 ―

In a papernote Mr. R. T. Baker has emphasised this leaf-variation, and gives figures. I have figured small pieces of Bentham's specimens (these are heteroblastic, i.e., with the juvenile and adult leaves different, as with most Eucalypts), at figs. 13–15 of Pl. 53, while what may be termed the normal form (homoblastic, with the juvenile and adult leaves similar) will be found figured on Pl. 54, figs. 1–4.

Mr. E. Maher, of Collaroy, gave me the name “Ginghi” as the native name for this tree on the Macquarie. I have received the name “Ghinghit” from the Dubbo district, but cannot understand the difference between the two words.


IN the original description the localities given for this species are:—

(a) Newcastle Range to Moreton Bay, accompanying E. crebra, and indicating sterile soil.

(b) Sub-tropical New Holland (Mitchell). “March 5, 1846. No. 485. Ironbark. Sub-tropical New Holland. Lieut.-Col. Sir T. L. Mitchell. E. pulverulenta, aff. H.” (Hooker). Copy of a label in Herb. Cant. ex Herb. Lindl. This is E. melanophloia.

Mitchell, see his “Journal of an Expedition into the Interior of Tropical Australia,” p. 80, and map, was, on that date, at the “Springs of Carawy,” in lat. 30° S. and, say, 148° 30 east longitude, a little to the north of Walgett, New South Wales.

(c) Moreton Bay, Moore, No. 66 of the “Sydney” woods, Paris Exhibition (1855). The word “Sydney” may be misleading. The collection was got together in Sydney, but the original label is “The Silver-leaved Ironbark of the Northern Districts” (which in this particular instance referred to Moreton Bay, Queensland not having been proclaimed a separate colony).

It is very extensively distributed in the drier parts of New South Wales and Queensland. Following are some localities represented in the National Herbarium, Sydney:—


“Silver-leaved Ironbark,” Dubbo (J. L. Boorman); Tomingley to Narromine, fruits very small (J.H.M.); Mulungerebar, Coolabah; also Willeroon, only a few in the district (R. W. Peacock); Ford's Bridge, 41 miles west of Bourke, on red sandy ridges (A. Murphy); Bourke district (O. C. Macdougall).

“Silver or Broad-leaved Ironbark,” Narrabri (Henry Deane, J. L. Boorman, J.H.M.); Gundy, near Scone, the most easterly recorded locality (J.H.M.); Walroodah, Barraba (R. D. Hay); “Narrow-leaved form,” Howell, near Inverell (E. C. Andrews).

  ― 73 ―

“A very common tree all over the Warialda district, both on the hills and on the low lands” (J. L. Boorman); No. 10 (Rev. H. M. R. Rupp); No. 12, the ordinary broad-leaved form, and No. 84, the narrow-leaved form, Warialda (E. J. Hadley).

Common all over the Warialda and Bingera district. Many were killed by the last drought. Yallaroi (Forest Guard Edward Julius); Ashford (W. S. Campbell); Acacia Creek, Macpherson Range (W. Dunn).


Morven (collected for F. M. Bailey); “Silver-leaved Ironbark,” “Of no utility,” Maryborough (W. A. Williams); “Silver-leaved Ironbark,” Brian Pastures, Gayndah (S. A. Lindeman); Rockhampton, narrowish leaves (Amalia Dietrich); Rockhampton, with normal leaves (R. Simmons); “Box tree of the Mackenzie River” (Leichhardt), the narrow-leaved form. A specimen like this shows considerable resemblance to E. microtheca, F.v.M.; King's Creek (E. Bowman); “Ironbark,” also “Weeping Box,” Jericho (H. Deane), leaves medium broad. There is no difference between them. Mr. Deane, a considerable authority on Eucalyptus, labels them “Weeping Box,” “Mackenzie River Box—White stem.” See p. 71; Stannary Hills (Dr. T. L. Bancroft).


“Ironbark.” Isdell River (W. V. Fitzgerald). Narrowish leaves, and rather small fruits. Sent as E. crebra. I am not aware that E. melanophloia has been previously recorded from Western Australia.


1. With E. pruinosa, Schauer.

This was pointed out by Mueller in the “Eucalyptographia.” So far as we know, however, the leaves of E. pruinosa are homoblastic. The leaves of E. pruinosa are, as a rule, larger, while the fruits are certainly so.

2. With E. crebra, F.v.M.

Already referred to under E. crebra, p. 67.

3. With E. microtheca, F.v.M.

Already referred to. The leaves of E. microtheca are much less heteroblastic than those of E. melanophloia.

4. With E. cinerea, F.v.M.

Bentham says: “It (E. melanophloia) sometimes resembles E. cinerea, but differs in the bark, the stamens, and the fruit. (B.Fl. iii, 221.) I will refer to this affinity, and to E. cinerea, when treating of E. pulverulenta, Sims.

15. LIV. Eucalyptus pruinosa, Schauer.

Description  74 
Notes supplementary to the description  74 
Synonym  74 
Range  74 
Affinities  75 

  ― 74 ―


LIV. E. pruinosa, Schauer.

IN Walpers' Repert. ii, 926 (1843). See also F.v.M. in Fragm. iii, 132 (1862–3). The descriptions in both these works are in Latin, but in English in B.Fl. iii, 213 (1866), and in “Eucalyptographia” with a figure.

Schauer tells us that the original specimen was collected by Ferdinand Bauer. (It was found along the Gulf of Carpentaria in 1802–5). Figure 5a of Plate 54 was drawn from the type in the Vienna Herbarium, lent to me for the purpose.

Notes supplementary to the Description.

This is the “Silver-leaved Box” of Northern Australia, and Mr. E. Palmer records that its native name is “Kullingal.” He also states that the Cloncurry blacks employ the inner bark for rheumatic pains.

Mueller states that this tropical tree is small or middle-sized, and with “box-bark”; he also suggests its use as a fuel-supply tree for the tropics.


E. spodophylla, F.v.M. in Fragm. ii, 71.

IT would appear that his species was never properly described, but the name cannot be ignored. Following is the reference at Fragm. ii, 71.

E. spodophylla systematice divellitur ab E. pulverulenta jam corticis textura et staminum brevitate.”

It has been distributed under this name in several important herbaria.


MUELLER (Eucalyptographia) states that it is rather frequent in arid country around the Gulf of Carpentaria, and in Arnheim's Land, especially on the sandstone-tablelands, extending southward at least to the sources of the Victoria River, the commencement of Sturt's Creek (Mueller), and of Ord River (A. Forrest), occurring also in the islands of Carpentaria (R. Brown, Bauer, Henne).

It is represented as follows in the National Herbarium, Sydney:—

Queensland and Northern Australia.—Mt. Albion (S. Dixon); Ravenswood (collected for F. M. Bailey); Stannary Hills (Dr. T. L. Bancroft); “The Upper Lynd” (Leichhardt); Sweer's Island (Henne).

North-western West Australia.—East Kimberley “Apple Gum” (R. Helms). In flower only. Ord River, E. Kimberley (W. V. Fitzgerald), with small fruits and well-exserted valves.

  ― 75 ―


1. With E. melanophloia, F.v.M.

Mueller (Eucalyptographia) states that it is only with E. melanophloia that E. pruinosa can be confounded, and he proceeds to indicate the differences. I have referred to the matter under E. melanophloia.

2. With E. pulverulenta, Sims.

Among trees with roundish, sessile, greyish, opposite leaves only E. pulverulenta need be alluded to here in reference to their distinguishing marks; but it has its umbels solitary and axillary, its anthers elongated and opening with longer slits, and its fruits flat or convex-rimmed. (“Eucalyptographia,” under E. pruinosa.)

It seems only necessary to add that E. pruinosa, so far as is known at present, is always heteroblastic as regards its leaves. Its leaves are larger than those of E. pulverulenta, and it is a tropical, or almost tropical, species, while E. pulverulenta grows in elevated districts in New South Wales and Victoria with low winter temperatures.

3. With E. gamophylla, F.v.M.

The connate leaves, smaller flowers, shorter lid, longer anther slits, and most particularly the sharply triangular seeds, surrounded by a diaphanous membrane, distinguish E. gamophylla readily from E. pruinosa.—(“Eucalyptographia,” under E. pruinosa.)

A marked rim is present in the fruit in E. pruinosa, and the fruits are broader and larger than I have seen them in E. gamophylla.

4. With E. pleurocarpa, Schauer (E. tetragona, F.v.M.).

This is another glaucous species which might be brought under review in this connection. The anthers of the two species are different in shape and arrangement, the leaves of E. pleurocarpa have a very short petiole, the fruits are very much larger, while the operculum is hemispherical or nearly so. E. pleurocarpa is always, so far as we know, never more than a tall slender shrub, native of south Western Australia.

16. LV. Eucalyptus Smithii, R. T. Baker.

Description  76 
Synonyms  76 
Range  77 
Affinities  77 

  ― 76 ―


LV. E. Smithii, R. T. Baker.

In Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., xxiv, (1899), 292, with a figure. A ribbony barked tree of considerable size. It has smooth limbs, and most of the butt is smooth.


  • 1. E. viminalis, Labill., var. pedicellaris, F.v.M. (in part).
  • 2. E. Mazeliana, Naudin, with some doubt.

1. E. viminalis, Labill. var. pedicellaris, F.v.M. (in part).

See Deane and Maiden in Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W. xxvi, 141 (1901):—

E. viminalis, Labill. var., pedicellaris, F.v.M. (ined.). Mr. R. T. Baker has described a species (these Proceedings, 1899, p. 292) under the name of E. Smithii, which, in our opinion, is simply a variety of E. viminalis with 6–8 flowers and longish pedicels. It is the E. viminalis var. pedicellaris, F.v.M., of Herb. Melb. It has rough bark at butt, and notes in regard to it will be found under “Bark” (supra, p. 140). It has narrow suckers like normal viminalis.

At Ben Bullen there is a clump of trees growing in a low-lying situation. The timber, bark, foliage, and habit are identical, with the exception that the rough bark of var. pedicellaris is further up the stem than is the case with the viminalis alongside; it is, of course, multiflowered. The trees are all 2–3 feet in diameter, and as regards the rough bark, it varies from 3 feet to 10 feet up the butt in normal viminalis, and from 12 or 15 feet up to the first fork and even beyond in var. pedicellaris. The most careful examination fails to show any difference in the texture of the rough bark of E. viminalis and its variety pedicellaris.

I think it is not always possible, in the present state of our knowledge, to separate E. Smithii and E. viminalis var. pedicellaris on herbarium specimens alone. It will be convenient to go into the matter when E. viminalis is reached.

2. E. Mazeliana, Naudin, Mém. 2, p. 41. See footnote p. 89 of this Part.

Following is a translation of Naudin's description of his E. Mazeliana:—

Tree very biform (he is referring to the difference in shape in juvenile and adult leaves.—J.H.M.) among the most rustic (rustique, I hardly understand the full force of this word.—J.H.M.) species of the genus. It has been seen to withstand frosts from 12° to 13° centigrade at Montsauve, Gard, where M. Mazel has cultivated it for several years.

When young, the leaves are opposite, sessile, linear-lanceolate, green and shining, with an average length of 10 centimetres, from 5–7 millimetres broad, and more or less bent like a sickle.

At the early stage it might be confused with the young plants of E. viminalis, which are, however, rather variable; it is distinguished from it, however, by its leaves, which are narrower and longer than in the greater number of the individual plants of viminalis.

When full-grown the distinctive characteristics are easy to perceive; the alternate and petiolate leaves are long-lanceolate, straight or slightly curved like a scythe, 10–12 centimetres long and 10–12 millimetres broad, often less. It is by the inflorescence and the fruit especially that E. Mazeliana

  ― 77 ―
is distinguished from viminalis. The axillary and pedunculate umbels are seven-flowered except in the case of abortion or fall of several flower-buds. These latter are ovoid, shortly pedicellate but not quite sessile, with a conical-obtuse operculum the same length as the calyx-tube. The fruit, which is scarcely larger than a grain of pepper, is hemispherical, flattened at the top, and the capsule, which is a little shorter than the calyx-tube, has from 3–4 cells.

This tree, interesting in its rusticity (rustiaté sic.—J.H.M.) is still too narrowly distributed. It has been known to attain its full growth and to flower only in the garden of M. Mazel, an amateur gardener, who has greatly helped to introduce and to propagate a large number of exotic plants in Provence.

If E. Mazeliana is not viminalis and not E. Smithii, I cannot say what it is. The only point in the description (so far as it goes) which is not a proper description of E. Smithii, is the fruit, which is said to be “flattened at the top,” but an unripe specimen may have been described. I have tried for years to obtain specimens, but without success.


So far as we know at present, it is restricted to the south coastal districts of New South Wales, the extreme western locality ascertained at present being not further than 60 miles from the sea. It should be looked for further south in New South Wales, and also in the Gippsland gullies, Victoria.

The original localities recorded were Sugar Loaf Mountain, Monga, and Irish Corner Mountain, all near Braidwood. Following are the localities represented in the National Herbarium, Sydney:—

Sugar Loaf Mountain near Braidwood. Type (W. Baeuerlen); “Blackbutt,” “White-topped Mountain Ash,” Major's Creek (W. Bound); “Jerrigree,” Bungendore (Allan Millard); “Jimmy Green” (I do not know whether this is a corruption of the Bungendore name or vice versâ, or whether they are independent names); Hoskinstown (Samuel Daniel); “White Top,” “Peppermint,” Nye's Hill, Wingello (J. L. Boorman); “White Ash” only in gullies,” Wingello (A. Murphy); Joadja Cross Roads, near Bowral (R. H. Cambage and J.H.M.); Colo Vale (E. Cheel); “Blackbutt,” Mt. Kembla (R. H. Cambage); Yeranderie to Mt. Werong, over 3,000 feet, the most westerly locality recorded (R. H. Cambage).


LEAVING the Porantheræ for the present, we now take cognizance of two anomalous members of the Renantheræ, E. Smithii, R. T. Baker, and E. Naudiniana, F.v.M.

As regards E. Smithii, Mr. Baker has drawn attention to the fact that its kino gives a turbid solution in cold water, and contains eudesmin, but not aromadendrin. This removes the species from my Ruby Group (of kinos), all of which belong to the Renantheræ. It is, in this respect, with affinity to E. microcorys.

  ― 78 ―

The author (op. cit.) says:—

In botanical sequence, it probably should be placed between E. Baeuerlenii, F.v.M., and E. viminalis, Labill., as in the young state the leaves belong to what may be called the “Viminalis Group,” and are quite different from those of the “Stringybark Group.”

1. With E. viminalis, Labill.

Mr. Baker's remarks on the affinities of the two species have already been referred to, and I will reserve further remarks until I come to E. viminalis. It appears to come closest, in most characters, to that species, but the anthers are very different. It seems, indeed, to be an anomalous member of the Renantheræ.

2. With E. scoparia, Maiden.

Its nearest affinity appears to be E. Smithii, R. T. Baker, from which it appears to be sharply separated by the markedly smooth bark of the new species. I separate the two trees mainly on that ground, the bark of E. Smithii being almost an Ironbark. The timber also of E. Smithii appears to be darker.— Maiden, in Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., xxix, 779 (1904). The anthers also are very different.

3. With E. Sieberiana, F.v.M.

These two species are known as “Ash,” but the bark of E. Sieberiana is more of an Ironbark, and its juvenile leaves, buds, fruits are very different.

4. With E. punctata, DC.

Mr. Baker says:—“In the chemistry of the oil and kino, this tree approaches E. punctata, DC., and a further resemblance is shown in that manna has been obtained from it; this differs in no respects from the manna of E. punctata.”

The differences are in the bark of E. punctata, which is a “Grey Gum”; in its timber, which is red, while that of E. Smithii is pale-coloured; in its leaves, which are broader and differently veined to those of E. Smithii. It is, indeed, easier, at present, to point out the dissimilarities of E. Smithii than its affinities.

17. LVI. Eucalyptus Naudiniana, F.v.M.

Description  79 
Notes supplementary to the description  79 
Synonym  80 
Range  81 
Affinities  81 

  ― 79 ―


LVI. E. Naudiniana, F.v.M.

In Australasian Journal of Pharmacy (Melbourne), July, 1886.

As this publication is not readily accessible to botanists, I publish such portions of Mueller's paper, “Description of an hitherto unrecorded species of Eucalyptus from New Britain” as are necessary. Mueller, in a prefatory note, speaks of the plant as being to “all appearance a veritable species of Eucalyptus.” He saw no fruit and apparently no buds, hence his uncertainty.

Eucalyptus Naudiniana.—Branchlets valid, angular; leaves scattered, on short broadish stalks, ovate-lanceolar, acuminate, much paler beneath; their primary veins distant, thin, very spreading and somewhat ascending, the peripheral vein not quite close to the edge of the leaf; veinlets subtle; oil-dots much concealed; panicles ample, terminal or from the upper axils; flowers small, nine or often fewer in each umbel; stalklets angular, as long as the total calyx or somewhat longer; tube of the latter hemispheric, slightly angular; lid hardly longer, almost semiglobular, suddenly produced into a thin beak-like apex; stamens all fertile and all inflected while in bud; anthers minute roundish-ovate, bursting longitudinally; style short; stigma not dilated; ovary surpassed by the calyx-tube, somewhat convex and angular at the summit.

Near Spacious Bay; J. Turner. (G. Turner, who was with the Rev. Mr. Brown at the time.) The specimens communicated by Ch. Moore, Esq., F.L.S., Director of the Botanic Garden of Sydney. New Ireland, Rev. G. Brown. (This is an error; it should be New Britain, so the Rev. Dr. G. Brown tells me.—J.H.M. A tree attaining a height of about 100 feet. Leaves usually 3–4 inches long, 1¼–1¾ inches broad, slightly inequilateral, not very thick in texture, dark-green and shining above, quite dull beneath. Panicles measuring from a few to several inches, the majority of their branches not opposite. Total length of the calyces hardly more than ? inch. Stamens very numerous. Style only about ? inch long. Fruit unknown. This species bears in some respects near affinity to E. Cloeziana; but the branchlets are much thicker, the leaf-stalks dilated upwards, the leaves broader, less oblique and of firmer structure, with a soft lustre on the surface, the branches of the panicle and also the stalklets are more angular, while the lid is conspicuously pointed, the ovary less depressed, and the style shorter. The fruit, irrespective of perhaps bark and wood, may also be different.

Notes supplementary to the Description.

Neither Rich (Asa Gray, see below) nor Mueller saw the buds or opercula of this species, and both had some doubts as to the genus of the plant.

My complete specimens, however, remove all doubt, and the description may be supplemented as follows:—

Juvenile leaves.—Branchlets flattened to quadrangular, more or less glandular-prickly; leaves nearly symmetrical, nearly oval, at the base tapering into a short petiole and at the apex into a blunt point, texture thin, paler on the under side, venation marked, particularly on the under side, intramarginal vein not evident, sometimes triplinerved, secondary veins arranged concavely with respect to the midrib and not opposite each other. Ultimate veins reticulate.

Flower-buds.—Operculum conical, the calyx-tube about of equal length, which then tapers somewhat abruptly into a pedicel in length about equal to that of the bud.

The tree has a smooth bark, and reddish timber. It is cut for commercial purposes in a local sawmill.

  ― 80 ―


E. multiflora, Rich.

Following is the description, which is not readily available, and therefore I reproduce it:—

E. ? foliis subalternis petiolatis oblongis acuminatis basi acutis aequilateris concoloribus laxe penninerviis venulosis costa venisque primariissubtus prominentibus; cymis paniculatis multifloris; pedunculis compresso-angulatis; capsulis subglobosis. Hab. near Caldera, Mindanao, one of the Philippine Islands.

The specimens consist of a leafy shoot, and a leafless branch with the inflorescence of the previous season, bearing the persistent capsules. The latter show what appears to be the line of circumscissile dehiscence; otherwise there are no evident grounds for referring the plant to Eucalyptus. The leaves are not phyllodineous, and apparently not vertical; they are unequally alternate, oblong, acuminate, or at least acute at both ends, 4 or 5 inches long and 1½ or 2 inches wide, on petioles of half an inch in length, equilateral, chartaceous, thickly pellucid-punctate, dull and of the same hue both sides, loosely feather-veined, the primary veins and the midrib prominent underneath, but impressed above; the veinlets minutely reticulated. Branchlets, especially the fructiferous ones, somewhat angled. The flowers appear to have been in naked, terminal and axillary, paniculate cymes; the peduncles, &c., compressed-angled, many flowered; the pedicels umbellately fascicled in threes and fives, as long as the capsules. The latter are globular; 2 lines in diameter, the summit, above the line from which the limb of the calyx has fallen, convex; there four-valved; within four-celled; each cell containing a large placenta, which has evidently borne numerous seeds. These, however, have all been shed. I thus record the plant, under the name given by Mr. Rich in the collection, since Blume has published one or two Eucalypti from the Moluccas and other Malayan Islands, to which this plant may be related.—(A. Gray in Bot. U.S. Exped., 554.)

The type is referred to in the following paper by me:—


In the Botany of the United States Exploring Expedition during the years 1838–1842, under the command of Charles Wilkes, U.S. Navy,note there is givennote an account of a plant found near Caldera, Mindanao, one of the Philippine Islands. Leaves and fruits were available, and Asa Gray says:—“I thus record the plant under the name Eucalyptus multiflora, Rich, given by Mr. Richnote in the collection.”

Bentham refersnote to this specimen in the following words:—

A fifth species of Eucalyptus from a still more distant region, Mindanao, one of the Philippine Islands, is described by A. Gray in the Botany of the American Exploring Expedition,note under the name of E. multiflora, Rich, from a specimen in leaf, and with a panicle of old fruits from which the calyx limb and operculum, if any, are fallen away and the open capsules have lost all their seeds. The four-celled (not three-celled) capsule is the only character leading us to suppose that it may be a Eucalyptus rather than a Tristania or a Metrosideros. No mention of it occurs in Blanco's Flora.

It will thus be seen that the very identity of the genus of this plant was doubted by an eminent authority.

A short time ago, through the kindness of the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution Washington, D.C., I was able to examine Gray's specimen. It is No. 25483 of the U.S. National Herbarium, and as it turns out to be identical with Eucalyptus Naudiniana, F. v. Müller, E. multiflora, Rich, must fall, because the name is preoccupied (E. multiflora, Poiret, probably a synonym of E. pilularis, Smith).note

There are so few Eucalypti found outside Australia that the question of the identity of one found beyond the limits of that continent is of interest, and the occurrence of the genus in the Philippines is now set at rest, and doubtless its range in that group will be ascertained by American botanists.

E. Naudiniana, F. v. Müller, is so little known that the following notes in regard to it may be acceptable. It was described by Müller in the “Australasian Journal of Pharmacy,”note under the title of “Description of a Hitherto Unrecorded Species of Eucalyptus from New Britain.” New Britain is, of course, now a German possession under the name of Bismarck Archipelago.

  ― 81 ―

A correspondent in that group writes to me:—

Eucalyptus Naudiniana is common in Neu Pommern, though not in the Ralum district, where I live. It grow especially on the rivers, from the coast to the mountains, and is so common in the forests that two sawmills have been started especially for this timber. The timber is not so hard as the Australian Eucalyptus, but still a good, useful timber.

I know of no locality for the species other than that indicated in this paper. (Proceedings U.S. National Museum, Vol. xxvi, No. 1327.)

Then we have a note:—

Eucalyptus multiflora, Rich, sp. nov., p. 554 (Wilkes' Exped.).

Hab. near Caldera, Mindanao, one of the Philippine Islands. One of the few species of Eucalyptus found out of Australia, and not as yet rediscovered.note It has been reduced by Maiden to Eucalyptus Naudiniana, F. Müll. (Pl. 2). (Phil. Journ. of Science, iii, 83, June, 1908.)

A photograph of Rich's type specimen is given.


THE Philippine Islands and New Britain (Neu Pommern). The locality New Ireland in the original description is wrong, as I have pointed out. It would be desirable to look out for it also in the Caroline Islands, northern New Guinea, and the Solomons.

Under E. alba (Eucalyptographia) Mueller records “an Eucalyptus-like tree has recently been recorded from New Ireland (Britain) by the Rev. Mr. Brown as forming forests in that island.” This Eucalypt is E. Naudiniana, so Mr. (now Dr.) Brown tells me.


IT is not easy to state the affinity of this species. Its anthers are somewhat anomalous. In most cases, in this species, the anther-cells are not confluent. At the same time, as regards shape, it is undoubtedly Renantherous. As regards foliage, it is markedly eugenioid.

It is one of the very few extra-Australian species, but it is not closely related to any of them. Indeed, its close affinities to any species are not apparent.

Looking at its large, homogeneous timber and its umbrageous foliage, it is obviously the product of good soil and favourable cultural conditions,—plenty of moisture and adequate shelter.

1. With E. Cloeziana, F.v.M.

Both species have dense panicles of flowers which have a general resemblance. But otherwise their relations are not close, either in anthers or fruits, nor, as far as I can see, in other respects.

2. With E. microcorys, F.v.M.

The leaves in both species are thin; those of E. microcorys are much narrower. The anthers are much the same, but the fruits are very different.

3. With E. saligna, Sm.

The two species resemble each other in bark and timber. In foliage and other respects there is less similarity.

18. LVII. Eucalyptus sideroxylon, A. Cunn.

Description  82 
Anthers with terminal pores  83 
Varieties  84 
Range  84 
Affinities  87 

  ― 82 ―


LVII. E. sideroxylon, A. Cunn.

FOLLOWING is the earliest record I can find of this species:—

At the base of the range of hills at Mount Maude some tolerable fair specimens of the Western Ironbark, Eucalyptus sideroxylon, were noticed, being easily distinguished from its congeners by its extreme rugged, furrowed bark, containing, like others of the Eucalypti, a strong astringent gum. (A. Cunningham's MS. Journal, under date 19th May, 1817.)

Oxley's expedition was then in latitude 33° 25' and longitude 147° 10', i.e., about midway between Condobolin and Wyalong West. Some of these specimens were distributed with Cunningham's name.

The next reference I can find is:—

6th October, 1846 (near Mount Pluto), .… and among the larger forest trees was a Eucalyptus, allied to, but probably distinct from, the E. sideroxylon, A. Cunn., p. 339 (Mitchell's Trop. Journ. Austral., 339).

In the list of plants collected by Mitchell's Expedition, at p. 437 of his work, this plant, referred to at p. 339, is given as E. sideroxylon without any qualification. I have seen the specimens in question, and they are what we know as E. sideroxylon, A. Cunn.

Then Mueller described a White Gum under the name E. leucoxylon in Trans. Vict. Nat., i, 33 (1855). See below, p. 88.

Thereafter, for many years, this “White Gum” was confused with the New South Wales “Ironbark.” For example, Bentham in the Flora Australiensis (iii, 210), who is followed by Bailey in the Queensland Flora. Then Mueller, in Eucalyptographia, continues to confuse the two trees. But in the field they could not be considered identical for an instant. Bentham's description of E. leucoxylon applies very well to that of E. sideroxylon, but requires to be supplemented in the following points:—

E. sideroxylon E. leucoxylon
Juvenile leaves  Seedlings linear-lanceolate or linear, thenceforward lanceolate.  Cordate or ovate-lanceolate, sessile, glaucous. 
Bark  Black, furrowed, and rugged (Ironbark)  Whitish or bluish, smooth (White or Blue Gum). 
Timber  Deep red.  Pale brown or white (hence the name leucoxylon). 

The species (sideroxylon) may be described in the following words:—

A small, medium-sized or even tall tree, often gnarled. (A “Red Ironbark” or “Mugga.”)

Bark.—Blackish, deeply furrowed and rugged, usually pulverulent in texture, interspersed with blackish kino grains, the general appearance reminding one of a burnt greasy cake, hence the name “Fat-cake Ironbark.” Sapwood externally of a yellowish colour.

Juvenile leaves.—Narrow-linear to narrow-oblong, stalked, glaucous.

  ― 83 ―

Mature leaves.—Pale-coloured, often glaucous, of the same colour on both sides, thickish, lanceolate, often falcate, with a petiole of half an inch and more. Venation as a rule not prominent, but sometimes prominent, penniveined, the intramarginal vein distinctly removed from the edge.

Flowers.—The buds sometimes angular, the operculum pointed, the calyx-tube often sharply separated from the pedicel, which may be ·5 cm. in length and longer. Flowers up to 7 and even more in the head, with a common peduncle longer than the pedicel. Filaments bi-coloured, often cream-coloured, but more commonly pink to crimson. Masses of dead filaments often adhere to the nearly ripened capsule.

Fruits.—Turbinate to subcylindrical in shape, commonly 1 cm. in length and half that in diameter, with long pedicels. Often tuberculate and with a marked ring round the orifice, which is usually caducous as ripeness supervenes.

Anthers with terminal pores.—For reasons of space in arranging the plates, and because of the incompleteness of material of some species, and also because of the development of views as to affinities, it is not convenient, or even possible, at present, to arrange species in this work in strict sequence according to the anthereal or, indeed, any other classification. It may be pointed out, however, that the present species affords the first illustration, amongst species already dealt with, of the anther with terminal pores.

Such an anther has been described by Bentham as “truncate,” (e.g., at B. Fl. iii, 189).

Eucalyptus anthers, much more varied than usually supposed, and so important in classification, may require a whole Part of this work for their elucidation, so I cannot exhaust the subject at this place. I will content myself with the observation that obliquity of attachment of anthers seems to be a character of the terminal-pored series.

Vernacular Names.—Its aboriginal name is in very common use, and it is also known as “Red Ironbark” because of its timber, but the timbers of other Ironbarks (e.g., siderophloia and crebra) are also red. For obvious reasons it is also called “Red-flowering Ironbark.” Sometimes it is called “Black Ironbark,” because of the darkness of its bark. A very common name is “Fat Cake,” or “Fat-cake Ironbark.”

The name “Mountain Ash,” as applied to E. sideroxylon, has doubtless crept into the Flora Australiensis and other works on Oldfield's authority. Following is one of his labels, in his own handwriting. Oldfield confused, as regards bark at least, E. sideroxylon with the Mountain Ash (E. Sieberiana), which in the southeast of New South Wales has bark a good deal like an Ironbark.

Ironbark, or Black Mountain Ash of colonists; tree 180 feet; bark persistent, brittle with dots of gum; dark iron-grey, rough, with prominent ridges; wood very hard. Mountain Hut Range, near Eden, Twofold Bay. (Herb. Barbey-Boissier.)

Oldfield added later, “Eucalyptus sideroxylon, A.C.,” with which determination I agree.

Aboriginal Names.—By those of Gippsland it is known as “Yerrick.” It was called “Easip” by the aborigines of the Yarra (Victoria). “Yirik” (apparently the same as “Yerrick”) and “Bwurawi” are Gippsland aboriginal names for the Victorian Ironbark, as given by Howitt (“Eucalypts of Gippsland”).

  ― 84 ―

George Caley (Sir Joseph Banks' botanical collector in the Sydney district, 1800–1810) gave “Bargargro” as the aboriginal name for this Ironbark. He also noted the variations of white flowers, small red flowers, and large red flowers, in this species.note


Bentham (B.Fl. iii, 210) enumerates, under E. leucoxylon, two varieties, which, as far as the New South Wales specimens are concerned, are, in part at least, referable to E. sideroxylon, A. Cunn. They are:—

i. “var. pallens.—Leaves not so coriaceous and whitish.”

I will deal with the forms attributed to E. sideroxylon when I arrive at E. Caleyi, Maiden. E. sideroxylon is, in some districts, and at certain seasons, more or less glaucous, and some specimens are referable to E. Caleyi. I am of opinion that var. pallens cannot stand.

ii. “var. minor.—Flowers rather smaller and often more numerous at the ends of the branches. Parramatta, Woolls.”

I have seen the specimens and do not think that this variety can be maintained, if only because it refers to a mixture of two distinct species. E. sideroxylon varies somewhat in the size of the flowers, though not to the extent that E. leucoxylon does. The South Australian specimens referred to I will deal with under E. leucoxylon.


IT is confined to Victoria, New South Wales, and Queensland, so far as is known at present. Speaking of New South Wales, Mr. R. H. Cambage states that it rarely occurs at an altitude exceeding 2,000 feet, and shows a decided preference for sedimentary formations. The type locality is, as has already been stated, about midway between Condobolin and Wyalong West.


The confusion between E. sideroxylon and E. leucoxylon originated in Victoria, where both species occur, and the following unpublished official report of Mr. A. W. Howitt, dated 1895, is useful:—

The Ironbark is of two varieties (leucoxylon and sideroxylon.—J.H.M.) botanically speaking, but in practice there is no difficulty in distinguishing between them.

The variety which is universally known as “Ironbark” grows especially in the neighbourhood of Bendigo, Maryborough, Costerfield, Chiltern, and other places to the north of the Great Dividing Range. At the places named there are State Forests and Timber Reserves, but with the exception of the forest between Costerfield and Rushworth, the Ironbark is practically cut out.

  ― 85 ―

In Gippsland it is found in many parts, for instance: Toongabbie, Bairnsdale, Bruthen, the Lakes Entrance, but nowhere to such an amount as to form the greater part of the forest.

It is therefore nearly cut out. Young forests are, however, growing up in the localities referred to north of the Dividing Range.

The following applies to Gippsland:—

This tree does not form forests in Gippsland, as in other parts of Victoria, but occurs scattered over a wide extent of country, from sea-level up to 2,000 feet. It grows upon various formations, as, for instance, Toongabbie, on recent alluviums, Tertiary clays, and Upper Silurian; at Bairnsdale, upon miocene and later tertiary beds; at Glen Maggie, upon Upper Silurian sandstone; at Upper Freestone Creek, upon Upper Devonian conglomerates; at Noyang, upon Palæozoic Plutonic rocks; and near Buchan, on Tertiary sands and clays.

I have not observed it further to the westward of Toongabbie, and it varies but little, if at all, in character throughout Gippsland. (Howitt, “Eucalypts of Gippsland.”)

Following are some Victorian localities:—

Maryborough, “Rough-barked Ironbark” (J. Blackburne, A. W. Howitt); Heathcote (W. S. Brownscombe); Bendigo (W. W. Froggatt); Jackson's Creek (C. Walter); Goulburn Valley (Sylvester Browne); Red Knob, viâ Metung and Swan Reach, Gippsland, a typical rugged Ironbark (J.H.M.).

NOTE.—In Victoria it is often called the “Rugged-barked variety” (of leucoxylon).


Twofold Bay, “Ironbark or Black Mountain Ash” (B.Fl. iii, 210). (See Oldfield's label, showing how the erroneous name “Mountain Ash” arose); Pambula and Eden (A. W. Howitt, J.H.M.); Wagonga (J. S. Allan).

“The nearest commercial Ironbark procurable is at a distance of 30 miles east of Braidwood, near Nelligen, and separated by the Coast Range, viz., the Sugar Loaf Mountain. Ironbark is also obtainable at Mericombene, Parish of Milo, 40 miles S.E. of Braidwood, and separated by the Araluen Mountain” (J. V. de Coque); Mudmelong, Araluen (J.H.M.).

Liverpool (A. Rudder); Fairfield (H. Deane); Canley Vale (E. Betche); Bankstown and Cabramatta, “Bastard Ironbark” (to distinguish it from E. paniculata, &c.) (J. L. Boorman); “Pink or Crimson-flowering Ironbark,” 18–30 inches diameter, 40–60 feet high, from the vicinity of Parramatta; a beautiful flowering tree, but scarcely to be considered valuable for timber (Sir William Macarthur); Miss A. F. Walker, of Rhodes, Ryde, tells me that E. sideroxylon was once common at Five Dock, Parramatta River; George's River (B.Fl. iii, 210).

Rankin's Springs, 60 miles north of Whitton (W. S. Campbell); range of mountains dividing the Counties of Bourke and Bland, commencing at the northern boundary of Forest Reserve No. 2,785, County of Bourke (J. Duff).

  ― 86 ―

Adelong (J.H.M.); Gundagai (Forester J. S. Taylor); Big Springs, Wagga district. Diameter 2–3 feet, height 50–60 feet, (J. S. Taylor); “Red Ironbark,” Grenfell (District Forester Arthur Osborne, Forester Postlethwaite, R. H. Cambage); Cootamundra to Grenfell (District Forester A. Osborne); “only specimen of Red-flowering Ironbark in my district,” 45 miles west of Cootamundra (A. Osborne); Wyalong (A. Osborne); Common on ridges in Murrumbidgee and Lachlan districts (J. Duff); “Moogar,” Lachlan River near Condobolin (R. Kidston); Condobolin (J.H.M.); Palesthan, Condobolin (Miss Clements); “Red-flowering Ironbark,” Mimosa and Parkes (District Forester A. Wilshire); Trundle (P. J. Holdsworth).

Molong-Parkes (H. Deane); Molong (Dr. Andrew Ross); Cudal (A. Wilshire); Bowan Creek and Sand Creek, Bowan Park (W. F. Blakeley).

Euchareena (J. L. Boorman); Dubbo (H. Deane, J. V. de Coque, J. L. Boorman); Tomingley to Peak Hill (J.H.M.); Minore (J. L. Boorman); Sandy Creek and Bogan (W. Woolls). Auriferous ridges, County Flinders, near Nymagee. “Mugga” (Forest Guard E. F. Rogers); Cobar (W. Woolls); Nymagee. Very red flowers (Dr. J. W. Cox).

Near Cobborah (W. Forsyth); “Ironbark,” splits readily, Grattai, Merrindee, and tops of mountains generally, say, 2,000 feet above sea-level, between Mudgee and Wellington (A. Murphy).

Gulgong (J.H.M. and J. L. Boorman); Mudgee (W. Woolls); Rylstone (very glaucous) and Lue (J. L. Boorman); Hawkesbury Agricultural College, Richmond (C. T. Musson and M. Carne); Richmond (H. Deane); Parramatta to Hawkesbury River, scarce (J.H.M.).

“Fat-cake Ironbark,” Stroud district (A. Rudder); Narrabri (J.H.M., J. L. Boorman); Bundarra (Forest Guard Gordon Burrow); Murrurundi (J.H.M. and J. L. Boorman); on porphyritic felsite, 11–12 mile posts, Inverell to Tingha (R. H. Cambage); Inverell (Samuel Gray, Gordon Burrow); “Black Ironbark,” Howell (J.H.M. and J. L. Boorman); “Fatcake,” Warialda (Rev. H. M. R. Rupp, E. J. Hadley, J.H.M., and J. L. Boorman); “Fatcake,” S.E. of Warialda (E. A. Powell, collected for H. Deane). Fruits smaller than the normal species. All the bark is of a very gummy nature. Yagobri, near Warialda (Surveyor E. A. Powell).

This timber is obtainable at Deep Creek, near Bolivia, but not, I believe, very abundantly. (H. Deane). Western slopes of Dividing Range, County of Clive, Tenterfield (A. S. O. Reid).


Darling Downs (F. M. Bailey); Jimbour Station (Sir Joshua P. Bell); “Silver-leaved Ironbark” (not to be confused with E. melanophloia). Between Stanthorpe and Warwick (A. Murphy); South Queensland (H. Lau); Mackenzie River and cultivated in Botanic Garden, Rockhampton (R. Simmons).

  ― 87 ―


1. With E. leucoxylon, F.v.M.

This is the species with which E. sideroxylon may readily be confused, but I think the remarks offered at p. 82 and Plates 55 and 56 will render confusion not so easy. E. sideroxylon is often glaucous, though not so commonly as E. leucoxylon.

2. With E. melliodora, A. Cunn.

Large flowering and fruiting specimens of E. melliodora may, from herbarium specimens only, be sometimes confused with small flowering specimens of E. sideroxylon. Both also are drooping trees, but the bark and timber are totally different.

It is an Ironbark, and therefore may be confused with other Ironbarks, but the following table will readily separate them.

White or She Ironbark (paniculata).  Narrow-leaved Ironbark (crebra).  Broad-leaved Ironbark (siderophloia).  Red Ironbark (sideroxylon). 
Colour (darkens with age).  Very pale; pink when fresh.  Medium red.  Medium. A little darker than preceding.  Very dark. 
Bark  Often pale-coloured, even grey. Furrows often anastomosing.  Very deeply furrowed, inferior in depth only (if at all) to sideroxylon Often of a flaky character.  Dark; deepest furrowed. 
Leaves  Narrow and medium  Very narrow.  Very broad.  Medium; foliage often sparse. 
Flowers  White.  White.  White.  Crimson; sometimes creamy. 
Fruits  Small.  Very small.  Rather large.  Large. 

19. LVIII. Eucalyptus leucoxylon, F.v.M.

Description  88 
Notes supplementary to the description  89 
Synonym  90 
Varieties  90 
Range  93 
Affinities  94 

  ― 88 ―


LVIII. E. leucoxylon, F.v.M.

MUELLER described this species in the following words:—Arboreous:

Leaves.—Alternate, somewhat shining, narrow lanceolate, subfalcate, tapering into a long uncinate acumen, veined and furnished with pellucid dots; umbels axillary, generally three-flowered, with a thin peduncle.

Lid.—Conico-hemispherical, acuminate.

Tube of the Calyx.—Semiovate, somewhat longer than the lid.

Fruits.—Semiovate, hardly contracted at the orifice; the valves of the capsule inclosed.

Seeds.—Blackish clathrate.

In grassy plains, from the Avoca to St. Vincent's and Spencer's Gulf.

This is the “White Gum Tree” of the South Australian Colonists. (Trans. Victorian Inst., i, 33 [1855].)

In the following year (1856) Miquel redescribed it, on Mueller's behalf, as follows:—

9. Eucalyptus leucoxylvn Ferd. Müller; ramulis teretiusculis, foliis elongato-lanceolatis sursum angustatis, apiculo incurvo terminatis coriaceis nitidulis penniveniis subreticulatisque, pedunculis axillaribus tri-raro quinque-floris petiolo brevioribus pedicellos aequantibus, floribus 2 lateralibus patentibus, calyce operculoque rugulosis, hoc depresso-hemisphaerico subulato-attenuato aequilongo. (F. Müller, Herb. et adnot.)

Fere ubique in planitiebus locisque montosis, White Gum tree incolarum.

Arbor excelsa, rarius arbuscula 10–12 pedalis (in montium cacuminibus). Rami juniores rubelli, saepe pruinosi; folia obtuse viridia, juniora glauca. “Truncus albus sublaevis, passim striis fuscis.” (Dr. Behr.) Filamenta luteo-albida, antherae fuscae. Variat floribus duplo majoribus. (Miq. in Ned. Kruidk. Arch., iv, 127 [1856].)

It was then described (in Latin, of course) in Fragm. ii, 60 (1860), with E. cosmophylla, F.M., as a synonym (which seems strange to us now), and the “White Gum” and “Ironbark” combined as heretofore.

Then Bentham (B.Fl. iii, 209) redescribed E. leucoxylon, and his description can stand if Mueller's reference to the bark, the synonym E. sideroxylon, and the varieties pallens and minor be omitted.

We now come to Mueller's figure and description of E. leucoxylon in the “Eucalyptographia,” and here, again, we must delete (as synonyms) the references to E. sideroxylon and “Ironbark.” The figures of the mature fruits of E. leucoxylon are not characteristic.

The late Rev. Dr. Woolls, in his “Note on Eucalyptus leucoxylon, F.v.M. (Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., i [2nd ser.], 859 [1886]), first made clear the confusion of the two species. Before that date he had explained his views to me, verbally and in writing, and probably in writing to Naudin and others, for Naudin in 1883 refers to his views. In my “Forest Flora of New South Wales,” Part xiii, plate 49 (1903), I give figures which help to clear up the confusion.

  ― 89 ―

The confusion of a White Gum and Ironbark puzzled Naudinnote a good deal.

It is quite clear (1st Mem., 400) that he includes E. sideroxylon under E. leucoxylon. The juvenile leaves depicted by Mueller in the “Eucalyptographia” for leucoxylon are a great stumbling block, and he suggests some error in labelling in regard to the different seeds he has received from various sources under the name E. leucoxylon. At page 401 he distinctly states that it is the Ironbark which they possess in France.

Following Mueller, instead of Woolls, he looks upon the Ironbark as the type of the species (leucoxylon), and points out the similarity of the growing French trees to those of E. longifolia. The flowers in the umbel are from 3 to 9.

This conclusion as to the determination (erroneous) of E. leucoxylon is important, not only because Naudin's observations on the Eucalypts are the most important of those of any French botanist, but because the French are the most assiduous cultivators of the genus in Europe.

Then we turn to 2nd Mem., and we find that Naudin, at p. 36 (still following Mueller), adheres to the opinion that E. leucoxylon is the “Ironbark des Colons australiens,” and states his opinion that the juvenile foliage depicted by Mueller in his “Eucalyptographia” plate under E. leucoxylon is referable to another species. Proceeding to discuss the conflicting statements of Mueller and Woolls in regard to E. sideroxylon and E. leucoxylon, he concludes that he is unable to decide on the matter. He adds that he persists in considering his E. gracilipes as distinct from E. leucoxylon (E. sideroxylon.—J.H.M.), to which it may be a good deal analogous, and he regarded it possible that it might be the “White Gum” of the Australian colonists.

There is no doubt, however, in my mind, that E. gracilipes, Naudin, is E. leucoxylon, F.v.M. (with the E. sideroxylon confusion eliminated). Mueller was wrong in mixing up E. sideroxylon with E. leucoxylon; on the other hand, he was quite right in his figure of the broad juvenile leaves of E. leucoxylon on the “Eucalyptographia” plate. Naudin rejected the juvenile leaves as incorrect for E. leucoxylon, but accepted the Ironbark as correct for that species, and thus was led to found another species.

Notes supplementary to the Description.

Blue Gums (leucoxylon) are often covered with rough bark here right up into the tree. The bark is white inside, not yellow, and in some parts of the country the young bark is of a dirty yellow after the old falls off, and in others pinker or whiter. It varies very much, according to locality. in the warmer parts it is generally hollow in the centre and more solid than in the cooler parts. (W. Gill, Conservator of Forests of South Australia, in litt., 5th October, 1904.)

  ― 90 ―

It is commonly seen flowering and fruiting as a small straggling shrub. The late Mr. Luehmann wrote to me:—

“Near Bacchus Marsh, Victoria, where Baron von Mueller found it, I saw E. leucoxylon freely flowering and fruiting at a height of 4 to 6 feet on very poor shingly ground.”

The late Dr. A. W. Howitt called E. leucoxylon “White Ironbark” (because of its pale timber) or “Blue Gum,” and gave its aboriginal name as “Yandert.”

Note the glands on the filaments (see figs. 1e, 1f, pl. 56). Mueller first drew attention to this (see his figure in “Eucalyptographia”). I have only seen this glandular appearance on E. leucoxylon and E. Caleyi, and it should be looked for on other species. Diels figures it on his E. Forrestiana.


E. gracilipes, Naudin.

I HAVE already explained how this species arose, and have referred to it briefly in Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., xxviii, 896 (1903).

I give a translation of Naudin's original description of his species, as I find that it is not readily accessible to Australians:—

Tree very close to E. leucoxylon, from which it differs especially in its juvenile state, which attaches it to the biform section. In this early stage, the leaves, which are very much broader and shorter than when full grown, are opposite, sessile, oval-oblong, from 6–8 cm. long, and from 3–4 broad. When full grown they are, as in the generality of species, petiolate, alternate, narrow-lanceolate, pointed, from 10–12 cm. long, and 1–1½ cm. broad. The inflorescence closely recalls that of E. leucoxylon. It consists of axillary umbels, generally three flowered, but often with five and more rarely seven flowers; pendulous, because of the length of the common peduncle and of the pedicels of the flowers. The flower-buds are ovoid, with their opercula almost the length of the calyx-tube, a little enlarged at the base, and terminated by a sharp or curved point. The fruit, which is of the size of a pea, is ovoid-truncate, and its capsule, 3–4 celled, is deeply enclosed.

I do not know from what part of Australia this tree is originally a native, having found it without locality in the garden of M. Huber, at Hyères.

My trees are about five years old, 3 metres high, with slender trunk, which becomes smooth and almost white after the shedding of its first bark. The general tint of the foliage is much lighter than that of E. leucoxylon. (2nd Mem., p. 37.)


This is a variable species, and many varieties have been named in connection with it. In my view, nearly all of them fall to the ground. So far as I know, the named forms are as follows:—

1. Var. pluriflora, F.v.M. (Miq. in Ned. Kruid. Arch., iv, 127 [1856]).

This is E. odorata, Behr, var. calcicultrix, Miquel. See p. 29, Vol. II, of the present work.

  ― 91 ―

2. ß rugulosa, F.M. (E. rugulosa, F. Müll., in schedulis herbariorum).

Florum majorum tubo amplo-obconico ruguloso, foliis longioribus; a vere ad autumnum florens; in vallibus et planitiebus, in Devily-County, Adelaide (F.M.), Lofty Range. (Devil's Country, Mount Lofty. The spellings of names of Australian localities are frequently much distorted in Miquel's work.—J.H.M.) (Miq. loc. cit.)

I have examined specimens in the Berlin and Vienna herbaria. They seem to me quite normal, with the inflorescence shrunken somewhat in drying. The type is described “calyce operculoque rugulosis.”

3. ? rostellata, F.M.

Operculo in cornu breve protracto. (E. rostellata, Behr, Herb.) Arbor mediocris in planitie arenosa ad oppidulum Tammida (? Tanunda). Ramuli rubelli (Behr). (Miq. loc. cit.)

I have not seen an authentic specimen of this so-called variety. Perhaps the opercula resemble those depicted at fig. 3b, pl. 56. I doubt very much whether a variety based on the very variable character of length of operculum can stand.

4. ? pruinosa, F.M.

Alabastris ramisque pruinosis, operculo rostellato. Arbor ingens, coma vetustiore nigricante (E. tristis, Herb. Müll.). Salt Creek (Behr). (Miq. loc. cit.)

I have seen one of the original specimens in the Vienna herbarium. It is a little glaucous, hence the variety-name, but the species is oftener glaucous than not.

5. e erythrostema, F.M.

Filamentis sanguineis.—Rarius ad sinum Encounty-Bay (Encounter) et montis Beagle (Bugle.—J.H.M.) range (Stuart et F. Müller) E. incrassata var. Müll. Herb. (Miq. loc. cit.)

There is a specimen labelled Eucalyptus incrassata, Labill., in Miquel's handwriting in the “Plantae Müllerianae” examined by him for the above paper, in Herb. Barbey-Boissier. It is E. leucoxylon, F.v.M.

This form is figured by J. Ednie Brown in his “Forest Flora of South Australia,” under the name of E. leucoxylon, var. macrocarpa. “The large-fruited Red-flowering Gum.”

Mueller's name cannot stand, from the fact that the flowers are indiscriminately crimson and cream-coloured.

6. Var. angulata, Benth. (B.Fl. iii, 210.)

Flowers large, the calyx distinctly angled. Devil's Country (Lofty Range), South Australia (F.v.M.).

The flowers of E. leucoxylon are often distinctly angled. This form may be identical with var. rugulosa, above. I do not think var. angulata is the form with the largest flowers (macrocarpa).

7. Var. pallens, Benth. (B.Fl. iii, 210.)

I have not seen the type, but the trees usually attributed to this variety are either E. sideroxylon, A. Cunn., or E. Caleyi, Maiden. See E. Caleyi, p. 96, and also p. 84. In any case they are not E. leucoxylon.

  ― 92 ―

8. Var. minor, Benth. (B.Fl. iii, 210.)

Flowers rather smaller, and often more numerous at the ends of the branches. [?] also several of the South Australian specimens, “White Gum.”

See above, p. 84.

The description refers to a mixture of two distinct species, and therefore cannot stand.

This is doubtless, as regards the South Australian specimens, the var. pauperita, J. E. Brown. See below.

9. Var. macrocarpa, J. E. Brown.

See below.

10. Var. pauperita, J. E. Brown.

See below.

The late J. Ednie Brown, in his “Forest Flora of South Australia,” devotes no less than four of his large plates to E. leucoxylon. They are:—

(a) “The Blue Gum.” This may be taken as the normal form.

(b) and (c). Var. macrocarpa, J. E. Brown. “The large-fruited Red-flowering Gum” and “The large-fruited White-flowering Gum,” respectively. They differ only in the colour of the filaments. On Mueller's authority he refers his macrocarpa to Mueller's (Miquel's) erythrostema.

(d) Var. pauperita, J. E. Brown. “The Scrubby Blue Gum.”

In my view, the variety names macrocarpa (see also figs. 11 and 12, pl. 56) and pauperita (fig. 10) can alone stand.

As regards var. macrocarpa, Mr. Ednie Brown's type specimens have not been preserved, but his figures and the localities “Port Lincoln to the Marble Range” (where I have visited and collected specimens) make it quite clear to what form he refers.

Mr. Walter Gill, the Conservator of Forests of South Australia, in the course of conversation, points out to me that, in his opinion, the var. macrocarpa has a different bark to that of ordinary Blue Gum (normal leucoxylon). It grows large, and also Mallee-like. The Port Lincoln specimens are bi-coloured. The variety has a seedling which has a petiole, which ordinary Blue Gum has not.

The most important character referred to in Mr. Gill's statement lies in the petiole of the seedling, but the figures on Plate 56 show that we have a gradual transition between the normal form and the variety in this respect. In other words, I do not think it would be justified to raise var. macrocarpa to specific rank.

  ― 93 ―



THE original species was described from this State, though, as was often the case in the early days, no special locality was given for the type. It is a widely diffused and well known tree in South Australia. Following are some localities of a few specimens:—

Devil's Country, Lofty Range (E. rugulosa), Miquel (see above); Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges generally; a Gum tree with smooth white bark, yellowish wood. Kapunda (R. H. Cambage); Kuitpo Forest Reserve, near Willunga (W. Gill); Cape Jervis (J.H.M.); South-east South Australia (W. Gill); “White Desert Gum,” Tintinarra (R. H. Cambage).

Variety pauperita, J. E. Brown, Mt. Bryan Ranges, near Hallett (W. Gill; Bundaleer (W. Gill and J.H.M.). See also J. E. Brown, loc. cit.

Variety macrocarpa, J. E. Brown.—Port Lincoln to Wangary (W. Gill and J.H.M.). See also J. E. Brown, loc. cit.


The second variety of E. leucoxylon is suitably termed “White Ironbark,” and it probably represents the variety of this tree from which Baron von Mueller named the species “leucoxylon.” Outwardly it has the appearance of a “White Gum,” and the wood is light coloured. It is locally called “Grey Gum.” “Spotted Box,” “Blue Gum.” The wood is of inferior quality, used in some places as posts, yet I saw it cut for railway sleepers near Heathcote a few years back.

This tree is not found, as far as I have observed, to the east of Melbourne in the south, or of Rushworth in the north. It is plentiful in the State Forests and Timber Reserves of Bendigo, Maryborough, Wedderburn and Heathcote, &c. It is of but little value, and need not be preserved where other and better Eucalypts can replace it. (A. W. Howitt, in an unpublished report, 1895.)

The small-fruited form or variety pauperita is very common in Victoria.

Following are some more or less specific localities for E. leucoxylon in Victoria:—

Smooth-barked tree. Darriwill, near Geelong (correspondent of Dr. Woolls); Torquay, near Geelong (J. M. Griffiths); Heathcote (A. W. Howitt); “Smooth-barked Ironbark.” Growing side by side with Ironbark (E. sideroxylon). Maryborough (J. Blackburne); Smooth bark, Carisbrook, Loddon River (J. Blackburne); “Blue Gum,” Bendigo (W. W. Froggatt); Eaglehawk (A. W. Howitt); “White Ironbark,” Grampians (C. Walter); “A clear or white-barked tree, known round Horsham and the Upper Glenelg as White Gum. I have never heard it called Ironbark or Blue Gum” (H. B. Williamson); Gerang Gerung (A. W. Howitt); Stawell, red-flowering (A. W. Howitt) his leucoxylon ß; Wimmera (F. Reader); Mallee district (C. Walter).

Bremin, Rutherglen (H. B. Williamson). This specimen simulates E. hemiphloia (see fig. 9, pl. 56); Heathcote, near Bendigo (W. S. Brownscombe) simulating hemiphloia var. albens.

The glaucousness of the specimens, which cannot be brought out in the drawing, (see fig. 7, pl. 56), accentuate the similarity. In sending other specimens from the same locality (fig. 4, pl. 56), Mr. Brownscombe says that the tree is known locally as “White Gum” or “Spotted Box.”

  ― 94 ―


Barham, Deniliquin District. “Bastard Gum” (Osborne Wilshire).

I exhibited some of Mr. Wilshire's specimens before the Linn. Soc. N.S.W. in May, 1907, this being the first occasion on which E. leucoxylon (not confused with sideroxylon) has been recorded for New South Wales.


1. With E. sideroxylon, A. Cunn. See also p. 82.

There has never been any difficulty in the field as regards this species, and I brought the matter of the difficulty, which sometimes occurs, of separating E. leucoxylon and E. sideroxylon on herbarium specimens, under the notice of Mr. W. S. Brownscombe, of Melbourne, a well-known investigator of Eucalypts in Victoria, and he makes the following remarks:—

In almost every case the herbarium material of E. leucoxylon and E. sideroxylon can be readily distinguished from each other, without further reference to the bark, &c., after obtaining a knowledge of the two in their native state. In typical (sic) forms the tube of the calyx starts more abruptly from the stalklet in E. leucoxylon than in E. sideroxylon. The same distinction is carried into the fruit; moreover the rim is more contracted in E. sideroxylon.

Mr. Brownscombe's remarks apply to such a specimen as fig. 4, plate 56, received by him from Heathcote. But they certainly do not apply to fig. 7 of the same Plate, which represents fruits of E. leucoxylon received from him from the same locality about a year previously. At the same time the character Mr. Brownscombe points out is often true, but, like other Eucalyptus characters, it must be applied with caution.

Referring to E. leucoxylon var. macrocarpa, I have never seen the fruits of E. sideroxylon attain so large a size as do those of E. leucoxylon.

2. With E. hemiphloia, F.v.M., var. albens.

The fruits of E. leucoxylon are more pear-shaped, and the ring round the orifice is always present. The anthers, also, of the two trees are different. On the other hand, the foliage of the two trees is a good deal similar; they are often very glaucous, and the habit, bark, and timber are a good deal alike.

3. With E. cladocalyx, F.v.M.

The timbers of these two South Australian trees are a good deal similar as far as superficial appearances go. Their other botanical characters are, however, very different.

4. With E. Bosistoana, F.v.M.

Already referred to under E. Bosistoana, see p. 4 of the present volume. See also p. 3 with respect to some confusion between the two species.

20. LIX. Eucalyptus Caleyi, Maiden.

Description  95 
Range  95 
Affinities  96 
Hybridism  97 
Explanation of Plates  97 

  ― 95 ―


LIX. E. Caleyi, Maiden.

In Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., xxx, 512 (1905).

A tall Ironbark tree, often glaucous, and finally becoming glabrous, but remaining dull-coloured.

Vernacular Names.—Called “Broad-leaved Ironbark” at Howell in comparison with the local “Narrow-leaved Ironbark,” which is E. sideroxylon, and which is rare in the immediate district. Also called “Silver-leaved Ironbark,” but not to be confused with E. melanophloia, which is not found in the neighbourhood, but which is exceedingly abundant near Bingera, Inverell, &c.

Bark very deeply furrowed and hard, with much less kino in grains throughout the bark than E. sideroxylon, and therefore not a true “Fat-cake Ironbark” like that species.

Timber deep red in colour, locally esteemed, and apparently a timber of good quality.

Juvenile leaves nearly orbicular, 3 inches in diameter being the usual dimensions. The leaves are symmetrical and taper rather abruptly into a petiole of about ½ inch. Texture thick and coriaceous, dull and even glaucous. Midrib rather prominent, and the intramarginal vein at a considerable distance from the edge. The secondary veins (of which the intramarginal vein is one) numerous, usually about ¼ inch apart, roughly parallel, but converging and finally becoming nearly parallel to the midrib.

Mature leaves broadly lanceolar, up to a breadth of 2 inches, and a length twice as great and rather more. Nearly symmetrical, blunt pointed, tapering at the base into a petiole of about an inch. Coriaceous and rather thick, equally dull on both sides; often glaucous. Intramarginal vein at a considerable distance from the edge. The secondary veins rather prominent and wide apart, and disposed at about an angle of 45° to the midrib.

Buds.—Operculum conical and of less diameter than the calyx, which tapers much more than does the operculum. The buds often glaucous.

Flowers axillary, becoming terminal by reduction of the upper leaves. Up to 7 in the head, the common peduncle rather slender and about ½ inch in length, each flower on a distinct pedicel. Anthers almost quadrangular in shape, opening in pores nearly terminal, which are a little wider in the direction of the broad portion of the anther. Filaments often tinged red and minutely glandular. In full flower in August (1905).

Fruits pear-shaped, slender, tapering into a distinct pedicel. Diameter, say, ¼ inch, with a length about twice as great. Dark brown and glossy when fully ripe. They have a marked dark-coloured thin rim such as is common in E. sideroxylon and E. mellidora. Valves well sunk, usually half way down the capsule.

This species is named in honour of George Caley, Banks' botanical collector in New South Wales (1800–1810), and whose shrewd observations in regard to another Ironbark have been referred to at p. 494 of the Proceedings quoted.


THIS species appears to be very widely distributed over northern New South Wales, extending from the Rylstone (Mudgee) district north-east to near the Queensland border, and as far east as Emmaville. The range of the species requires to be more fully defined, but it appears to be found over the greater portion of New England and over a considerable area of the western slopes of this tableland.

  ― 96 ―

Howell (Bora Creek), 19 miles south of Inverell, on the tin-granite (E. C. Andrews, per favour of R. H. Cambage, April, 1904, and April, 1905, in bud and fruit); (J. H. Maiden and J. L. Boorman, August, 1905); Head of the Gwydir (Dr. Leichhardt, circa 1842); it grows chiefly on low ranges along the foot-hills of the Nandewar Range and along the Gwydir (Forest Guard Gordon Burrow); “Mountain Ironbark,” Upper Hunter (H. Deane, 1858); “Stunted Ironbark,” Murrumbo, Rylstone (R. T. Baker, December, 1893); at Howell it would appear that the trees obtained a finer development; Tingha (J. L. Boorman, June, 1904), with fruits less pear-shaped than those of the type; Emmaville (J. L. Boorman, June, 1904) Very glaucous.

The locality Peak Hill, as given in a note to the original description, was founded on a misapprehension.


1. With E. sideroxylon, A. Cunn.

E. Caleyi is sharply distinguished from this species by its broad juvenile foliage, that of E. sideroxylon being very narrow. The fruits of E. sideroxylon are more globular and warted; the opercula are not constricted. In E. sideroxylon (and I have chosen an equally fresh local specimen for the observation) the filaments have a fine line or ridge extending the whole length. In E. Caleyi the line is less marked, and extends only for the lower half of the filament.

Let us turn to a reputed variety of E. sideroxylon, A. Cunn., viz., var. pallens, Benth. “Leaves not so coriaceous and whitish.” New England, C. Stuart (B.Fl. iii, 210). I have not seen the type specimens, but have travelled over a good deal of C. Stuart's country (northern New England, Tenterfield to Drake, &c.), and have no doubt, in my own mind, that E. Caleyi is the plant referred to. At the same time I cannot state absolutely that it is a synonym without the type. The tree is often as glaucous as it can be, and young lanceolate leaves at the ends of branches are often less coriaceous than the maturer leaves down the branches.

On my showing Mr. R. T. Baker specimens, and informing him that I deemed this tree to be new, he very kindly sent me specimens collected by him at Murrumbo Plains, Goulburn River, north of Rylstone, and informed me that the tree was referred by him and Mr. Smith, in their “Research on the Eucalypts,” to E. sideroxylon, A. Cunn., var. pallens. It will be observed that the authors state that the “oil has little resemblance to that obtained from E. sideroxylon.”

2. With E. affinis, Deane and Maiden.

E. Caleyi resembles this species in general characters, and even in fruits, but the timbers sharply separate them, that of E. affinis being pale.

  ― 97 ―

3. With E. siderophloia, Benth., var. glauca, Deane and Maiden.

E. Caleyi certainly presents some resemblance to this variety. Both forms are glaucous, and the juvenile foliage of both forms has much in common, but the opercula of the var. of E. siderophloia are not constricted, while its valves are not only not sunk, but they are exserted.

4. With E. paniculata, Sm.

E. Caleyi was by Mueller and others sometimes labelled E. paniculata, with bud and flower specimens alone available. The inflorescence often, indeed, takes on a paniculate character, and the fruit, when unripe and the rim not defined, is certainly reminiscent of that of E. paniculata, but the leaves, ripe fruits, and timber sharply distinguish the species.


Mr. J. E. Carne collected this species at Copeton, with a Box-bark, very different in appearance to that of the normal species. I will describe this specimen when I deal with the subject of hybridism in the genus. Ironbarks seem specially prone to hybridise with the Boxes; and I cannot usefully describe the various hybrids without pictorial illustrations, which are being prepared.

Hybridism in Eucalyptus is a scientific fact, although a few of the instances adduced may still form the subject of controversy.

After I have critically revised the various species of Eucalyptus in the way I am doing, and before I publish my diagrams and tables explaining my views as to their affinities, I propose to devote a Part of this work to the hybrid forms, and shall at all times be grateful to correspondents for specimens illustrating the phenomenon, or believed to do so.

Explanation of Plates (53–56).

Plate 53.

Plate 53: EUCALYPTUS RAVERETIANA, F.v.M. (1-3). E. CREBRA, F.v.M. (4-9). E. STAIGERIANA, F.v.M. (10-12). E. MELANOPHLOIA, F.v.M. (13-15). Lithograph by Margaret Flockton.

E. Raveretiana, F.v.M.

  • 1a and 1b. Juvenile foliage. Rockhampton, Queensland. (J.H.M.)
  • 2a. Leaf in intermediate state; 2b, fruits received by Mr. F. M. Bailey from Rockhampton (collector ?).
  • 3a. Mature leaf; 3b, anther. Rockhampton. (Late A. Thozet.)

E. crebra, F.v.M.

  • 4a, 4b. Juvenile leaves, near Dubbo. (J. L. Boorman.)
  • 5a. Broadish mature leaf; 5b, anther. Lower Kurrajong. (J.H.M.)
  • 6. Rather large fruit. Wybong Creek. (Augustus Rudder.)
  • 7. Fruit. Baulkham Hills. (Rev. Dr. Woolls.)
  • 8. Fruit not perfectly ripe, showing rim. Windsor. (J. S. Allan.)
  • 9. Fruit, nearly ripe, showing marked rim. Capertee. (J.H.M. and J. L. Boorman.)

  ― 98 ―

E. Staigeriana, F.v.M.

  • 10a. Juvenile leaf; 10b, mature leaf; 10c, buds and flowers; 10d, anther; 10e, fruit from Palmer River, Queensland (type locality). Received from Mr. F. M. Bailey (collector ?).
  • 11a. Broadish juvenile leaf; 11b, buds, cultivated, R. Simmons, Rockhampton, Queensland.
  • 12. Mature leaf, cultivated, Botanic Gardens, Sydney.

E. melanophloia, F.v.M. (first part).

N.B.—The drawings of this species are intended to supplement those of the “Eucalyptographia.” I do not repeat “Eucalyptographia” drawings, but sometimes add to them or correct them. In my “Forest Flora of New South Wales” I will figure whole twigs of the normal form of this species. I may, perhaps, be permitted to remind my readers that the present work is a “Critical Revision,” and hence a drawing of normal E. melanophloia, already conveniently available, would be out of place.

  • 13a and 13b. Twig with flowers, and anther of a lanceolate-leaved form of E. melanophloia. Bentham looked upon it as a variety of E. crebra at B.Fl. iii, 222, and this original specimen bears the label, in Bentham's handwriting, “Bark fissured, not shedding, Suttor River, Bowman.”
  • 14a. Leaf; 14b, buds and flowers of “Box-tree of the Mackenzie, Leichhardt.” This tree has a “fissured bark,” and was examined by Bentham for B.Fl. iii, 222. It is a lanceolate-leaved form of E. melanophloia.
  • 15a. Leaf; 15b, buds and flowers of the “Gum-topped Box of the Suttor River, Bowman,” in Bentham's handwriting, examined by him for B.Fl. iii, 222. It is a lanceolate leaved form of E. melanophloia. All these from Kew.

Plate 54.

Plate: 54 EUCALYPTUS MELANOPHLOIA, F.v.M.-continued-(1-4). E. PRUINOSA, Schauer (5-8). Lithograph by Margaret Flockton.

E. melanophloia (continued).

  • 1a, 1b, 1c. Juvenile leaves. Narrabri, N.S.W. (J.H.M.)
  • 2a. Mature leaf; 2b, buds. Bourke, N.S.W. (O. C. McDougall.)
  • 3a. Mature leaf; 3b, very small fruits. Narromine, N.S.W. (J.H.M.)
  • 4a. Mature leaf; 4b, small fruits. Stannary Hills, North Queensland. (Dr. T. L Bancroft.)

E. pruinosa, Schauer.

  • 5a. Reproduction of a portion of the type in the Vienna Herbarium. The original bears the inscription, “Eucalyptus pruinosa, Schauer, in Walp. Repert,” in Schauer's handwriting; 5b, a fruit from the type, end on.
  • 6. Anther from a flower from Sweers' Island, Gulf of Carpenteria. Herb. Melb. with the label “Henne?” (Henne was the botanical collector in Landsborough's Expedition.)
  • 7a. Angled and ribbed fruits; 7b, quadrangular branchlet. Mt. Albion, Queensland. (S. Dixon.)
  • 8. Very small fruits. Ord River, East Kimberley, W.A. (W. V. Fitzgerald.)

Plate 55.

Plate 55: EUCALYPTUS SMITHII, R. T. (1-2). E. NAUDINIANA, F.v.M. (3-4). E. SIDEROXYLON, A. Cunn. (5-13). Lithograph by Margaret Flockton.

E. Smithii, R. T. Baker.

  • 1. Juvenile leaf. Colo Vale, N.S.W. (E. Cheel.)
  • 2a. Mature leaf; 2b, buds; 2c, anther; 2d, fruits. Sugar Loaf Mountain, Braidwood, N.S.W (W. Baeuerlen.)

E. Naudiniana, F.v.M.

  • 3a. Juvenile leaf; 3b, mature leaf; 3c, buds; 3d, anthers. New Britain or Neu Pommern. (R. Parkinson.)
  • 4. Fruits. Philippines, U.S. Exploring Expedition, 1854.

  ― 99 ―

E. sideroxylon, A. Cunn.

  • 5. Seedling plant. Condobolin Hill, N.S.W. (J.H.M.)
  • 6. Juvenile leaves. Condobolin. (J. L. Boorman.)
  • 7a, 7b. Juvenile leaves. Harvey Range, N.S.W. (J. L. Boorman.)
  • 8a. Juvenile leaf; 8b, intermediate leaf. Merrindee (Mudgee to Wellington), N.S.W. (A. Murphy.) The broad juvenile leaf may be evidence of hybridism.
  • 9a. Mature leaf; 9b, buds and flowers; 9c, anthers (note their truncate shape) from “Interior of New Holland, Major Mitchell, 1836,” which is typical of the species.
  • 10. Buds. Condobolin. (J. L. Boorman.)
  • 11. Small, smooth fruits. Minore, Dubbo, N.S.W. (J. L. Boorman.)
  • 12. Fruits (note the tubercular appearance of the surface and the rims round the orifice, both characters common in this species). Grenfell, N.S.W. (J. Postlethwaite.)
  • 13a, 13b. Fruits of the coast form. Cabramatta, N.S.W. (J. L. Boorman.)

Plate 56.

Plate 55: EUCALYPTUS LEUCOXYLON, F.v.M. (1-12). E. CALEYI, Maiden (13-16). Lithograph by Margaret Flockton.

E. leucoxylon, F.v.M.

  • 1a. Juvenile leaves, perfectly sessile; 1b, juvenile leaves, showing the rudiment of a petiole; 1c, flowers; 1d, anther, side view; 1e, anther, showing pores and glandular filament; 1f, portion of glandular filament enlarged. Kapunda, S.A. (R. H. Cambage.)
  • 2. Juvenile leaf, showing incipient petiole. Mt. Barker, S.A. (J.H.M.)
  • 3a. Mature leaf; 3b, buds; 3c, fruits (note that in this species the attachment of the pedicel to the fruit is often abrupt). Adelaide. (Max Koch.)
  • 4. Fruits. Heathcote, Victoria. (W. S. Brownscombe.) Compare 7, below, with more tapering calyx.
  • 5. Fruits from Barham, Deniliquin, N.S.W., the only New South Wales locality so far recorded for this species. (Osborne Wilshire.)
  • 6. Fruits, nearly hemispherical. Kapunda, S.A. (R. H. Cambage.)
  • 7. Fruits, with pedicels tapering into the fruits. Heathcote, Victoria. (W. S. Brownscombe.)
  • 8. Fruits, showing the ring at the orifice, common in this and some allied species. Cape Jervis, South Australia. (J.H.M.)
  • 9a. Leaf; 9b, buds; 9c, fruits. Bremin, Rutherglen, Victoria. (H. B. Williamson.) These specimens simulate E. hemiphloia, cf. plate 50, fig. 21a; plate 51, fig. 3, and other figures on these two plates.

Variety pauperita, J. E. Brown.

  • 10. Fruits. Mt. Bryan Ranges, S.A. (W. Gill.)

Variety macrocarpa, J. E. Brown.

  • 11a. Juvenile leaf, with distinct stalk; 11b, fruits, not quite ripe. Wanilla, Port Lincoln, S.A. (W. Gill.)
  • 12a. Juvenile leaf; 12b, single fruit; 12c, three fruits. Between Port Lincoln and Coffin's Bay, S.A. (J.H.M.)

E. Caleyi, Maiden.

  • 13a. Juvenile leaf; 13b, mature leaf; 13c, buds (note the “egg-in-egg-cup” arrangement); 13d, side view of anther; 13e, anther, showing dehiscence; 13f, fruits, showing rim; 13g, fruits, smaller. All from the type, Howell, N.S.W. (J.H.M. and J. L. Boorman.)
  • 14. Fruits. Tingha, N.S.W. (J. L. Boorman.)
  • 15a. Leaf; 15b, fruits Rylstone, N.S.W. (R. T. Baker.)
  • 16. Fruit, showing cracking of the rim when over ripe. Emmaville, N.S.W. (J. L. Boorman.)
no previous
no next