A new theory (extract from Insectifera 1997): Eugenie's passage through the Strait of Magellan

New theory (Excerpt from Insectifera in 1997)

I therefore want to launch a completely new theory. I think that the three butterflies that Wallengren called Colias ponteni are captured on the 9th or 10th of February 1852 next to the mouth of the Bachelor River. In his book on Eugenie's voyage, C. Skogman describes this beautiful place in almost lyrical terms. I think that Skogman also reaches the pinnacle of his nature descriptions from this voyage. Probably he liked it here. I can really feel that even a "relict" Colias would enjoy it here!

“The view from the anchorage was no less remarkable than they, which we enjoyed during today's sailing. To the south behind Carl the third island, mountains over mountains and snow fields at snow fields, to the north quite close to us the pointed split Bachelor peak, around whose foot the river winds in one of lush trees and bushes adorned valley. In the distance bare and snow-clad mountains of the most alternating forms, and in the northwest the mouth of the ioronymi channel (Jerome Channel), through which you enter into those in the vast bays Otway Water and Skyring Water, of which the former only through a isthmus of moderate width separates from the Strait of Magellan at Cap Negro and later through such a depth from a deep inland Pacific Ocean.”

As far as I can understand, they arrived ashore rather late in the afternoon that day and stopped for the evening. Even if no scientific discoveries were made, one should have had some Colias butterflies if any of them existed, which we must assume with this theory. On the morning of Tuesday, the 10th of February, they went back ashore. Skogman writes:

"We landed at the mouth of the Bachelor River and walked a bit along its shore. This river valley is a true paradise for these areas; one should not expect anything so covered and smiling. The clear and contagious waters of the river flow between lush forests and small green fields, where large bushes of Fuchsia, covered with flowers, seem to prefer their place and thrive. But the lack of living creatures gave everything a character of desolation. We saw only a few ducks that did not let themselves be approached within a shotgun. On the right bank of the river, a short distance from its mouth, we found some abandoned huts. They were in the shape of an upwardly rounded hood, a pair of arms in the cross-line and built of ground-cast rods, whose upper ends were bent together and joined, and in the interstices other rods interleaved. They probably also have been covered with sealskin or the like. It was immediately seen that they had been abandoned for a long time and are probably the same huts that FitzRoy describes as having been seen in 1829, and even then without the inhabitants. Highs of half-weathered seashells and sea urchins lay there beside as well with parts of a whale skeleton. It was really missing we at dusk left the beautiful place to return on board. A journey into the boat raising the river would surely offer much to both the scientist and the lover of picturesque nature, but time did not allow any such."

Large fuschia shrubs thrive in this place. Abandoned huts photographed in Skottberg´s book Photo Daniel Rosengren. from the fields around the Strait of Magellan.

After a short landing the following morning Eugenie sailed under Captain Virgin's command further west towards the Pacific Ocean. Although it has not been stated that no collection was made at this place, but considering how nice the place is, and judging from the description, it seems highly unlikely that no collection had taken place here. This after nearly a week struggling against tidewater and winds in the south parts of the Strait of Magellan they got the chance to once again land on the southernmost point of South America's mainland.

A further suggestion for this place is that, as Skogman writes, Captain FitzRoy, in 1829 had also been here when he explored the area together with Captain King. The imperialis-butterflies, which are supposedly brought home by Captain Phillip King, would also have been possibly caught in this place.

Captain Robert FitzRoy. Captain Phillip King. Commander Christian Adolf Virgin.

The location is certainly not so many miles from Port Famine but nevertheless on the other side of the southernmost peninsula in South America. Skogman, Skottberg and many with them describe the climate on this western side of the Brunswick peninsula as quite different compared to what prevails in Port Famine. The climate should be more typical for an "arctic" Colias-butterfly.

One might wonder why on this long voyage of almost three years, they did not get enough time to investigate, based on Skogman's report, this apparently fantastic estuary? After the short landing in the morning, Eugenie raised anchor and sailed, as I wrote above, towards the Pacific Ocean. However, there is a very good explanation and reason for this. Sailing through the narrow Strait of Magellan at this time was a real test of strength for the captain, officers and all the crew of that sailing ship. Strong tides combined with difficult westerly winds along the rocky beaches were often a nightmare for all sailing ships. A transit could often take weeks of constant tacks against hard winds and often ending

up being driven back to the starting point of the day's attempt to sail through. Sailing at night was nothing to even think about.

Based on studies of frigate Eugenie's logbooks under Captain Adolf Virgin's command, Christer Hägg, in his fantastic book (Appendix 3) on this voyage, published in 1999, describes what happened then:

"On the morning of February 10, the Eugenia Day after the calendar of that time, a bram-sledge-shot from ONO blew up. The Weather-Gods thus gave Eugenie the very best gift you could imagine! The opportunity must be used immediately. The boats that were landed to fill water or on fishing and hunting trips with the scientists and officers, were recalled and they made it easy to go to sails.”

The sudden and most unexpected weather change early on the morning of February 10th with a strong east to south-east wind that would allow a passage through the 150 km long narrow channel that led out to the Pacific gave Captain Virgin a chance to run through this very long, narrow and dangerous passage out to the Pacific Ocean. It was ordered to make the ship ready for immediate departure. If the passage succeeded, perhaps up to a month's awkward cruising under difficult conditions would be avoided. Through successful manoeuvring with sailing through an only slightly wider than twentymeter narrow channel which is called "Eugenie's passage" northwest of Carl III's island, they managed to sail through the entire 150 km long channel in one single day (February 10th) without a single tack! This, of course, was very tempting for Captain Virgin, who was responsible for the expedition, but it was a pity for all the scientists that the area at Bachelor River could not be explored more closely.

My map of the prospective catch site for Colias ponteni in "Insectifera" of 1997.

Could this be the place where Colias ponténi was collected? Note Isla Carlos III beside which they anchored when they landed at the mouth of the Bachelor River late in the afternoon of February 9th and the morning of February 10th, 1852.

Based on the contacts I had, nobody seems to have noticed this place, which with its extremely isolated location could be the location where they found this strange butterfly. The fact that Captain FitzRoy actually visited this place in 1829 does not make the place less interesting either. But why has no one noted this place? About that one can only speculate. If the butterflies were caught in this place, why did Oahu be listed as the locality for collection? I can possibly think of some reasons even though each seems unlikely. It is often easier to remember the first specimens you collect on an expedition. The natural resources one collects at the end of an expedition often tend to be more stubbornly treated, as it often happens that too many impressions can fight for space in the brain as well as the note pad. The fact that all on board the frigate, including the scientists, abruptly had to interrupt all their work and completely concentrate on the passage through "Eugenie's passage" on the morning of February 10th may perhaps also be a contributing explanation?

Whether Samuel Pontén himself landed at the Bachelor River we have no information about. In any case, we know that he probably did not leave the frigate Eugenie during the days outside Port Famine. The butterflies could also have been captured by some people other than Samuel Pontén, Johan Kinberg or Master Andersson during the short visit to the mouth of the Bachelor River. There were more than 300 men on the frigate Eugenie. This might also explain why none of these three gentlemen later remembered, or perhaps just guessed wrong, about where the butterflies were collected once they came back to Sweden and one or some of them met Wallengren many years later? Wallengren´s description of Colias ponteni 1860, was eight years after the visit to the Strait of Magellan 1852.

When departing from the anchorage at the island of Carl III, I can also imagine that the voyage out through the Strait of Magellan to the Pacific Ocean filled the participants with so many impressions that a catch of five butterflies, or possibly larvae or pupae, as in the report eight years later, in 1860, fell into oblivion. We also know that this has obviously happened to butterfly number three in Wallengren's description of newly discovered species. Here Wallengren has described a small Pierid under the new name Terias angulata. Most likely, this is about the species Eurema arbela described by Warren in 1897. The species flies along the west coast of Central America from Colombia to Mexico. Even butterfly number two, Terias eugenia, in Wallengren's descriptions is unlikely to be here based on Kinberg's, Pontén's or Andersson's details who described this species from Insula St. Joseph among the Galapagos Islands. This species does not exist on the Galapagos Islands and it would be extremely unlikely that this particular specimen of this South American species had flown out to these islands and caught by someone from Eugenie. Probably the butterfly has been caught on the visits to Peru or Panama.

One can of course also speculate on how much Pontén remembered about the capture of these five butterflies if several years later he presented them to Wallengren, especially if it was perhaps not even he who made the catch. It may also have been Kinberg who met Wallengren and told him about the capture of these butterflies? Did they, or one of them, speculate that it was in Oahu that these five butterflies were collected? They must have been caught in some place and Wallengren, who must have realized the potential of these fantastic Colias butterflies, of course demanded an exact location for the catch. For these extremely beautiful and interesting butterflies, Pontén could not just confess that he had forgotten where he had taken the specimens. As Wallengren writes that the butterflies were collected by Kinberg and Pontén then Pontén or Kinberg obviously wanted say they had collected the butterflies together. Kinberg, who was the expedition's zoologist, but mainly an expert on amphibians and other aquatic animals, has obviously met quite a lot of criticism for his inadequate documentation of the journeys collected animals. He might, by standing as a co-collector of this exclusive butterfly,

absorb some of the honour of this exquisite find. Note, however, that all this is just my own thoughts and speculation if one questions the accuracy of these men's information to Wallengren that the butterflies were really collected on Oahu!

But if Pontén had forgotten where he got hold of these butterflies, the name "ponteni" would also be a much better name than a name related to any specific place such as "oahua", "tarna" or any other place they visited during the trip around the world. All of this is, of course, just pure speculation, but I still cannot find any better answer to the question if they forgot the right collecting place. One can also imagine that Skogman had a great deal to do with his notes at this stage of the trip when so much happened in a few days. It probably wouldn't be unlikely that his writing omitted such a small detail that someone on the short visit to the mouth of the Bachelor River had caught five yellow butterflies, Or less likely a number of larvae or pupae of a butterfly they, at that time, could not imagine was the last time this fantastic insect was found. Even more sensational was that they were the only known persons on earth who had collected this species!?

Because the butterflies were so exceptional and beautiful and probably completely unknown, Kinberg could not throw them away or “lose face”, something that might have come in handy if it was about mosquitoes or some other less interesting beast. The only way was therefore to "make up" a suitable locality where the butterflies had been collected. They had been twice to Hawaii and also stayed there for quite some time on the first visit, which ran from June 22 to July 2. "It was good enough that we caught these specimens". How many of us remember where we might have taken some butterflies eight years ago during a worldwide voyage?

Well, if you were a butterfly collector you would have remembered this. Here one cannot avoid thinking about the many stories you read about how some exceptional butterfly finds were unforgettable memories of the discoverers. My thoughts go first to the very sympathetic Alfred Russel Wallace when he saw a female of a new and so far undescribed bird-wing butterfly during his first forest walk on his visit to the island of Bachan. It took him two months before he managed to see and also capture a male of this extremely spectacular butterfly, Ornithoptera croceus, named by him in 1859. the only red bird-wing we have in the world. His own description of what happened to him is unforgettable as well as his beautiful English.

“The beauty and brilliance of this insect are indescribable and none but a naturalist can understand the intense excitement I experienced when I captured length. My heart began to beat violently, the blood rushing to my head, and I felt more like having done when in apprehension of immediate death. I had the rest of the day, so great was the excitement produced by what will appear to most people a very inadequate cause.”

Ornithioptera croceus. Pehr Kalm's own ex of "Papilio Glaucus" the first described American butterfly! Butterfly number 9 in Linnaeus´ SYSTEMA NATURAE 1758.

When I sit and write this and think of unforgettable butterfly finds, I cannot forget Linnaeus´ disciple Pehr Kalm's finding the North American Swallowtail that Linnaeus named Papilio glaucus. Unfortunately, this butterfly was so damaged that Queen Lovisa Ulrika obviously did not consider adding the specimen in her great butterfly collection. She still bought the butterfly along with the other animals and plants Kalm brought home from North America to help him financially. However,

Linnaeus apparently thought the butterfly was worth describing despite the miserable conditions. I have had the privilege of looking closer at this specimen and can state that this is actually the first butterfly described from North America in Linnaeus new system! Only this should be something to sigh for, but this unique specimen is also in safety at the great Museum of Evolution in Uppsala. What you would like to know, however, is how it happened and when Kalm caught this magnificent swallowtail and what he then thought. As Kalm was first a botanist he has not, as far as I have found out, ever written anything about his finding of this great American butterfly.

But as Pontén, Kinberg or Andersson were not entomologists, and in any case not butterfly collectors, it would probably be likely that the memory could have failed. This can also be the reason why several of Pontén's collected butterflies from this voyage that he handed over to his brother at Strängnäs High School carry the label "Tahiti". Tahiti at that time was probably the most exotic place to their relatives at home. It was also on Tahiti's southwestern neighbouring island, Savage Island, that Samuel Pontén got to exchange a fancy spear that is actually still in the Pontén family’s possession. This exchange business has also been immortalized in a beautiful and rich watercolour by Skogman.

The savages of Savage Island on board the frigate Eugenie on September 27th, 1852. To the right of the capstan is Commander Virgin and to his right lieutenant Skogman with the sketch book under his arm. To the left you see Pastor Pontén swapping a few weapons and in the background several natives. Watercolour by C. Skogman.

The name "ponteni" as Wallengren gave the butterflies in his description 1860 suggests that Samuel Pontén was to a great extent involved in the collection of these specimens. There is no doubt about this. The question, on the other hand, is not clear as to whether he has captured the butterflies or whether he has somehow exchanged them or possibly even bred them? The fact that he devoted himself to barter and purchase on his brother's account is evident from the previous paragraph and the image

with the spear from Savage Island. Samuel Pontén's relative, Anders Pontén, told me about the barter with the spear that he still has in his possession, I was also told that Samuel brought home from China a Ginkgo tree, Gingko biloba, which today, after nearly 170 years, grows and appears healthy next to the cathedral in Pontén´s hometown, Strängnäs, in central Sweden.

I cannot possibly believe that none of the scientists or anyone with an interest in nature didn´t cross on the landing boat on this occasion. With so many nature enthusiasts on this voyage, someone must have brought back some kind of animals or plants from this visit although they, like Skogman, had no time for a journey up the Bachelor River:

"A boat ride up the river would certainly have offered much to both the scientist and the lover of picturesque nature, but time did not allow such a thing."

I finished this piece in my article in "Insectifera" in 1997 with the words: "A dream".

A dream would be to go to this area to search for this “ponteni-butterfly”. When I was in South America for three months in their summer of 1979-1980 to collected butterflies for my museum, the political situation was not the best between Argentina and Chile that the border regions at the Strait of Magellan and on Tierra del Fuego were unfortunately not available to tourists. We spent most of our time in the nice Misiones. Today, almost 40 years later, I realise that the above dream has unfortunately not been met. The article I wrote in "Insectifera" in 1997, however, as I have indicated above, has dramatically and very positively influenced my life during these years through all the contacts made the world over that this article has given rise to!