188 
LINNAEUS 
So this “ consilium abeundi ” had no result, either 
with Rudbeck or Roberg. In the end, the question 
resolved itself into a complaint against Rosen, who 
did not deny the neglect of lecturing in the botanic 
garden, but asserted that there was no material there 
for his lectures. Upon this Rudbeck remarked that 
at first there was plenty to lecture on, as shown by the 
fact that Martin and Linnaeus, shortly before, had 
been able to teach successfully; further, that so 
recently as 24th October, 1739, there were actually 
two hundred and eighty flowers in the garden ; although 
he admitted a decline since that time. He also 
declared that he (Rudbeck) was not to blame, as he 
had been specially allowed to work on his philological 
books, while Rosen had been appointed his deputy; 
further that an incompetent gardener had been put 
in charge. It is plain that in 1730, there was no 
prefect of the garden, but it was left to the four 
gardeners who quickly succeeded each other to the 
office. 
In this unedifying quarrel Linnaeus was so far 
involved, that each of the disputants in turn solicited 
his help. Evidently uneasy about the bad state of 
the garden, Rosen hastened to send a letter to 
Linnaeus asking him for good advice. On his side, 
Rudbeck travelled to Stockholm to beg the loan of 
Linnaeus’s “ Adonis Uplandicus,” which showed by 
plans and descriptions the former poor condition of 
the garden, and the many plants at present in it to be 
used for demonstration. 
This volume had but little effect on the quarrel, 
but Rudbeck, wearied with wrangling, withdrew his 
statement concerning Rosen. An improvement, 
however, in the management took place at this time. 
At the beginning of 1739 the gardener, Samzelius, 
died, and at the Consistory, Rudbeck produced a 
letter from Linnaeus, urging the appointment to the 
vacant post of the skilful Dietrich Nietzel, whom he 
had known at Hartecamp and had greatly valued his 
