The notes in this file refer to non-stellar objects known to various observers before the the NGC was compiled, yet for one reason or another, were not included in the NGC itself. I've also included stars or non-existent objects included in various lists of nebulae by e.g. WH, JH, and others. These typically aim to complete the lists, and I'll add others from time to time. The positions and other data are in an accompanying file "notngcpos.all", arranged by RA. Given the plethora of names in that file, this one may be a bit awkward to get around in, but I have preserved here the primary name from that file of positions. Wolfgang Steinicke ("Wolfgang" in the following Notes) has found some of JH's objects that would otherwise have been lost in his old catalogues, and Steve Gottlieb ("Steve" in the Notes) has similarly found several galaxies seen by Lord Rosse or his observers at Birr Castle. Yann Pothier ("Yann" in the Notes) has also dug into Lord Rosse's observations and found other unrecognized "novae" from the Birr Castle observers. Steve and Wolfgang have also found several objects seen by WH that did not find their way into the NGC. Steve has also delved into the Melbourne Observations where he has found mention of many objects found with the Great Melbourne Telescope but never published. Finally, I have added a few myself; if no other name is mentioned as having dug out the entry, then the "new" object here is one that I've found in the old literature. Steve has written up his work on the GMT discoveries, and has uploaded them to his web site: https://www.astronomy-mall.com/Adventures.In.Deep.Space/Discoveries%20By%20GMT-2.htm . While I have summarized his results here, I would urge you to visit his web pages for a full appreciation of this previously overlooked mid-19th century work in the southern sky. ****************************************************************************** ESO 194- G013 is one of 63 southern galaxies, nebulae, or clusters found by Pietro Baracchi with the Great Melbourne Telescope (GMT) between 10 December 1884 and 14 February 1888. This is one of the later ones; Baracchi picked it up on 7 December 1887. Unfortunately, the bulk of the GMT discoveries were never published, so remained locked away in the GMT log books. Dreyer never saw these, and was perhaps only peripherally aware of them through the "Part 1" of the title of the single GMT monograph devoted to nebulae and clusters. Recently, however, the logs were scanned and put online by the National Archives of Australia (see "SL 460" below for more information and a URL). As I mentioned above, Steve has gone through these and has found that Baracchi and his colleagues (Albert Le Sueur and Joseph Turner) discovered over 70 previously unseen southern deep sky objects during their work. ESO 194- G013 is one of them. ===== Barnard And SC. This is a bright OB association in the northern end of M 31 found by Barnard in 1885 while he was still at Vanderbilt in Nashville. Here is his note (from AN 2690) in full: "A small faint Nebula near the n. f. end of the Great Nebula of Andromeda. I have for some time suspected a faint Nebula near the f. end of the Great Nebula in Andromeda. Last night being fine I verified its existence. It is North 17.'1 of and follows by 29[sec] a 9 m star which I take to be W2 0h952. Hence its place is [alpha] = 0h 38m 15s} [delta] = +41d 13.'6} 1885.0 This object though extremely faint, flushes out quite distinctly by averted vision. It is close f. to the s. [of] a small star and is just free of the n. f. end of the Great Nebula. I find no record of this. It lies about as far from the new star [S And = SN 1885] as the Nebula [NGC 206] in the p. end of the Great Nebula does. Vanderbilt University Observatory, Nashville, Tenn. U.S.A. 1885 Oct. 9. E. E. Barnard." Why isn't this in the NGC? I have no idea, nor can I even speculate. ===== Lindsay 035 = Kron 25 = OGLE-SMC 045 = HZ-SMC 054 is an open cluster in the SMC first seen on 16 December 1887 by Pietro Baracchi with the GMT. For more information on the GMT, see ESO 194- G013 and SL 460. ===== Henize SMC-N45 is a small nebula in the SMC. Like Lindsay 035, it was first seen by Baracchi on 16 December 1887. ===== Bruck 067. As with Lindsay 035 and Henize SMC-N45, this cluster was found by Pietro Baracchi on 16 December 1887 with the GMT. ===== NGC 307 comp(anion) and super(posed) gal(axy). R.S. Ball first looked at the bright galaxy with LdR's Parsonstown "Leviathan" on 8 November 1866. On that night, he noted "... on the p side there is either a * close or some other appearance different to the f side. About 3' or 4' ssf is a nova, eF; I suspect others in the neighborhood". Ball, and later Dreyer, came back to NGC 307 and measured the "others" -- all of those turned out to be stars (see NGC 307 for that story). In March of 2016, I received from Yann Pothier a list of all the objects he found in Lord Rosse's monograph that were not included in the NGC. In that list was "LEDA 212626" also known as 2MASX J00562545-0148489. This is about three or four arcminutes south-southwest -- not east -- of NGC 307, so I had dismissed it earlier. However, given that the object superposed on NGC 307 is actually east rather than west suggests that Ball simply had his east-west directions confused that one night. If so, then the 2MASS galaxy is certainly the one that he saw. So, digging out a decent position for this, I also looked at NGC 307 itself to note the superposed "star". That turned out to be a background galaxy (z = 0.1528) seen through the eastern wing of the brighter galaxy. Thus, we can credit Ball with having found two non-NGC galaxies. I would guess that Dreyer did not include these because he took the superposed object to be a star, while the galaxy to the south-southwest was apparently not seen again by either himself or Ball. It was certainly not measured by them in December 1866 or October 1876 when they reobserved NGC 307. ===== NGC 307 sup(erposed) gal(axy). See NGC 307 comp(anion) just above. ===== Copeland "NGC 296". Working with LdR's Leviathan on the night of 26 October 1872, Ralph Copeland found an object that he believed to be NGC 296. It was not -- as a glance at the group where it is the brightest galaxy will show. Copeland's description of the field is exact with micrometric measurements and simply can't be fit to the field of the real NGC 296. Fortunately, in 2015, Yann Pothier found the galaxies and stars that Copeland actually saw and measured (see the Notes for NGC 295 and NGC 296 for the full story; Yann also recovered the previously lost NGC 295). The galaxy that Copeland took for NGC 296 is actually CGCG 501-058 = Markarian 352. Since NGC 296 is clearly CGCG 501-042, this leaves Copeland's galaxy without an NGC number. So, it becomes an entry in the "notngcpos.all" list. ===== MCG -05-04-012 is one of four galaxies found by Baracchi with the GMT on 5 December 1885 (the others are MCG -05-04-013, LEDA 132859, and MCG -05-04-018). See ESO 194- G013 and SL 460 for more information. ===== MCG -05-04-013 is one of four galaxies found by Baracchi with the GMT on 5 December 1885 (the others are MCG -05-04-012, LEDA 132859, and MCG -05-04-018). ===== LEDA 132859 is one of four galaxies found by Baracchi with the GMT on 5 December 1885 (the others are MCG -05-04-012, MCG -05-04-013, and MCG -05-04-018). ===== MCG -05-04-018 is one of four galaxies found by Baracchi with the GMT on 5 December 1885 (the others are MCG -05-04-012, MCG -05-04-013, and LEDA 132859). ===== h 2420. JH found this on the night of 23 Oct 1835 and described it as "vF, pL, R, vlbM, 2'; has a double * 5' or 6' nf." His position, 01 24 55.6, 129 34 14 (1830.0 NPD), is less than an arcminute south of ESO 296- G038 = SGC B013015-3856.2. The double star is there (there are, in fact, THREE double stars northeast of the galaxy!), so the identity is secure. (JH did not see the faint companion that I've included in the table.) The standard question: Why isn't this in the NGC? It is not in the GC, either, and there is no mention of it in any of the notes or errata that JH has left us, so the omission is unlikely to be intentional. So, Steve and I suspect that JH simply missed it when he was compiling the GC. Steve alerted me to this in December 2013. ===== LEDA 131053. This is another of Baracchi's discoveries with the GMT; he found it on 11 December 1885. ===== NGC 633 comp(anion). Like LEDA 131053, Pietro Baracchi found this companion to NGC 633 on 11 December 1885 with the GMT. ===== LdR "B". Steve has found that LdR's diagram (from 7 Oct 1855) of the NGC 708 group has only four NGC objects in it. The fifth, labeled "B" in the diagram and identified with CGCG 522-033, did not receive an NGC number in spite of the fact that Dreyer himself re-observed the galaxy in 1875 with LdR's 72-inch. Steve suggests that, "... the note 'B is suspected to be a neb' dissuaded JH and Dreyer from adding it to the GC and NGC ...". ===== h 162 is 55 And. JH claims to have seen it as "A fine nebulous * with a strong atmosphere losing itself imperceptibly; diam 90 [arcsec]." He goes on to note that it is a double star, and was called "nebulosa" by Piazzi. However, by the time the GC was compiled, LdR had looked at the star eight times without seeing any nebulosity. JH noted this, but "retained [the star] for occasional future examination." By the time Dreyer pulled together LdR's "complete" observations, the star had been viewed 11 times with the 72-inch without detecting any nebulosity. He adds a note "It has probably never been nebulous, see Schjellerup Astron. Nachr. No. 1613, comp. Phil. Trans. 1833, p. 499-500." So, Dreyer simply omitted the object from the NGC. I see no verifiable trace of nebulosity around 55 And's image on any of the sky survey plates/scans, so have to agree with Dreyer's omitting the object from NGC. ===== NGC 772 HII. Yann has found that two of the Birr observers -- one certainly John Dreyer, the other perhaps the fourth Lord Rosse -- saw this knot in the northwestern arm of NGC 772 on the 9th of January 1875 with the 72-inch. They give an approximate position angle, 315 degrees, and distance, 2 arcminutes, from the nucleus of the galaxy that leads us to the brightest HII region. The published description adds the caveat "If this is a real nebula, it would be a nova." This probably explains why it does not have an NGC number. ===== LM1-46. Found by Ormond Stone in the mid-1880s with the Leander McCormick 26-inch refractor, this object was either overlooked by Dreyer, or omitted on purpose. (It is, incidentally, only one of two of the Leander McCormick objects not included in the NGC.) Stone puts it at 01 54, -09 26 for 1890, and describes it as having Mag = 14.0, Size = 0.2 arcminutes, Form = R[ound], and being "gbMN". He has no Notes. This object is one of three that Stone found in the area. The others are NGC 757 = NGC 731, and NGC 763 = NGC 755, both of which see. The identities for the other two are assured by Stone's descriptions, even though his positions average 1m 15s too large, and 5 arcminutes too small. Assuming that the missing 46th object shares the same position errors, we find a J2000 position for it of approximately 01 58.2, -08 59. The only galaxies near this position have visual magnitudes of 16.5 or fainter, so this object may well not exist. There is a somewhat brighter star near the "corrected" position; this may be a possibility for Stone's object. I did a search east and west several minutes of time, as well as about 30 arcminutes north and south, but found no other candidates. I still don't know why Dreyer left this out of the NGC, but given that it is pretty well lost, it's a good thing he did! ===== MCG -02-06-052. Steve points out that in Sweep 478 on 27 November 1785, WH found "2 very close stars, that without sufficient attention may be mistaken for a vS, vF [nebula]. 240 shewed [sic] them plainly." He put them 7m 43s west of 72 Ceti, and 3 arcmin north. That position puts WH's two "stars" within an arcminute of MCG -02-06-052 and the star just 17 arcsec to the southwest. This must be the pair of objects that WH saw. Because he thought it to be two stars, he did not assign an internal working number to it, nor did he include it in his list of nebulae. ===== LM1-70. This nebula, found by Frank Leavenworth with the 26-inch at Leander McCormick was, like LM1-46, not included in the NGC. Leavenworth left only a position (02 42, -16 35; 1890) and a brief note "[S]ame as (64) [NGC 1075]?" There is no other information; this is clearly why Dreyer skipped the entry in the first Leander McCormick list. There is nothing at Leavenworth's position, nor is there anything at obvious offsets from it. Leavenworth's suggestion that the object is identical with NGC 1075 which he also discovered is reasonable, so that is what I've adopted here -- with the requisite colon, of course. ===== UGC 02272. Steve has found another galaxy hiding in WH's observations, this one in Sweep 626 of 26 Oct 1786. WH's clear description reads, "A star of about the 8th or 9th magnitude with an extremely faint nebulosity about 1' north of it; but it is so faint that there is a doubt whether it may not consist of 2 or 3 S stars only. 41 Arietis p 1' 56" s 0d 9'. RA 2h 36m 14s, PD 63d 43' [1800]." There is no internal number assigned to the object. The star, by the way, is HD 17382 = BC Ari, a BY Dra variable. In this case, it's clear why WH left this out of his published lists -- he just was not sure about its existence. ===== IC 257. Here is another result of Steve's digging, this one in WH's Sweep 645 of 11 December 1786, with no internal number assigned. WH says, "A few very small stars mixed with very faint seeming nebulosity, [extended] in the direction of the meridian; most probably only a patch. RA 2h 36m 32s, PD 43d 50' [1800]." His recorded time and NPD "02 29 32, -46; 43 58" combines with that for 27 Persei "02 48 15; -2, 46 02" to yeild the galaxy being 19m 27s preceding and 2d 4m north of the star (this gives an epoch 1800 position accordant with that entered by CH in the description quoted in the previous sentence). There are at least two stars, probably three, and a companion superposed; and the position angle of the galaxy is 155deg; so WH's description is appropriate. Steve suspects that the qualification "most probably only a patch" is what kept the object out of WH's published lists, and therefore, out of the NGC. ===== GC 614 = BD +36 0587. F.W. Bessel, in his zone catalogues, noted this star as nebulous. Heinrich d'Arrest examined it on two nights with a 12-cm refractor at Leipzig finding no nebulosity. In his "First Series" of observations of nebulae and star clusters (1856), he suggested that the object might have been a comet. So it was that JH included it in the GC. The identity of the star is secure, resting as it does on observations by both Bessel and d'Arrest. d'A in particular noted a somewhat brighter star 24.2 seconds preceding and 76 arcseconds north -- that star is there. Dreyer, in the GC Supplement, says: "R.A. is 2h 44m 16.5s. Only a * 9m (and no nebulosity) seen by D'Arrest." This led him to omit it from the NGC. There is indeed no nebulosity seen on any of the modern optical sky surveys. ===== IC 285. Pietro Baracchi picked up this galaxy with the GMT on 7 December 1885, eight years to the day before Stephane Javelle rediscovered it with the big Nice refractor. ===== NGC 1313 comp(anion) knot. Pietro Baracchi found two HII regions in the NGC 1313 complex. The companion to the southwest of NGC 1313 is the host galaxy. The knot was first seen by Baracchi on 4 December 1885 with the GMT. ===== NGC 1313 knot. This is the second of two HII regions found by Baracchi on 4 December 1885. This is one of the brightest in the main body of NGC 1313. ===== Swift VIII-031. During the preparation of his book on Lewis Swift, Gary Kronk decided to reconsider all of Swift's nebular discoveries. In the process, he alerted me to two objects in Swift's 8th list (in AN 2918) that have no entries in the IC, numbers 31 and 32, both found by Swift on 14 September 1888. It turns out that number 32 is NGC 1277 (which see), certain because of Swift's note "M of 3 in a line". The line is composed of NGC 1277, 1278, and NPM1G +41.0110 = PGC 12430, all just 3-5 arcminutes north of NGC 1275. Swift's description of number 31 is equally telling: "... one of 3 in a line ...". His position puts it just three seconds of time preceding and 1.2 arcminutes north of his middle object, NGC 1277. Applying these to the position for NGC 1277 leads us right to NPM1G +41.0110, the northern of the three galaxies. Dreyer apparently thought that these two objects in Swift's list were already in the NGC, so did not include them in the IC. One was, of course, an NGC object, but the other was not. It's a bit surprising that Dreyer did not record the galaxy when he went over the Perseus Cluster with the 72-inch reflector, so I've included it in this list of "pre-NGC" objects. It's a stretch, yes, but given that the galaxy has no NGC or IC number, I think it worth calling attention to Swift's discovery of it. ===== The Pleiades = M 45. Dreyer apparently considered this cluster -- and a few other objects (the Hyades, M 25, LMC, etc.) -- to be so large, so bright, and so well-known as to need no further cataloguing. So, this most obvious of Messier objects, known from antiquity, does not have an NGC number. ===== ESO 358- G059 is the very last object discovered -- on 14 February 1888 -- by Pietro Baracchi with the GMT. ===== Hyades. This nearby open cluster spans something like 5 degrees on the sky, and is a vital link in the distance scale of the universe. Like the Pleiades (M 45, which see), it has been known for eons -- it "needs no introduction!" So, like the Pleiades, Dreyer did not give it an entry in the NGC. ===== LEDA 177545. This is one of three galaxies found Pietro Baracchi on 11 December 1885. The others are ESO 297- G012 and LEDA 131053. ===== NGC 1646 comp(anion). R.S. Ball notes in his description of NGC 1646, "There is one object sf and another np, one or both of which may be nebulae, but my examination was interrupted before it could be completed. Has a star in pos 89.4[deg], dist 114[arcsec] by two hurried measures." Given that NGC 1646 is a double galaxy, Ball's remarks can be interpreted in a couple of different ways. The orientation of the two components of NGC 1646 is indeed northwest and southeast, so perhaps he was simply making a note about the primary object here. On the other hand, the companion is also southeast of the primary double galaxy, so it's possible that he saw the primary as a single "north-preceding" object and the companion as the "south-following". In either case, the star is just where his "two hurried measures" put it. No matter how we interpret Ball's remarks, we get at least two nebulae in this field. Yann has suggested that we take the second interpretation and list the companion as another of the objects known before the NGC was assembled. Given that the primary galaxies are separated by only about 12 arcseconds, I'm more or less comfortable with this. Dreyer was probably influenced by the words "interrupted" and "hurried" in the description. Given those, he probably decided to leave Ball's second object out of the GC and NGC. ===== SL 092. This Shapley-Lindsay cluster in the LMC was discovered by Baracchi on 10 December 1884 with the GMT. ===== UGC 03221 is almost certainly the galaxy that Copeland misidentified as NGC 1719 on 3 January 1873. Steve, in an email from 24 December 2016, explains: "I also noticed the observation of 3 Jan 1873 reads '[GC] 948 (NGC 1719) is F, S, mE 161.5[deg], * 13m att to s end.' On reading this, I originally assumed Copeland simply got the position angle incorrect as there is a star involved on the south side of NGC 1719, though it is closer th 15th magnitude. But while observing the region, I also picked up UGC 3221, which is 24[arcmin] south of NGC 1713. This is a thin edge-on [galaxy] with a mag 14.5 star attached at the south end, and the position [angle] is 161 or 162 [degrees], a perfect match! So, I suggest UGC 03221 was misidentified as NGC 1719 [by Copeland] and this is another pre-NGC discovery." See the note for NGC 1717 for the context of the surrounding field. ===== ESO 203- G019. Steve has noticed that JH in CGH has a note in his description for NGC 1803 (h2737), "... query whether a * 11.12 m near it sf be not also nebulous." This actually made it into the GC and NGC where the short descriptions read "* 11 sf, ? neb". The "star" must be the bright nucleus of ESO 203- G019 as there is nothing else near to the southeast that bright. ===== h2835 Note. In the notes to NGC 1923 (h2835) in CGH, JH says "A faint and poor cluster precedes." While it is actually a scattered association in the LMC (LH 43; see Lucke and Hodge AJ 75, 171, 1970), and may even be associated with the NGC object, I'm curious as to why JH did not include it as an object in his CGH list. I suspect the lack of a position dissuaded him. Whatever his reason, he did not carry the comment over into the GC, nor did Dreyer include it in the NGC. ===== LMC = The Large Magellanic Cloud is a satellite of our own Milky Way Galaxy. It and the Small Magellanic Cloud (= NGC 292) were obviously first seen by the several ancient civilizations of the southern hemisphere long before they were noted by Ferdinand Magellan and his crew during their circumnavigation of the earth in the early 16th century. Nevertheless, the Euro-centric nature of western civilization has insured that the Clouds have been known as the "Magellanic Clouds" ever since (though JH preferred the terms "Nubecula Major" and "Nubecula Minor"). Curiously, the Small Cloud has an entry in the NGC while the Large Cloud does not. This goes back to JH and his stay at the Cape of Good Hope where he in fact does note the SMC as "... a Faint, Rich, Large Cluster of very small stars (12 .... 18) filling many fields, and broken up into many knots, groups, and straggling branches. But the whole is clearly resolved into stars." He has no such observation for the LMC itself, but has remarks on the western, northern, and southern edges of the LMC, as well as mentioning it in the context of many of the nebulae and clusters that he found in it. His great map of it, which he called his "First Approximation to a Chart of the Nubecula Major, or Greater Magellanic Cloud", stretches from 4h 40m to 6h in RA and 156d to 162d in NPD for 1830. While there are clearly LMC objects in his southern list outside of those boundaries, these limits are not quite arbitrary, but represent the extent of the main body of the LMC as JH saw it. Today, the LMC is known as a productive, star-forming galaxy. At M_V = -18.4, it is not a "dwarf" as many continue to call it, but is one of the brighter galaxies in the Local Group. Like the Hyades, it is an important step in our cosmic distance scale, being close enough to use many of the seconday distance measuring methods ("standard candles" and "standard rulers") to find a very accurate distance for it. Calibrating tertiary distance methods in the LMC, including SN 1987A, now allows us to look on out into the universe at large, and to measure distances there with considerable confidence. ===== h2863 Note. In the notes to NGC 1955 (h2863) in CGH, JH writes "The second of a great line of rich clusters [in the LMC] which are connected by abundant scattered stars. (The first not taken.)" This is that first cluster. As with the poor cluster noted near NGC 1923, I wonder if Dreyer was aware of the object. ===== SL 460. In the "Observations of the Southern Nebulae made with the Great Melbourne Telescope from 1869 to 1885. Part I" there are several "new" nebulae noted in the LMC. Some are in the NGC, some are not. Two that are not in the NGC are faint clusters at 05 25 28.1 -69 46 39 = SL 460 (called "a." in the Observations) and 05 25 56.8, -69 45 08 = SL 469 (called "c."; J2000.0 positions are mine from SkyView), in the same field as NGC 1958, NGC 1969, NGC 1971, and NGC 1972. These were first sketched by Albert Le Sueur on 26 February 1870 (see addendum below) and again by Joseph Turner on 21 December 1875. Finally, Pietro Baracchi saw them on 10 November 1884 and provided the following descriptions: "a. (1156) [sic; this is not h 1156 = NGC 1950] faintest of group, very faint and small," and "c. (1164) [sic; this is not h 1164 = NGC 1959] faint, small, only a little brighter than d. round;" ("d." is h 1174 = NGC 1969). The Melbourne observers noted that JH's chart of the area is not very accurate. Baracchi labeled them as I've noted above, misidentifying at least two of them. I expect that Dreyer saw these, felt that JH's observations were good enough, so did not assign NGC numbers to the new objects. As it happens, the chart by Turner is more accurate than JH's, at least in this area of the LMC, so we have no trouble now identifying the objects he and his colleagues were seeing. ----- During the fall of 2018, Steve Gottlieb went through the Great Melbourne Telescope observing logs, and has found that the published data in "Part I" -- there is no "Part II" -- are just a small part of the story of the discovery of new nebulae and clusters with the 48-inch GMT. (The observing logs are now online at the National Archives of Australia website: https://recordsearch.naa.gov.au/SearchNRetrieve/Interface/SearchScreens/BasicSearch.aspx Search for "Great Melbourne Telescope", "Notebooks kept by J Turner and P Baracchi", "P Baracchi", "J Turner", and/or "A Le Sueur".) In particular, Pietro Baracchi found 63 new nebulae and clusters, Joseph Turner found nine more, and Albert Le Sueur two others. I have entered all of these in the "notngcpos.all" file and have entries for them here, usually from Steve's notes, though with occasional comments of my own. Steve is preparing his notes for publication, and I am grateful to him for sharing them with me before he sent his final paper off. Back to SL 460. Albert Le Sueur's sketch of the field made on 26 February 1870 shows this cluster and SL 469, so he should be credited as the discoverer of both. ===== SL 469. See SL 460, just above. ===== ESO 086-SC009 = SL 556 = Hodge 004 = LW 237 is a cluster in the LMC first seen by Pietro Baracchi on 3 January 1886. ===== OGLE LMC 632. Also in the Melbourne Observations of Southern Nebulae, there is mention of a "new" nebula in the LMC at 05 36 47, -70 06.7 (2000). Found by Pietro Baracchi on 18 December 1884, he describes it as "an extremely faint, flat, a [sic] little elongated patch, not shown by any of the previous observers. It precedes H. 1260 [sic; = h 1260 = NGC 2059] by 14s, and is 1' North of it" in the text, and "Very, very faint, flat, elongated, small, indistinct," in his table of transit times. The difference in RA given in the table between the new object and JH's is 13.9 seconds. As with NGC 2043, there is nothing exactly at this position, but there is an asterism of 6-8 LMC stars at 05 36 53.3, -70 06 32 that I've taken to be Baracchi's "nebula". Note that The OGLE study picked this up, and called it a "cluster". SIMBAD has named it "NGC 2059A", but I have retained the OGLE name and the "asterism" notation until a detailed study can be made of the object. Why did Dreyer choose to include NGC 2043 and NGC 2072 -- also found by Baracchi in the same area of the LMC in the same set of observations -- but not this object? Perhaps the phrase "not shown by any of the previous observers" explains the lack. ===== Hodge 301 is another LMC cluster found by Baracchi on 24 June 1884. ===== N2078 n comp, N2084 [ne/sw/w] comps. These four knots shown in JH's CGH Plate III, Figure 4, are not included in the GC or the NGC. Several other knots in the Figure are included in his catalogues; JH does not tell us why he chose to omit these four. All are clearly shown in his Figure, and correspond to real patches and knots of stars and nebulosity in the LMC. In any event, here they are. See the note for NGC 2077 in the "ngcnotes.all" file for more on this group of nebulae. ===== hLMC710 is apparently a duplicated observation of NGC 2092, a small open cluster in the LMC. JH has it only in his Catalogue of stars, nebulae, and clusters in the LMC where it is number 710 at 05 42 43, 159 19 33 (1830, NPD); it is listed as a WH class III (vF) nebula. The note at the end of the table includes it with several other nebulae and clusters -- along with NGC 2092, No. 714 in the table -- found by JH near 30 Doradus (NGC 2070), with "their places deduced ... from a very careful and deliberate drawing of the neighbourhood of 30 Doradus made with the 20 feet, and duly checked and corrected by the known stars in it." Unfortunately, JH does not include the drawing in his CGH Observations, though he does show the nebula on his large "First Approximation" chart. NGC 2092 also appears there as a separate symbol. This looks like an error that JH later detected so that number 710 was not included in any of his catalogues, CGH or GC. It consequently did not receive an NGC number, either. I find it a little odd, though, that JH did not leave us a note about the object somewhere. So, given that last little bit of uncertainty, I've included it here. ===== SL 676. Here is yet another LMC cluster found by Baracchi, this one on 11 December 1884, with the GMT. ===== SL 684. Found the same night as SL 676 (11 December 1884) by Baracchi, this is another LMC cluster. ===== SL 692 is an LMC cluster found 10 February 1885 by Baracchi with the GMT. ===== H IV 44. See the discussion under NGC 2167 for background on this area. Briefly, WH's position for H IV 44, found on the night of 28 November 1786, is not very good, but his description fits exactly: "A star involved in milky chevelure, situated betwee[n] two stars, with a 3[rd] star at rectangles to the former two." Wolfgang points out that this clearly identifies IV 44 as van den Bergh 68, a reflection nebula. Dreyer picked up the same object and correctly describes the stars and position in the Scientific Papers, Vol. 1, page 368. The error occured because JH assumed that IV 44 is the same as his h378 = NGC 2167; it is, of course, not. ===== NGC 2194 comp(anions), ene and e. Yann has gone through LdR's 1880 monograph in some detail. In the process, he found mention of these two "clusters" east of NGC 2194. LdR's description reads, "Found a loose Cl and in it a more concentrated one at 6h 6m, 77.0[deg] also two others not quite so remarkable about 16' & 21' f, both crescent-shaped, convex p." The "two others" are obvious in the DSS2R image. Are they real clusters? Probably not, but it is interesting to note that Brian Skiff noticed the western of the two in the mid-1970s. Brent Archinal has the story in "Star Clusters" on page 199 with a DSS cutout that actually shows both of LdR's "crescent-shaped" clusters. Also see Luginbuhl and Skiff's "Observing Handbook and Catalogue of Deep-Sky Objects" (1990, Cambridge Univ. Press), page 180, for a bit more. I would guess that neither of these is in the NGC for lack of confirming observations available to Dreyer. Brian's observations of the first of them might have convinced Dreyer to assign an NGC number to at least this one. ===== IC 2163, the interacting companion of NGC 2207, was first noted as a seperate object by Joseph Turner on 15 December 1878. ===== Collinder 115. Wolfgang and Yann independently found that WH mentioned this cluster in his 1817 Phil. Trans. (Volume 107, page 302) paper. Steve's further comments about it finally caught my attention in December 2019. WH found the cluster on 27 December 1786 in Sweep 668, where he says, "Clustering stars of the milky-way (sic). Almost close and separate enough to be called a cluster; but still evidently joining to the rest." This suggests why he did not include it in his catalogue. In the sweep, the minute of RA is marked with a double colon (::) which may also have influenced his decision to withhold it. The position given in the sweep, "6 3:: 53, 88 4" is between positions reading "6 26 44, 88 43" and "39 [no seconds], 88 35", so the "3::" must be read as "3[digit]::" (or perhaps "3[digit]:") where the "digit" is somewhere between 0 and 8. In the 1817 paper, WH explicitly gives the RA as "6h 36m", so the observation almost certainly refers to Collinder 115. In any case, WH probably did see the cluster, but perhaps excluded it because of his uncertainty of its relationship to the Milky Way, and the uncertaintly of his measured position for it. ===== UGC 03580. Steve sent this one in May 2015. WH found it on the night of 3 December 1788 and described it as "2 vF stars with eF nebulosity between them, but the nebulosity doubtful." The final phrase tells us why WH chose to not include this in his list of nebulae. Steve suggests that "The '2 vF stars' refer to the nucleus and a mag 13.5-14 star 25 [arcseconds] east of center." He also has an observation of the galaxy from "... nearly 30 years [ago] with my former 13-inch, which probably had a comparable light grasp [to] WH's speculum mirror." He described it then as Fairly faint, small, diffuse. A faint star is off the east edge [25 arcsec from the center]. A larger, very faint halo is visible at low power but it still appears smaller than the catalogued dimensions. The galaxy does indeed have very faint spiral arms extending north and south over nearly five arcminutes. I give a position for the star, presumeably WH's second star, as well as for the galaxy itself. ===== CGCG 085-033. As noted by Wolfgang, this was found by Edouard Stephan on 6 February 1874. Unfortunately, Stephan overlooked it when he was preparing his work for publication. It was not uncovered in his papers until E. Esmiol reassessed his work and published the full observations in a monograph in 1916. There is a fainter companion galaxy 0.75 arcmin to the north that Stephan did not see; its J2000 position is 07 06 24.63, +20 48 34.6 from the 2MASS PSC. ===== UGC 03840. Wolfgang also noted another of the galaxies found by Stephan on 6 February 1874, coincidentally on the same night as CGCG 085-033. Like that galaxy, this one was overlooked by Stephan when he was preparing the positions for publication, and was not recovered until Esmiol published it in his monograph in 1916. Six other galaxies (NGC 218, NGC 845, NGC 3570, NGC 6172 = IC 1213, NGC 6574 = NGC 6610, and NGC 7054 = NGC 7080), also found by Stephan, are listed in Esmiol's monograph as "Anonyme". Esmiol suspected that some of these might be NGC objects, but did not have accurate positions -- aside from Stephan's -- on hand to be sure. A seventh galaxy, NGC 2528 (which see), has a somewhat confused story, with Esmiol calling it "Anonyme" in two tables, but "NGC 2528" in a third. ===== CGCG 262-047. Tucked away in Copeland's discovery note for NGC 2457, Yann found this comment: "About 3' n of the nova [N2457] there seemed to be another vF neb. Telescope now at the limit of its range." This is indeed the location of the CGCG galaxy, but Dreyer again must have wanted a confirming observation before he included it in the NGC. I also found this in LdR's monograph when I was chasing down NGC 2456. See that and NGC 2457 for more. ===== CGCG 287-052, MCG +10-12-092, and UGC 04270. Yann has noted that on 20 February 1851, Bindon Stoney made this observation with LdR's Leviathan: "At PD 31d 47' and RA 8h 2m+- I found 3 S and vF neb." He left a sketch that positively identifies the galaxies and a foreground field star; they are about 11 arcminutes northwest of his estimated position. [There is a fourth galaxy here that Stoney did not see; it is 3 arcminutes northwest of CGCG 287-052 at 08 12 34.58, +57 57 38.1 (J2000, GSC3). The field star is near UGC 04270 at 08 13 18.70, +57 52 18.9 (J2000, Ty2).] As with several other objects in LdR's list, I suspect that Dreyer did not include these in his catalogues because there is only one observation with no verified position. ===== MCG +10-12-092. See CGCG 287-052. ===== UGC 04270. See CGCG 287-052. ===== NGC 2554 comp(anion). There is no problem with the identification of the NGC galaxy, but as Steve recently (April 2014) pointed out, the faint companion (CGCG 119-032) was seen by LdR, though mistaken for a "vS" star. The SDSS photometry for this object makes it among the fainter galaxies picked up with the 72-inch (cModel magnitudes transformed: B = 16.53, V = 15.57, and R = 14.94), only half a magnitude brighter than NGC 2603 (which see). ===== NGC 2606 comp(anion) w(est). This was seen at least twice by LdR. He called it a star once, and a "nova" the second time when he actually measured it with respect to NGC 2606. See the discussion under NGC 2600 for more details. ===== IC 2391 = Lacaille II-5. In spite of its location deep in the southern sky, this cluster is credited to al-Sufi who first noted it in his "Book of Fixed Stars" from the middle of the tenth century (Kenneth Glyn Jones has the full story in "The Search for the Nebulae"; Alpha Academic, 1975). Lacaille also included it in his list, apparently not knowing that al-Sufi had seen it eight centuries earlier. There is no trace of it in JH's CGH observations, so it never made it into GC or NGC -- Dreyer followed JH's lead unhesitatingly in the southern sky, of course having no other choice at the time. The entry in the second IC comes from Solon Bailey's 1902 Harvard list of bright nebulae and clusters. See the notes on IC 2391 in the "icnotes.all" file, and on NGC 2669 for a bit more about this cluster. ===== NGC 2648 comp(anion). Here is another object seen by LdR, dug out of his notes by Steve in April 2014. LdR has this to say about NGC 2648 and its interacting companion (CGCG 060-036) on 23 Feb 1857: "E np sf. mbM, I think [alpha] is a vF ray though likely to be taken at first for a *." [alpha] is clearly shown as an extended galaxy in the diagram, the second in a line of four objects (the others are stars). Again, I can only speculate as to why Dreyer did not include it in the NGC. My first thought is that he simply overlooked it, though LdR's comment "... likely to be taken at first for a *" could be the culprit. The second observation of NGC 2648 (on 29 Dec 1866) also has no mention of the companion. Perhaps being an object from a single night made it questionable enough that Dreyer did not feel comfortable with giving it an NGC entry. Another possibility is that because JH did not give this a GC number, Dreyer simply did not know about the object. In fact, LdR's 1861 monograph has no mention of the companion and no diagram. So, JH could not have known about the object. Still, Dreyer himself put it into LdR's 1880 monograph, so he would certainly have known of its existence. ===== CGCG 238-051 is a companion of the beautiful, face-on spiral, NGC 2857 (the spiral is itself a companion of the pair NGC 2854 and NGC 2856). Steve found that LdR mentions the CGCG galaxy in one observation on 9 January 1856, but not in two further observations in March 1858 or March 1867. This is perhaps why Dreyer chose to not include it in the NGC. ===== NGC 2885 comp(anions). CGCG 121-099, the NGC object, and a star were all seen on 10 January 1867 by R.S. Ball with LdR's 72-inch reflector. Ball's description of the field reads in full, "3 objects seen close together, of which one is probably a neb., the other possibly also, and the third a *? All these are eF, and would perhaps not be seen unless on so good a night as this is." Assuming that the brightest of these three is NGC 2885, the other objects are CGCG 121-099 and the star between these two. There is, however, a possibility that Ball actually saw a somewhat brighter star with a faint galaxy just northwest; this pair is about 2 arcminutes to the west-northwest of the NGC galaxy. Ball's description is not clear enough to give us a definite identification, but if his attention was focused on NGC 2885, then the star roughly 0.6 arcminutes to the east could have caught his eye as well, even though it is quite faint. This is especially true if he saw the CGCG galaxy about an arcminute on further east. But that is speculation. I've included all these objects in the table, flagging my preferred candidates without the word "possibly". Dreyer himself was the observer on 17 March 1877 and saw only one object here. He noted, "eF, vS, iR; no other neb seen." This negative observation confirms, in a way, my preferred candidates -- they are the nearest and brightest of the objects in the area of NGC 2885. Perhaps the better night that Ball commented on was just enough to allow them to appear in his eyepiece. This is another of the Birr Castle objects dug out by Yann Pothier. Finally, see the note for NGC 2885 for its equality with IC 538. ===== CGCG 121-099. See NGC 2885 companions, just above. ===== IC 2488 = Lacaille III-4 is another of the clusters rediscovered by Solon I. Bailey during his survey of Harvard patrol camera plates for bright nebulae and clusters. But the object was first seen by Lacaille during his two-year stay at the Cape of Good Hope in 1751-3. JH has no record of seeing this 80 years later, so it is has no entry in either GC or NGC. As with IC 2391 (which see in this file and the IC files), Dreyer explicitly followed JH for the southern objects. ===== NGC 2986 comp(anion) = ESO 566- G004 = MCG -03-25-018. Steve has noticed that in his observation of NGC 2986 on 10 March 1785, WH wrote, "I partly suspect a vS F one preceding it about a minute or two, but it may be only a few close very small stars." It is actually this galaxy. WH did not pick it up again in two additional sweeps, but it seems pretty sure that he saw it at least this once. He was doubtful enough about it, though, that he did not include it in his catalogues. The accurate positions from the sky surveys are more scattered than I'd expect. UCAC, GSC3, and UB10 all adopt the position from Tycho-2. That position, however, is three arcseconds away from the 2MASS position, and I think -- since it is at the faint end (B_Tycho = 12.8) of the Tycho-2 catalogue -- that the position is probably quite uncertain. I've taken the 2MASS PSC position for the galaxy. ===== h 612 is a star that JH mistook for NGC 2938. See the note for that object as well as those for NGC 3752 and h 917. ===== GC 1936 and GC 1937. See NGC 3010 for the background on this confusing area. In brief, there are four galaxies here. JH found two of them, but we are not sure which two he saw, so the assignment of the NGC numbers is problematic. However, based on his observations, and a possibly mistaken transit wire in his records, I've tentatively assigned the numbers NGC 3009 and 3010 to the southwestern (MCG +07-20-065) and northeastern (MCG +07-20-067) of the triplet northeast of the largest galaxy of the group, MCG +07-20-062. This leaves that largest galaxy and the middle of the triplet (MCG +07-20-066) with no historical designations, though all were seen at least once with LdR's 72-inch. Here, repeated from the discussion under NGC 3010, is that story: The first [observation] is from 1 March 1854, presumably by R.J. Mitchell who writes "One pB; 6'f and a little north are two others vF, about 3' apart pf; several others round about." ... On 1 April 1878, Dreyer at the eyepiece has "1933 [N3009] and 1935 [N3010] seen for a few minutes ..., the f one is smaller and in a rectangular [triangle] of 3 sts." These are pretty clear descriptions of the two brightest objects, the ones that we have taken as N3009 and N3010 in the past. Mitchell's note inspired JH to include two additional numbers in the GC, 1936 and 1937. He credits these to LdR and gives a rounded off position (09 41+-, 45 00+-; 1860, NPD) to both based on his own for NGC 3010. His "Summary Description" reads only "Several near". So, given that we have four galaxies here, and four GC numbers, it seems reasonable to give the GC numbers to the two galaxies without them. Others may argue differently, but the galaxies were indeed seen before the NGC was assembled, so I've included them in this file. The uncertainty remains, of course, as to which two of the galaxies should receive the numbers. Since I've tentatively assigned the NGC numbers to two of the galaxies, and since the two NGC numbers carry GC numbers along with them (NGC 3009 = GC 1933, and NGC 3010 = GC 1935), I can tentatively assign the remaining GC numbers, 1936 and 1937, to the other two galaxies. I've used colons to indicate the remaining uncertainty outlined here. ===== GC 1937. See GC 1936. ===== LM1-162. This nebula, like LM1-70 (which see), found by Frank Leavenworth with the 26-inch at Leander McCormick, was not included in the NGC. As with LM1-70, Leavenworth left only a position (09 54, -05 54 for 1890) and a brief note "[S]ame as (161) [NGC 3064]?" There is no other information; this is clearly why Dreyer skipped the entry in the first Leander McCormick list. This reads very much like LM1-70, doesn't it? However, unlike LM1-70, there is another candidate galaxy for LM1-162. It is MCG -01-26-005, and is quite similar to NGC 3064: D d PA B Type MCG -01-26-005 0.8 x 0.3 40 14.7 Sc NGC 3064 1.1 x 0.3 35 14.5 Sbc? sp If Leavenworth saw both galaxies, it is obvious why he thought they might be the same object. I've included the MCG galaxy as the prime candidate, with NGC 3064 as a secondary candidate. ===== ESO 499- G023 was first seen by Pietro Baracchi with the GMT on 9 April 1885. ===== NGC 3088 comp(anion) = NGC 3088B. Yann must have nearly read between the lines to pull this one out of LdR's 1880 monograph. The descriptions are buried in the short ones for NGC 3088 itself, first by R.J. Mitchell on 21 March 1854: "eeF with B centre. E principally on f side." The companion is indeed on the eastern side. Nearly fifteen years later on 16 February 1869, C.E. Burton wrote: "Nucl susp to be a *. I think there are 2 wings, spp and sff. * in Pos 254.5[deg], Dist 278[arcsec]." The NGC galaxy is indeed extended toward the southwest, and its companion towards the southeast. And the star Burton measured is indeed where he saw it. In this case, it is only with our modern sky surveys that we can see how the Birr Castle observers wrote the descriptions they did. Dreyer clearly thought that the extended "wings" were part of the main galaxy, so did not bother to assign a GC or NGC number. ===== h 653 does not exist. JH only suspected it on one night when he was searching for H II 903 (NGC 3061), but there is nothing near his position that he might have seen. See h 917 and NGC 3752 for the full story. By the way, h 802 = NGC 3484 (which see) also does not exist for the same reason, but received a GC number (2272) and thus its NGC number, while h 653 did not get a separate GC number. This "object" is included here to cover all the entries in JH's catalogues. All the others are taken care of, either in their GC/NGC numbers, or through other entries in this file (e.g. h 917, which see). ===== GSC 0836-0339 = Todd 19 is a star. David Todd found this on 5 February 1878 (not 14 January; Courtney Seligman found the correct date), and said of it merely "Object 'a' suspected". His sketch of the field is accurate, however, and clearly identifies the star. This is another of Klaus Wenzel's identifications. As with IC 591 just below, I think that Dreyer did not like the word "suspected", so omitted this object from the NGC. ===== IC 591 = Todd 22b. David Todd was pretty sure of this object, which he found on 6 February 1878. He measured the difference between its RA and that of a star (UCAC 512-048744 at 10 06 01.3, +12 16 08; J2000) at 86 seconds of time; the actual difference is 86.4 seconds. His description is brief: "Suspected object faint and diffused." The sketch has it and five stars in the correct configuration, so the identity is not in doubt. I would guess that Dreyer did not like the word "Suspected", and omitted the galaxy from the NGC because of that. ===== [CGCG 064-091 is not Todd 20c as I had thought. Courtney Seligman points out that Todd's RA differences (ab = 32 seconds of time; bc = 43 seconds) for objects in his sketch of the field correspond almost exactly to the differences (ab = 32.4 seconds of time; bc = 42.3 seconds) seen between NGC 3153 (Todd 20b) and two stars which Todd labeled "a" and "c". Todd 20c is therefore HIP 50085 at 10 13 32.5, +12 39 05 (J2000), and Todd 20a is UCAC 514-051250 at 10 12 18.1, +12 39 27 (again, J2000). See the background discussion below in the note for CGCG 013-049. This is another of Todd's objects that was not included in the NGC. He found it on 5 February 1878 near NGC 3153. As with the two stars, his sketch identifies it unambiguously. Todd has no description of it in his paper, though the sketch shows it as a moderately bright star.] ===== CGCG 064-093 = Todd 23 is one of David Todd's discoveries on 6 February 1878. He says only "Object [is] small and quite faint." It is labeled "a" in his sketch, with three stars also shown. These positively identify the galaxy. ===== GSC 0841-1088 = Todd 27 is another star. David Todd found it on 28 February 1878, saying "'a' bright and very star-like -- disk slightly suspected"; then verified it on March 4th, "Object fixed", that is, not "the trans-Neptunian planet" for which he was searching. Klaus Wenzel found the identification from Todd's sketch which is a good representation of the field. As with the other stars that Todd found, Dreyer did not include this in the NGC. ===== CGCG 094-042 was apparently picked up, independently -- though with questions -- by both R.J. Mitchell (10 January 1856) and S. Hunter (24 March 1860) with LdR's 72-inch. It is mentioned in their observations of NGC 3239: "A vF neb susp f?" (Mitchell), and "Is there a vF neb f?" (Hunter). However, Dreyer says "Looked for a neb f, saw nothing" on 17 March 1876 with the same telescope. All this was pointed out by Steve in the summer of 2014. Given the marginal nature of Mitchell's and Hunter's observations, and Dreyer's negative one, I am not surprised that this is not in the NGC. ===== GSC 0838-0889 = Todd 2 is a star. Todd found this on 11 November 1877, calling it "suspected," and adding after his sketch and some estimated distances to neighboring stars, "I do not much believe it to be anything but a star." He examined it again two nights later, saying "Object a star." The DSS shows a faint companion just northeast that may have added to Todd's first impression that this was non-stellar. The sketch verifies the identification by Klaus Wenzel. Dreyer clearly did not want single stars in the NGC, so that is why this object is not there. ===== ESO 375- G041 = A1027-35A was found by Baracchi with the GMT on 28 January 1886. ===== LEDA 083097. This faint galaxy was found by Pietro Baracchi on 8 February 1886 with the GMT. ===== LEDA 083082 is a member of the NGC 3268 Group found by Pietro Baracchi with the GMT on 28 January 1886. ===== IC 2584. First seen by Pietro Baracchi on 8 February 1886 with the GMT, this was rediscovered by Lewis Swift on 1 January 1898. ===== NGC 3258D = ESO 375- G058 is another galaxy in the NGC 3268 Group discovered by Pietro Baracchi on 28 February 1886 with the GMT. It was not seen again until Gerard de Vaucouleurs picked it up on a plate he took with the 30-inch Reynolds reflector at Mt. Stromlo in the early 1950s. ===== UGC 05722. This was seen by WH on 9 April 1793, and is quite similar to his observation of UGC 3580 (which see, this file). He wrote "2 vS stars pretty close together. I suspected them to contain vF nebulosity, but 240 shewed [sic] them clear of it." This explains why he did not put this into his list of nebulae. Steve found this observation in May 2015 in the Herschel Archives, and writes "... the '2 vS stars' consist of the nucleus of the galaxy and a mag 14.5 star just 20 [arcseconds] SE. Probably at the higher power, the halo became unnoticeable as the surface brightness dimmed and he was left with [just] the double." I've included the nearby star in the position table along with the galaxy. ===== PGC 31418 was discovered by Pietro Baracchi on 10 March 1886 with the GMT. He also mentioned the star to the southwest that I've included. ===== PGC 31444. 3 February 1886 was a productive night for Pietro Baracchi working through the nearby galaxy cluster that would later be known as Abell 1060. He found this object and four others (LEDA 141475, PGC 31450, PGC 31476, and ESO 501- G049) with the GMT, as well as many of the NGC objects there. ===== LEDA 141475. See PGC 31444 just above. ===== PGC 31450. See PGC 31444 just above. ===== PGC 31476. See PGC 31444 just above. ===== ESO 501- G049. See PGC 31444 just above. ===== CGCG 065-073 = Todd 28. Todd says of this on 28 February 1878, "[Object is] very faint -- could not observe transits." He was able to verify it on 4 March, but Dreyer still did not include it in the NGC. Todd's sketch, with four field stars, clearly identifies the galaxy. ===== CGCG 065-074 = Todd 26 was found on 26 February 1878. Todd says nothing of it, but his sketch -- also showing four stars -- identifies the object. ===== IC 2602 = Lacaille II-9. As with IC 2391 and IC 2488, this cluster was rediscovered by Solon Bailey during his survey of bright non-stellar objects on Harvard patrol camera plates. Lacaille found it during his stay at the Cape of Good Hope in the early 1750s. And, as with IC 2391 and IC 2488, JH has no record of having seen it during his CGH stay. So, it has no entries in either GC or NGC. ===== UGC 05864 = CGCG 066-007 = Todd 25. This is another of David Todd's discoveries during his search for "the trans-Neptunian planet." See the discussion in this file under CGCG 013-049 and the more lengthy one under NGC 3604 for more information about Todd's nebular discoveries. Todd found this one, his number 25, on 26 February 1878, and his sketch positively identifies the object. His descriptive note, however, probably dissuaded Dreyer from putting a listing for it in the NGC: "[The object] is very faint, and but faintly suspected." But he goes on to note on 28 February, "Object fixed", (that is, not moving), so he did in fact verify its existence. ===== NGC 3414 comp(anion) = 2MASX J10511304+2800221. This was found by Bindon Stoney with LdR's Leviathan in March 1851, and was seen again in February and March 1857 by R. J. Mitchell with the same telescope. Steve suggests that an 1867 observation ("date uncertain") by R.S. Ball with the comment "... has a twist turning n from np end" led Dreyer to suppose that the galaxy was actually a part of NGC 3414. Dreyer adds this note to that 1867 observation (his square brackets, not mine): "... [this is evidently what on 3 other nights was seen as an isolated 'patch']". Here, we have an explanation as to why this object did not receive an NGC number. ===== NGC 3445 comp(anion) is interacting with the brighter galaxy. First seen by R.J. Mitchell on 30 March 1856 (he saw it again on 3 April 1858), it was catalogued a century later as MCG +10-16-024. This is another of the non-NGC galaxies dug out of LdR's observations by Steve. He notes that the first observation was included in LdR's 1861 monograph, thus must have been seen by JH during preparation for the GC. Perhaps JH skipped it because LdR gave no position for it. ===== CGCG 095-086. LdR's 72-inch reflector was not a good instrument for finding absolute positions. Once the micrometers were put into use, it did quite well for relative positions, however. Thus it was that Dreyer, looking for NGC 3473, actually found CGCG 095-086. It is positively identified by Dreyer's comments about nearby stars. His additional comments about the galaxy being "bet 2 sts" suggest that he was not certain he had the right object, but he nevertheless listed it in the 1880 monograph as GC 2267 = H III 67. So, the galaxy did not receive an NGC number. Dreyer's brighter star is north of the galaxy at 10 59 59.09, +17 30 20.3; and the fainter one is southwest at 10 59 52.77, +17 24 13.4 (J2000, both from UCAC). Steve and Yann recovered this one. ===== UGC 06076. Here is another of Yann and Steve's recoveries. Just as Dreyer had misidentified CGCG 095-086 (which see, just above) as NGC 3473, so did Copeland misidentify UGC 06076 as NGC 3478 six years earlier. Again, the correct identification is assured by Copeland's measurement of the neighboring star at 11 00 20.89, +45 54 44.8 (J2000, UCAC). Since neither Copeland nor Dreyer doubted the identification, this galaxy also did not receive an NGC number. ===== IC 669 = Todd 8. One of David Todd's nebulae, swept up during his search for "the trans-Neptunian planet." He says of it, "Object 'a' suspected -- it has a companion, [PA] = 25 [deg]." The companion is a star, and both are shown in his sketch which accurately reflects the sky. The discovery date is 3 December 1877. ===== GSC 0848-1219 = Todd 3 is another star found on 11 November 1877. He says "An object 'a' [the star] about equally suspected [see GSC 0838-0889 = Todd 02, another star found the same night], +9 [deg] 35 [arcmin], RA = 11h 1m. It has a faint companion, [PA] = 96 [deg], s [distance] = 25 [arcsec]." On November 13th, he looked at this again and said, "Object a star." His sketch clearly identifies the star and the surrounding field. As with Todd 2, Klaus Wenzel identified this star. Again, Dreyer did not want to include a star in the NGC, so skipped this object, too. ===== NGC 3683A = UGC 06484. There is some confusion in the two observations of NGC 3674 and NGC 3683 reported in LdR's monograph, both under GC 2415 (NGC 3674). R.S. Ball has an observation on 1 March 1867; it reads "Another neb found together with 2421 [= NGC 3683], which notes describe as pF, pL, R, lbM, f half a field of finder and about the same amount n of 2421. Unless there is some mistake (f for p) this must be a nova, otherwise it must be 2415 [= NGC 3674]. A * near." On 1 April 1878, Dreyer made this observation, nominally of NGC 3674, "pF, S, irr R, mottled, * ssp and * sf, both about 11m. Nothing found 13' f and 13' n of 2421, evidently a mistake for 2415 in 1867." Dreyer's observation could refer to either NGC 3674 or 3683 -- both have stars southeast and southwest, though those south of NGC 3683 are closer to 11th magnitude. Note, too, that UGC 06484 is 20.5 arcminutes northeast of NGC 3683, not just 13 arcminutes as Dreyer assumed. If he did not check at greater distances, he would not have seen Ball's nova. Looking at all of this, I suspect that Ball's observation is correct as it stands -- no mistake in the directions -- and that Dreyer did not check far enough from NGC 3683 to find Ball's nova. If that is true, then UGC 06484, which we also call NGC 3683A (from Keenan's ApJ 82, 62, 1935 paper), is indeed the new object not included in the NGC. ===== CGCG 242-042. Lord Rosse himself probably saw this one on 26 March 1848 during the first year of operation of his 72-inch telescope. The observation reads Before this neb [NGC 3726] came into the field of the large finding eyepiece, Lord Rosse observed a vF neb p it about 2m nearly in the same NPD. [{Dreyer adds} If the estimation of {delta} RA is wrong, this may have been h 888 {NGC 3677}.] Lord Rosse's object was apparently not looked for again as there is no other mention of it. I note, too, that NGC 3677 was not on LdR's observing list, so Dreyer's suggestion could be correct. (I think it was probably this uncertainty that led Dreyer to not include CGCG 242-042 in the NGC.) However, the CGCG object is bright enough to have been seen at Birr, and it is about 2m 40s of time west of NGC 3726, much closer to LdR's estimate than the 7m 02s of NGC 3677. If LdR was consulting a clock that night, then I think that NGC 3677 is ruled out, assuming of course that he did not make a five-minute clock-reading error. This is another of Steve's discoveries in LdR's big 1880 monograph. ===== h 917 is a star. Though this number appears in the NGC (on NGC 3752), once the identification for that object is sorted out (and the sorting out is considerable; see NGC 3752 for the story) -- it becomes one of three of JH's objects -- from his search for his father's objects from WH's sweep 1096 on 2 April 1801 -- that did not eventually end up on an NGC object. As I explain in the note to NGC 3752 (which see), Wolfgang has found that WH observed the objects of that sweep off the meridian, thus introducing considerable errors in the positions. Unfortunately, neither CH nor JH knew of this, so assumed that WH's positions -- reduced as usual by CH -- were at least as accurate as normal (two to three arcminutes). So, during JH's Sweep 414 on 5 April 1832, he set himself the task of reobserving at least four of his father's nebulae: II 903, II 905, III 963, and III 967. As it turned out, he found none of these, though recorded them all in his 1833 list of nebulae. Here are the objects which he was searching for, along with his own numbers in his 1833 list, his positions for 1830, his descriptions; and what is actually at the positions he recorded (in square brackets []): III 963 h 612 09 27 11.2 12 39 46 eF; has a coarse D * 3' following. [This is a star; the double star is where he says it is.] II 903 h 653 09 45 41.3 13 01 41 Very doubtful. [Moon] and haze. [There is nothing here.] III 967 h 802 10 50 08.9 13 16 11 A very doubtful object. [There is nothing here, either.] II 905 h 917 11 27 09.7 13 47 01 eF. [This is a star. Note, too, that JH mistakenly calls this "III 905".] The other two objects that JH recorded in the sweep as "novae" are actually two of the objects that his father found in 1801: h 733 = I 284 = NGC 3329 and h 795 = III 967 = NGC 3465 (note that this is WH's real III 967, not h 802 as claimed by JH). The bottom line of this story is that JH was misled by the poor positions his father accidentally left him. Thus, three of the six objects that JH swept up that April night in 1832 were left without NGC numbers: h612, h653, and h917, in spite of appearing in the NGC with JH's positions (the WH numbers to which JH applied them moved to other NGC numbers). h 802 was also assigned a GC number (2272, though no WH number) by JH, so eventually also got its NGC number (3484) in spite of being non-existent all along. ===== NGC 3769A. Though given its modern name in RC1 following Holmberg (it is also Ho 270b), Steve points out that it was first seen on 9 April 1852 by LdR as "... a F appendage or 2nd neb." He and his observers picked it up again on the nights of 17 April 1855 and 12 April 1861. In 1855, the Birr observers noted, "The appendage looks like an independent nebula"; and in 1861, as the second of "Two, probably connected." Steve adds, "Furthermore, a sketch shows the companion at the correct orientation. Given all this, I'm surprised neither JH nor Dreyer decided to add this object to the GC or NGC!" However, "novae" are usually noted in the Herschel number column as "R. nova", and there is no such designation here. I have to agree with Steve, though; this clearly deserved an NGC number. As is, it had to wait until Holmberg's list of double and multiple galaxies in 1937, the MCG in 1962 (where it is MCG +8-21-077), and the third volume of CGCG in 1966, where it is CGCG 242-066, before it received catalogue numbers. Note also that there is a bright knot in the southeastern end of the galaxy; it's position is 11 37 51.42, +47 52 53.3 (J2000.0; SDSS). Thornton Page, by the way, in ApJ 116, 63, 1952, had picked up this and NGC 3769 itself in his spectroscopic study of double galaxies. He was the first to demonstrate the physical connection between the two system -- they have nearly identical redshifts (V_sun = 748 for N3769 and V_sun = 712 for N3769A). ===== CGCG 097-090 = Bigourdan 047. Working in the NGC 3842 group on 8 February 1886, Bigourdan came across two objects which he took to be new. He actually misidentified one of them (NGC 3841), but as if to compensate, dug out another (CGCG 097-087, which see above). Bigourdan described this particular galaxy somewhat differently on the two nights he saw it (the second night was 8 March 1886 when he actually measured it): "This object, distinct from NGC 3841, could be nothing but a simple star," and "Exceedingly faint object, but whose existence appears certain, and which is almost surely a small nebula. [He adds a note in italics:] It is found at the position which the NGC gives for NGC 3841." (Another object which he claimed to have discovered (Big 048) is actually NGC 3841.) His positions in the group are good, and there is no doubt that CGCG 097-090 is the galaxy he saw. (The CGCG object actually includes a faint companion just northwest of the brighter galaxy that must be Bigourdan's object; that faint companion is at 11 43 56.84, +19 57 20.9, J2000, 2MSP.) I suspect Dreyer did not include it in the NGC because of the possibility that it might have been one of the previously known objects in the group. By the way, note that Bigourdan calls this "Bigourdan 46" in his big table of observations. It is correctly noted as number 47 in his tables of new objects, and in the list published in CR. This is also a good place to note that of the hundred or so "novae" that Bigourdan sent to Dreyer before the NGC was published, Dreyer did not include nine for one reason or another. It may well be that Bigourdan did not send these to Dreyer, though I suspect he did. We will have to dig into Dreyer's records to find out for sure, of course. So, even if Bigourdan sent these to Dreyer, why do these nine "novae" from Bigourdan's first two lists not appear in the NGC? Of those that are included, Dreyer says only, "About 100 nebulae found with the west Equatorial of the Paris Observatory (of 310 mm. aperture), and kindly communicated in May 1887." These objects are presumeably the 102 nebulae that Bigourdan published in his first two "Comptes rendus" lists (CR 105, 926, 1887, 50 objects; and CR 105, 1116, 1887, 52 objects). The nine objects not credited to Bigourdan in the NGC are: Big RA (J2000) Dec RA (J2000.0) Dec Cat. Notes Big Reduced Modern 008 (01 07 54 +32 23.5 ) 01 07 51.44 +32 24 17.1 UCAC *; Big's pos is an estimate. 039 09 23 27.3 -10 25 45 09 23 27.19 -10 25 46.3 UCAC = NGC 2868 --- 11 43 49.3 +19 57 59 11 43 49.08 +19 58 06.5 SDSS = CGCG 097-087; called N3841 by Big. 047 11 43 57.4 +19 57 12 11 43 57.51 +19 57 13.5 2MSP = CGCG 097-090se; F comp near nw --- -- -- 11 43 56.84 +19 57 20.9 2MSP = CGCG 097-090nw 048 11 44 02.1 +19 58 19 11 44 02.16 +19 58 18.9 UCAC = NGC 3841 058 12 54 11.0 +27 03 51 12 54 10.73 +27 03 50.1 UCAC * 075 15 06 29.2 +01 35 41 15 06 29.20 +01 35 41.6 UCAC = NGC 5846A 093 22 57 53.3 +26 04 08 22 57 51.66 +26 04 03.2 UCAC *; called N7433 by Big 094 22 58 02.7 +26 05 04 22 58 02.05 +26 04 57.1 UCAC *; called N7435 by Big 100s 23 46 49.9 +29 29 08 23 46 49.45 +29 28 58.1 UCAC *; s of ** 100n 23 46 49.9 +29 29 08 23 46 49.79 +29 29 08.2 UCAC *; n of ** In this table, the position reduced from measurements given in the big tables are included in the second and third columns. The fourth and fifth columns give a representative measurement from a modern catalogue, while the final column gives brief notes about the identification of the object. Here are more extensive notes for each of the objects. Bigourdan 008. On the night of 19 November 1884, Bigourdan swept over the area with the NGC 383 group. He picked up several objects there including two new ones that became numbers 8 and 9 in his lists of "novae". Number 9 also became NGC 390 (which see), but is only a single star. Big 8, however, did not find its way into the NGC. Bigourdan's description reads, "This object could be formed by one or two [stars], with some traces of nebulous material." His measurement is apparently hurriedly taken as he gives a measured angle to his comparison star (326.55 degrees), but he has no screw reading. Instead, he estimates the distance as 7 arcmin. At roughly the correct position angle, there are a number of stars that could be his object; the one in the table is the one closest to his position. It's clear, of course, that whichever object he mistook as nebulous, there is no galaxy here. Bigourdan 039 = NGC 2868. This problem was caused by Muller's poor position given in the second paper of new nebulae from Leander-McCormick. Sweeping through the area on 15 February 1887, Bigourdan of course did not find either NGC 2868 or 2869 at Muller's positions. The brighter NGC 2869 (which see) was picked up by the Herschels, so has a reasonable position under the number NGC 2863. However, Bigourdan was apparently the first to find N2868 at its correct position. Unfortunately, neither he nor Dreyer made the connection to Muller's object. Given the resulting confusion, Dreyer decided to not include Bigourdan's "nova". Herbert Howe later sorted out the problems, and Dreyer included his corrections in the IC2 Notes. Bigourdan 047 and 048. See above. Bigourdan 058 is a star. It is, however, between NGC 4787 and 4789, so I suspect Dreyer did not include it in the NGC because he could not be sure that it was not simply another observation of one of these. In his CR list, though, Bigourdan says, "... is distinct from 5675 G.C. [= N4787]". I wonder if he included the same comment when he wrote to Dreyer. Bigourdan 075 is the compact galaxy we now call "NGC 5846A". That turns out to have been seen by both Herschels as well as by Bigourdan. See the note on it below for more. Bigourdan 093 and 094 are both stars superposed on the NGC 7436 galaxy group. Bigourdan also misidentified them as NGC 7433 and NGC 7435, respectively. This was apparently because of some confusion on Dreyer's part in merging d'A's and LdR's observations in the group. Bigourdan's positions are not as good as for the other objects in this short list; the stars are quite faint, and must have been difficult to measure. Bigourdan 100 is a double star near NGC 7752 and 7753. As with Bigourdan 058, I suspect that Dreyer did not include this in the NGC because of the possibility that Bigourdan may simply have reobserved one of the two known nebulae. Curiously, Bigourdan has separate entry for Big 100 in his table of measurements, then also calls NGC 7752 Big 100. This is on the page following the Big 100 entry, however, so is probably just an oversight. And in the CR list, Bigourdan specifically says, "... distinct from 6226 G.C. [= N7752]". Again, as with Big 058, I am curious if Bigourdan included this in the list he sent directly to Dreyer. ===== NPM1G +56.0124 = LEDA 083487. Working near the northern limit of LdR's 72-inch reflector, Dreyer has observations of three galaxies on the night of 1 April 1878. He lists one that he believed to be GC 2555 = NGC 3888 and another he called GC 2564 = NGC 3898. Fortunately, he has good descriptions of the fields around both, so Steve has found that the observation of "GC 2555" actually applies to GC 2532 = NGC 3850; and that for "GC 2564" is actually for GC 2555 = NGC 3888. For this second observation, Dreyer cites two stars of the 12th magnitude 2 arcminutes distant toward the north- northeast and the northwest. For the first observation, Dreyer has a "Nova, vF, vS, Pos. 167.2[deg], Dist. 340.5[arcsec]." This actually describes very well the position of the NPM1G galaxy with respect to NGC 3850. This does not appear in the NGC because Dreyer thought he was actually reobserving NGC 3889 found 13 March 1852 by Bindon Stoney. In the 1880 monograph, Dreyer Stoney's observation reads: "[h] 978 [NGC 3888] is Oval [sic], F Nucl. Another F, S, 5' nf." To this, Dreyer adds in square brackets, "If '5[arcmin] nf' should be '5[arcmin] sf' this would be the nova seen in 1878; h 985 [NGC 3898] is about 15[arcmin] nf." This comment makes sense if the galaxy 15 arcminutes to the northeast is NGC 3888. As I mentioned above, Steve has sorted out this one for us. ===== NGC 3953 comp(anion) = 2MASS 11532098+5220442 was seen only once with LdR's 72-inch "Leviathan", on the night of 3 March 1851, by Bindon Stoney. He says "S neb, vF, 6' npp." Dreyer adds a note "[not noticed since, would be a nova if a real neb.]." There were three additional Birr observations of NGC 3953; as Dreyer noted, none mention the companion. It is, of course, a "real neb", picked up again during the 2MASS survey 150 years later. There is a fainter star on the western side of the galaxy; its position is 11 53 20.18, +52 20 45.2 (J2000, 2MSP). This is another of Steve's discoveries in the Birr observations. ===== CGCG 013-049. Late in 1877, David Todd undertook a "Telescopic search for the trans-Neptunian planet" with the 26-inch refractor at the Naval Observatory in Washington, DC. He reported his results in AN 113, 153, 1886 (= AN 2698), essentially transcribing his observing log. He found 36 objects which he suspected of being nebulous. His positions are crude, but he has sketches of the fields for most of the objects, so all but one have been identified (see the list and further discussion under NGC 3604 = NGC 3611). Many of these turned out to be NGC objects, and a few are even credited to Todd, but some were regarded as uncertain enough by Dreyer that they were not entered in the NGC. CGCG 013-049 = Todd 13e is one of these. Todd found it on 2 January 1878 in the same field with NGC 4045 and 4045A. His sketch identifies it positively, though he says of it, "suspected somewhat." This is clearly why Dreyer did not put this into the NGC. ===== NGC 4132 companion = MCG +05-29-024. During one of WH's most productive sweeps (sweep 396 on 11 April 1785), when he found over 70 "nebulae", he made a note in his observation of NGC 4132 (= H III 357) that reads, "I suspect a fourth, but could not stay to ascertain it, though I am pretty sure." (The other two galaxies are NGC 4131 and NGC 4134.) While there are two fainter galaxies also in the field (12 08 40.8, +29 10 45 and 12 08 50.9, +29 22 52, neither bright enough to be in CGCG or MCG), this MCG galaxy is the nearest to the line of three that Herschel recorded, so is the most likely candidate. It may be a stretch to include it here, but I put it in anyway as there is at least one other of WH's suspected nebulae in this list (UGC 5722). ===== CGCG 069-113. Steve has found that Samuel Hunter, working with LdR's Leviathan on 23 April 1860, probably noticed this faint companion north of NGC 4216. Hunter says, "The neb [N4216] is either twisted at n end in p direction or it has a F compn there?" I suspect that Dreyer was simply being cautious in this case, not including the "F compn" because of the doubt expressed by Hunter. ===== NGC 4292A. Bindon Stoney's terse observation of NGC 4292 on 1 March 1851 reads in full, "bM and has a vF companion". For LdR's 1880 monograph, Dreyer added this in square brackets, "2 [arcmin] n by a diagr." Steve found this as he has so many others in the monograph. Dreyer has confused the observations of NGC 4292 and NGC 4303 (see the Notes for both of these), and likely suspected the possible confusion with NGC 4301. Also, given that Stoney's observation is the only one of this particular nebula, it's likely that Dreyer felt too unsure of the object to include it in the NGC. For the record, Adelaide Ames picked this up in her Virgo Cluster survey of 1930 (in HA 88), and Vorontsov-Velyaminov included it in his note for NGC 4292 = MCG +01-32-016 (in the third volume of MCG, 1963). ===== Coma Star Cluster = Melotte 111. This is another of the nearby Galactic clusters known since ancient times. Dreyer did not include it in the NGC simply because it is too large, too bright, and too well-known. Like the LMC, M 25, and a few other objects, he simply skipped over it for those reasons. ===== IC 3290. Discovered by Joseph Turner with the GMT on 16 April 1877, this was later picked up by Lewis Swift on 30 January 1898, with another (undated) observation by Herbert Howe. ===== h 1367. Another of JH's objects missing from the NGC, this one is apparently a placeholder for M91. JH's description reads in full: A bright * 9 m, and 2 or 3 smaller; close by the B star and sp it, is a small well defined body which may be a close double star, and np is also a F neb. The place set down is that of Messier's 91st neb, but I do not think this can be that object, whose existence even seems questionable." Curiously, though JH marks the RA and NPD with +- signs, the RA is exactly one minute of time too small for the star and the NPD is very close. Messier's position for M91 precesses to 12 35.0 +14 01, though as we now know, this is wrong (see W.C. Williams, Sky and Telescope, Dec. 1969 for a convincing resolution to the mystery; in short M 91 = NGC 4548). JH's description of the field is good aside from the "np is also a F neb." The only object northwest of his 9th magnitude star is a much fainter one (at 12 35 52.8, +14 06 58, B1950, my estimate from a DSSR2 image downloaded via SkyView). JH went on to include his observation in GC with the "Summary Description" (but no Note) reading, "np this place is a F neb; *not* M.91, whose existence ? ." The position he gives in GC is just that from his 1833 list, though without the +- signs. Another small curiosity is why Dreyer left this object out of the NGC. Even considering the uncertainty of the M91, JH's mention of "a F neb" should have been enough to at least suggest an NGC number. Fortunately, none appeared as it would now have to be marked as only a star. ===== NGC 4603A. Beginning on 19 March 1885 and finally finishing 4 July of the same year, Pietro Baracchi worked through the nearby rich cluster we now call Abell 3526, the Centaurus Cluster, discovering 17 galaxies with the GMT. He picked up this particular one on 20 March. ===== ESO 322- G047 is another of Pietro Baracchi's discoveries of 20 March 1885 in the Centaurus Cluster. ===== NGC 4603C, like NGC 4603A (both later rediscovered by G. de Vaucouleurs on photographic plates taken with the 30-inch Reynolds reflector at Mt. Stromlo) and ESO 322- G047, was found on 20 March 1885 by Pietro Baracchi with the GMT. ===== NGC 4644B. Once again, Steve has found that Dreyer noticed this galaxy when he (Dreyer) was observing NGC 4644 and NGC 4646 on 25 April 1878 with LdR's Leviathan. Dreyer has this to say about the field: [GC] 3177 [NGC 4644] is eF, vS, E sp nf, S compn or * 3/4 [arcmin] f. The "S compn or *" is what we now call NGC 4644B. Dreyer saw only the nucleus of this edgewise spiral with the 72-inch. He probably did not include it in the NGC because he was not sure that it was not just a star. ===== UGC 07905sw and UGC 07905ne. Steve also notes that in the same observation of NGC 4644 and NGC 4644B (which see), Dreyer picked up NGC 4646 and UGC 7905 with LdR's 72-inch. Here again are Dreyer's notes on the UGC object (an interacting pair of galaxies): A third neb ([GC] 5668), biN in Pos 16.5 [deg], Dist 44 [arcsec], sp Nucl much the brighter, other one fainter and smaller, perhaps composed of sts. This neb is in Pos 71.5 [deg], Dist 533 [arcsec] from [GC] 3179 [NGC 4646]. The only problem with this description is the identification of the new double nebula with one of d'A's novae to which Dreyer had given the number 5668 in his GC Supplement. He realized his mistake while compiling the NGC, however, so GC 5668 is properly given its own NGC number, 4669. I've given positions for both galaxies. However, Dreyer did not take the next step and give his new, "third" nebula an entry in the NGC. Did he perhaps think that d'A had seen this one, too? Another mystery! ===== NGC 4622A is one of Pietro Baracchi's discoveries in the Centaurus Cluster with the GMT. He found it on 19 March 1885. ===== NGC 4650A was also found by Pietro Baracchi on 19 March 1885 with the GMT. ===== ESO 322- G075. This galaxy was also discovered by Pietro Baracchi on 19 March 1885 with the GMT. ===== NGC 4696A. On his last night, 4 July 1885, scanning through the Centaurus Cluster with the GMT, Pietro Baracchi discovered three galaxies -- this is one. The others are ESO 322- G099 and ESO- G100. ===== ESO 322- G099. See NGC 4696A, just above. ===== ESO 322- G100. See NGC 4696A, just above. ===== ESO 322- G102. Late in August 2018, Steve Gottlieb sent an email to me, Wolfgang, and Courtney Seligman detailing his work on the surviving papers and artifacts at Museums Victoria in Melbourne concerning the Great Melbourne Telescope (see the article in Sky and Telescope, October 2018 [Vol. 134, No. 4], page 34 by Trudy Bell for background on the GMT. See SL 460 above for the URL and search terms to access the material; another is given below). I'm quoting Steve's email message in full. In it, Steve relates how he uncovered more about the Melbourne observations of nebulae than has been published (Wolfgang gives a thorough account of the published data in his 2010 book.) The October issue of Sky & Tel has an interesting article by Trudy Bell on the restoration or reconstruction of the Great Melbourne Telescope using surviving original parts (both pre- or post-fire) by volunteers of the Astronomical Society of Victoria. This got me thinking of the paucity of new objects found with the GMT (2 in the NGC and a couple of Shapley-Lindsay clusters). Despite the limited program of reexamining objects discovered by John Herschel and looking for evidence of change, many new nebulae should have been picked up in the same field as well as fainter galaxies within southern galaxy clusters -- at least before the mirrors hadn't tarnished too severely. Bell's article mentions that the Museums Victoria owned the GMT parts, so I checked out their website and quickly discovered a number of photographs and images of plates (https://collections.museumvictoria.com.au/search?query= "Great+Melbourne+Telescope"). The single publication on nebulae from the Observatory ("Observations of Southern Nebulae made with the Great Melbourne Telescope 1869 - 1885") only included 3 plates of nebulae, numbered 1, 3, and 4, but the Museums Victoria collection includes the missing Plate 2, as well as a Plate 7 and 8. So at least 8 lithographs were prepared for publication (numbered up to 85), though the museum site doesn't include Plates 5 or 6. There's a "Fullscreen" button on the page but the images aren't the greatest quality and seem to include very few LMC fields. I made a stab at identifying some of the objects and found on Plate 2, #14 = NGC 1531/1532 and #9 = NGC 1331/1332. On Plate 7, #84 = NGC 1365 (likely the first sketch to show it as a barred spiral), #82 = NGC 1531/1532, #79 = NGC 346. But I doubt there's anything new on these two plates. I also spent some time scanning online the Annual reports of the "Board of Visitors" to the Observatory, together with the "Annual Report of the Government Astronomer". Although these are very brief accounts generally giving the number of nebulae observed in the previous year, I did find at least a couple of pre-NGC discoveries! The Seventeenth Report of the Observatory published in 1882 mentions, "a new nebula about 1' N of H. 4549 [sic. GC 4549 = NGC 6872] was observed and sketched." This clearly refers to IC 4970. I assume Turner made this observation, probably in the latter half of 1881. The Sixteenth Report of the Observatory published in 1881 states, "Twenty- two nebulae of Sir John Herschel's catalogue, with a new one not previously recorded, were observed and sketched, the position of the new on being 4'30" south of H. 3705 [sic. GC 3705 = NGC 5365], and preceding it by 67 seconds of time." This offset lands on NGC 5365A = ESO 271-006. Again, the observation was probably made by Turner in 1880. The only other specific reference to a new nebula was in the Fifteenth Report: "... one small not mentioned by Herschel, and in the same field with his Nos. [GC] 3234 and 3237 [NGC 4706 and 4709], has been observed." There are two possibilities here -- either ESO 322-102 or PGC 43402. The 19th Report published in 1884 includes the comment "He [referring to Turner] recorded a new but faint nebula found during his observations of the 3rd August, 1883.", but no mention is made of the field. Similarly, the 20th Report states, "... of the 172 nebulae observed, 140 are Herschel's, 3 are new, one discovered by the late Mr. Turner, and 29 new or not identified, found by Mr. Baracchi. Many of these nebulae have observed twice, and some three times, and none were completed until they had been observed on a first-class night." But no specifics are mentioned. Finally, the 21st Report says, "30 nebulae were found, but not identified in the catalogues, and may therefore be regarded as new." So just the 20th and 21th reports refer to as many as 59 new or not identified objects in the logbooks. These may still be kept at the National Archives of Australia in Canberra but in any case are not available online. At least we know the telescope did make some visual discoveries! Steve mentions two possibilites for the new object in the field with NGC 4706 and 4709, ESO 322- G102 and PGC 43402. My thought that the ESO galaxy is the correct object is based on the magnitudes and diameters from SuperCOSMOS data. Here is a short table: Galaxy RA (J2000) Dec V_T D x d Note ESO 322- G102 12 49 37.8 -41 23 18 13.7 1.0 x 0.4 Isosceles triangle with NGC 4706/9 PGC 43402 12 49 51.6 -41 13 34 14.3 0.5 x 0.2 3.3' n of NGC 4706 The ESO object is considerably larger and brighter and makes a nice isosceles triangle with NGC 4706 and NGC 4709. So, I've put it into the positions table rather than the fainter PGC object. However, given that Steve has laid out all the original information available for the nebula, it is quite possible that the fainter object was the one referred to by the GMT observer. ===== MCG -07-26-057 is a member of the Centaurus Cluster found with the GMT on the night of 12 May 1885 by Pietro Baracchi. This was another productive night for him as he discovered five other galaxies in the cluster: ESO 323- G005, G008, G009, G019, and ESO 322- G102. ===== ESO 323- G005. See MCG -07-26-057, just above. ===== ESO 323- G008. See MCG -07-26-057, just above. ===== ESO 323- G009. See MCG -07-26-057, just above. ===== ESO 323- G019. See MCG -07-26-057, just above. ===== ESO 323- G023. A member of the Centaurus Cluster, this was found by Pietro Baracchi on 21 March 1885 with the GMT. ===== 2MASX J13002111+2920135. This was probably seen by LdR on 24 April 1865 during his observation of a field he thought was near NGC 4914 = GC 3365. See NGC 4912 for the story. ===== H II 815. Steve has found that this WH galaxy should not have an NGC number, though Dreyer (following JH for the GC), put it on NGC 4987. See the note for that for the full explanation. Briefly, there are two galaxies in the area; WH got one, JH got the other, and JH combined them for the GC using his position. ===== MCG +08-24-066. See UGC 08269, just below. ===== UGC 08269 and companions. Dreyer has a complex note here describing a field that he believed included NGC 5029 = GC 3457 -- it does not. The NGC galaxy is about 20 arcminutes northeast of the two brightest galaxies in the field. Yann found that UGC 08269 and MCG +08-24-066 matched these two galaxies that Dreyer discusses. That is where I've started. Here is Dreyer's description from 27 April 1878 at the eyepiece of LdR's 72-inch: 2 neb, Pos 173.0[deg], Dist 183.0", s one has a * 6' sf and n one a * 4' nf. About 7' n and 3' p the last mentioned * is another neb, vF, vS, forms a [triangle] with 2 sts f. About 11' f and 3' s of last neb is a close D neb sp nf, 15"+- Dist. A good way n and a little f(?) the 2 measured nebulae is a neb, eF, vS, E ssp nnf, vF * close sf it (this one was seen first of all and was supposed to be in the place of 3457). A few minutes (of space) p the E neb is a nebulous looking object. Here is how I sorted all this out, starting with the two galaxies identified by Yann as the two that Dreyer himself started with. The positions are mine from the DSS2R image (source HCsv), and the identifications are from NED (or SIMBAD for the two brightest stars). Objects in brackets are not mentioned by Dreyer. Dreyer Desc RA J2000.0 Dec Ident/Notes s of 2 neb 13 11 15.19 +46 42 02.3 UGC 08269 [comp 13 11 10.50 +46 42 49.1 2MASX J13111041+4642484] n of 2 neb 13 11 12.82 +46 45 01.3 MCG +08-24-066 * 6' sf 13 11 33.53 +46 39 51.1 * = BD +47 2028 [comp 13 11 34.15 +46 39 38.4 * = SDSS J131134.18+463937.9] * 4' nf 13 11 20.61 +46 46 24.8 * = GSC 03460-01920 7' n 3' p 13 10 47.86 +46 50 35.8 SDSS J131047.84+465034.9; plsb comp 13 10 53.46 +46 49 09.6 2MASX J13105347+4649094; compact tri n * f 13 11 00.16 +46 53 25.2 **; mean pos. tri n * f n 13 11 00.11 +46 53 27.1 * = SDSS J131100.13+465327.1, n of pair tri n * f s 13 11 00.21 +46 53 24.3 * = SDSS J131100.26+465323.4, s of pair tri s * f 13 11 08.72 +46 50 34.3 * = SDSS J131108.74+465033.4 11' f 3' s 13 12 00.88 +46 47 09.0 SDSS J131200.90+464707.9; not double (* near s) 13 12 00.70 +46 46 34.2 * = SDSS J131200.72+464633.6 E ssp nnf 13 11 55.91 +46 54 26.3 NPM1G +47.0248 * close s 13 11 56.54 +46 53 55.3 * = SDSS J131156.54+465354.5 neb-look ob 13 11 39.57 +46 55 05.7 NPM1G +47.0246 There are other galaxies in the area that Dreyer does not mention, his distances are generally poorly estimated, the "close D neb sp nf, 15"+- Dist" is not double, nor is there a double galaxy in the field that fits this description. The star that I have taken as the "sp" of the double is 33 arcseconds distant from the galaxy and is almost directly south, so I am not encouraged about this being the pair of "nebulae" that Dreyer was describing. Aside from that, things more or less fit, so I've put the galaxies in the "notngcpos.all" file, though some carry colons or question marks. I can see why Dreyer would not want to include these in the NGC. I don't think that he even believed that he had found NGC 5029. Even if he had, he had only approximate positions for all but one of the objects. He was simply too fastidious to allow such poor data into his catalogue. Better to keep it hidden in the 1880 monograph so that it could be sorted out later. Have I actually done that? Perhaps ... At least Yann has found the correct two starting galaxies; they match the single micrometric measurement that Dreyer made here. ===== MCG +08-24-066. See UGC 08269, just above. ===== UGC 08269 comp nw1:. See UGC 08269, just above. ===== UGC 08269 comp nw2:. See UGC 08269, just above. ===== UGC 08269 comp ne1?. See UGC 08269, just above. ===== UGC 08269 comp ne2. See UGC 08269, just above. ===== UGC 08269 comp ne3. See UGC 08269, just above. ===== NGC 5033 knot. R.J. Mitchell, perhaps alerted by Johnstone Stoney's observation of NGC 5033, found this on 3 May 1858 while observing NGC 5033. He notes, "... I also think I see a neb knot sf, in the direction of major axis of neb, but was interrupted by clouds." Stoney had written on 1 March 1851, "vB centre, neb extends to a * sf? ..." There is a star southeast of the center of the galaxy, but it is fainter than two stars north and west of the nucleus that Stoney does not mention. The knot is indeed where Mitchell suspected it, and is the brightest and largest star cloud in the galaxy. The faint superposed star is just northeast of the star cloud. Stoney and Mitchell also write of "an appendage preceding" which is the western arm of the galaxy containing another bright, but smaller, star cloud. Hunter confirmed the "appendage" on 19 April 1862, but did not comment on the knot to the south. This is another of Steve's discoveries in LdR's monograph. ===== CGCG 073-021. While examining NGC 5207 on 3 May 1856, R.J. Mitchell noted, "About 5' nf is a vF nebulous knot." Given that LdR's observers saw it on just this one night, Dreyer may have felt that it needed verification before he put it into any of his catalogues. Whatever happened, the galaxy was picked up for CGCG about a century later. Steve noticed its presence in LdR's 1880 monograph. ===== NGC 5303B. Bindon Stoney examined NGC 5303 on the night of 1 March 1851 with LdR's 72-inch reflector and described it only by saying, "* or Nucl in np edge; 2nd vF, 3' s, both E p f." The "2nd vF" is the galaxy we now call "NGC 5303B". I find it a real puzzle as to why Dreyer did not include this in the NGC -- perhaps because JH did not put it into the GC? Steve found this one, too. ===== NGC 5318 comp n and nw were both seen by R.J. Mitchell on 27 and 28 March 1856. On the first night, he says, "A [NGC 5312] is F, B [NGC 5318] much brighter and has a Nucl, 2 vF patches extend to np." On the second, he simply notes, "Last night's obs is correct, nothing to add to it." He has a sketch that shows the "2 vF patches" aligned with the major axis of NGC 5318. Dreyer must have taken these as knots in NGC 5318 itself, but they are, in fact, both separate galaxies. This is another of Steve's discoveries in the 1880 monograph. ===== NGC 5318 comp nw. See NGC 5318 comp n, just above. ===== UGC 08756. Steve has noticed that on 9 April 1787, WH recorded this galaxy, describing it as "Suspected, 300 left it doubtful and shewed 2 S blotted supposed stars." WH put it 4min 20sec following and 1d 28arcmin north of a star he identified as "203 Canum Ven. of Bode's Cat." CH reduced the position to 13 42 03, 46 25 (NPD for 1800; this becomes 13 50 26, +42 35 for J2000), but did not assign a running number to the object as she did for all those nebulae and clusters that WH inserted into his catalogues. It's clear from his notes why WH rejected this galaxy. But it is also pretty clear that he did at least get a glimpse of it. ===== NGC 5365A. See ESO 322- G102 above for the background to this object. Steve uncovered this from observations with the Great Melbourne Telescope. An excerpt from his email of August 2018 reads: The Sixteenth Report of the Observatory published in 1881 states, "Twenty- two nebulae of Sir John Herschel's catalogue, with a new one not previously recorded, were observed and sketched, the position of the new on being 4'30" south of H. 3705 [sic. GC 3705 = NGC 5365], and preceding it by 67 seconds of time." This offset lands on NGC 5365A = ESO 271-006. Again, the observation was probably made by [Joseph] Turner in 1880. Dreyer obviously did not see this report, so did not include the object in the NGC. ===== UGC 09077 and UGC 09081. Yann found that these were seen by Bindon Stoney on 1 March 1851. Stoney mistook UGC 09077 as NGC 5536 = GC 3827 and UGC 09081 as NGC 5541 = GC 3831. LdR has Stoney's diagram in the 1880 monograph; the nearby stars positively identify the UGC galaxies as those that Stoney saw. Dreyer suspected something was amiss as Stoney says "About 15' np [NGC 5541] I found a F, E neb as in diagram". Dreyer added the comment, "[h] 1768 [NGC 5536] & [h] 1769 [NGC 5541] are sp nf," making explicit the difference in orientation between JH's and Stoney's observations. But this was the only indication that something might be amiss with the early observation from Birr Castle, so Dreyer left it with just his short note. ===== UGC 09081. See UGC 09077 just above. ===== UGC 09084. This galaxy was probably mistaken by Wilhelm Tempel (see his eighth list of new nebulae in AN 106, 107, 1883) as H III 59 = NGC 5482. The story is given in full in the note to NGC 5469, which see. Briefly, Tempel found a new nebula about 15 seconds of time following what he took to be H III 59; this became NGC 5469. But Tempel's position (presumeably sent to Dreyer as it is not given in the eighth list) for his new nebula is about 2.5 minutes of time west and half a degree north of NGC 5482, so the nebula cannot be in the same field as his text states. He also mentions an 11th magnitude star near H III 59 which is not seen on the sky. The only set of three objects anywhere in the area that matches his description are UGC 09084, CGCG 074-136 = UGC 09084,N1, and the star 8 seconds east and 3.6 arcminutes north (Tempel's estimates are 9 seconds and 2.5 arcminutes). So, UGC 09084 was probably found before the NGC was compiled. It was not included because Tempel and Dreyer mistook it for one of WH's nebulae. The only remaining uncertainty comes from Tempel's narrative (given in full in the NGC 5469 note) -- it's possible that he means his new nebula is east of the 11th magnitude star, not the galaxy that he mistook as H III 59. ===== CGCG 191-071 was seen once by R.J. Mitchell with LdR's 72-inch telescope on 19 April 1855. He noted, "[NGC 5529], long narrow ray with a S, R, vF neb sf ..." (He picked up NGC 5524 (probably a star) and NGC 5527 in the same observation. See those for more about this observation.) Steve points out that the "vF neb sf" is CGCG 191-071. I stumbled across this independently when I was trying to sort out NGC 5524. Here is another mystery: Why JH and Dreyer did not include this in the GC and NGC? There are clearly four nebulae in Mitchell's descriptive comment, yet only three made it into the catalogues. Mysterious indeed! ===== IC 990 may have been seen by Dreyer with LdR's Leviathan on 27 April 1878. On that evening, he was examining NGC 5536 and NGC 5541, and noticed "Another neb 4' +- nf a * 11m seen at the same set, but where is not stated; clouds interrupted." Steve suggests that the object is IC 990. If so, the 11th magnitude star is TYC 3035-996-1 = GSC 03035-00996 at 14 15 36.42, +39 45 58.4 (J2000); this places it 3.1 arcminutes southwest of the galaxy. Its V magnitude is 10.6. For an observation probably rushed by encroaching clouds, these numbers fit Dreyer's estimates pretty well, and lend considerable credence to Steve's idea. Without some better idea of a position, Dreyer was obviously not ready to put the object into one of his catalogues. In this case, we have a good answer to the question, "Why isn't this in the NGC?" ===== UGC 09165 and GC 3817:. JH set aside three GC numbers -- the other two are GC 3815 and 3816 -- for "3 knots near" NGC 5523 seen by Johnstone Stoney with LdR's 72-inch on 13 April 1850. However, as Dreyer suggests in the 1880 monograph, these "knots" are actually southeast of NGC 5548, not 5523. One is UGC 09165 = CGCG 133-030, the second is NGC 5559, and the third is most likely a star (there are no nebulae in its area). Here is what Stoney wrote: Only lE; a F, E neb ([alpha]) about 20' sf, and about 8' f this is another, eeF; about 12' ssf [alpha] is a third F, E, rather brighter than [alpha]. At this point Dreyer adds a comment in square brackets: These 3 have been entered in G.C. as 3815, 16, 17, R. novae. But there can be no doubt that a wrong object was observed, as h1762 is a ray and not "only lE." A diagram shows an object slightly oval np sf, and possibly 3838 = h 1773 [NGC 5548] was examined instead of 3818. This is exactly what happened. As I noted above, two of the objects southeast of NGC 5548 are indeed the galaxies UGC 09165 and NGC 5559, while the third object is probably a star -- there are no galaxies eight arcminutes east of UGC 09165. We can understand why Dreyer did not want to include these in the NGC; not only did he not have good positions in hand, but he was pretty sure that Stoney had misidentified GC 3818 = NGC 5523. So, in addition to the UGC galaxy and the star appearing in the "notngcpos.all" file, we should add the GC number 3816 to NGC 5559. ===== GC 3817:. See UGC 09165, just above. ===== CGCG 047-019. This was sketched by Dreyer on 26 April 1878 while he was examining the NGC 5560/66/69 triplet. He does not mention it in his description of the field, but it is clearly shown as the nebula in the upper right corner of his sketch, 12 arcminutes from NGC 5566. Yann found this during his work on LdR's 1880 monograph. I suspect that Dreyer did not include this in the NGC because he did not have a good position for it. He did not use the micrometer on it -- is it too far from NGC 5566 for that instrument? -- and the estimate he did make is just too vague in its direction, if not its distance, to allow a position to be derived. ===== CGCG 273-003 may be the unlabeled nebula shown in Copeland's sketch of the NGC 5602 field made on 9 April 1874. Assuming he has the correct galaxy, I can make sense of his nebula [alpha] which would be the NGC galaxy, his star [beta], and the three stars on the left edge of his sketch. But the three nebulae and three other stars in the middle of the sketch do not correspond to any pattern that I can make out on the sky in this area. On the other hand, the unlabeled nebula is about where CGCG 273-003 is seen. Yann called my attention to this galaxy, and Steve followed up with suggestion that the faint double star at 14 22 05.5, +50 27 10 (J2000; Steve's estimate) could be one of the other "nebulae" in the sketch. It doesn't seem to fit very well, but I don't see another explanation that does any better. All considered, this seems the most likely interpretation, though I did search the area for other galaxies that Copeland might have seen with LdR's Leviathan -- none of the bright galaxies around match the sketch any better. So, while I regard this identification as tentative, I don't see anything else around that fits. ===== UGC 09216 has also been called NGC 5603B because of its proximity to the NGC galaxy. It was seen by R.S. Ball with LdR's 72-inch reflector on 27 March 1867 when he was examining the field of NGC 5598 and NGC 5603. He has only a brief note "One or perhaps 2 novae; 2nd one may be a *." Dreyer felt that Ball was sure enough about the other object that he (Dreyer) included it in the GC Supplement where it is number 5770; it became NGC 5601. The UGC galaxy has a low surface brightness and a small but bright nucleus; this probably led to Ball's uncertainty about its nature. (Alternatively, the galaxy we now call "NGC 5601" has a stellar nucleus, too. This may have been Ball's possible star). This is another object that Yann has found during his work on LdR's monograph. ===== IC 4470 was mentioned by WH in his observation of NGC 5712 on 20 December 1797. He says, "It [NGC 5712] is preceded by a S patch of sts which appears almost like this nebula, but more resolved." Curiously, Bigourdan also described the IC object as a small cluster. See the note under IC 4470 in the "icnotes.all" file for more. ===== UGC 09473. WH has a note in his Sweep 738 on 16 May 1787 that reads, "A small patch, very faint." No offsets or reduced position is given, just the hours, minutes, and seconds of clock time (14 22 49), and the raw reading of polar distance (48 56). The previous object, however, is NGC 5732 = H III 686 which does have all the usual numbers from which a position can be derived. Given the clock time (14 21 43) and polar distance (49 09) for that, offsets to the "small patch" can be easily found: 1 minute 6 seconds following, and 13 arcmin north. The position of the "small patch" that results shows that it is, in fact, UGC 09473. This is another of Steve's discoveries in CH's fair copy of WH's sweeps. ===== IC 1066 and IC 1067. Steve has found that this pair was seen at Parsonstown by R.J. Mitchell in 1855. Though not "discovered" until 28 May 1891 by Javelle at Nice, Mitchell actually saw the galaxies on 16 May 1855 with LdR's 72-inch Leviathan when he mistook them for NGC 5765, itself an interacting pair. Mitchell's description of the IC nebulae and five nearby stars is exactly correct for the field. He also has a sketch, reproduced by Dreyer in LdR's 1880 monograph, which is a near-perfect match for what we see on the sky. Dreyer recognized that there is a problem with Mitchell's observations, since Mitchell has yet a third observation on 10 May 1855. That one is apparently of NGC 5765 and matches the appearance of that pair pretty well. Faced with these two discordant observations, Dreyer wrote in the monograph These 2 neb [seen 16 May 1855] are evidently different from those in the previous observation [of 10 May]; the description does not agree with any known nebulae near the place of h 1880 [NGC 5765]. On May 3, 1856, the same pair were found when searching for h 1885 [NGC 5775], and a diagram was made which agrees perfectly with the one [from 16 May] reproduced above. However, with no positions for these two nebulae, Dreyer apparently did not feel that he could include them in the NGC. ===== SBS 1457+540 = KUG 1457+540. Here is a little double galaxy just a couple of arcminutes south of NGC 5820 that was pulled up by S. Hunter on 29 April 1861 with LdR's big 72-inch reflector. Yann ran across this as he was digging into LdR's 1880 monograph. Because it was only seen once [along with another "F neb (or possibly a D *)" which is indeed a double star], Dreyer did not include it in his GC supplement or the NGC. The object appears to be a galaxy pair with the eastern component -- apparently a compact elliptical -- either superposed on or seen through the western galaxy, a late-type spiral, perhaps a dwarf. It was also picked up by two modern surveys looking specifically for blue objects, the Second Byurakan Survey of emission line objects and the Kiso Ultraviolet Survey of galaxies with an ultraviolet excess. The late-type spiral appears quite blue in the SDSS image, and is clearly the source of the blue light that led to the object's presence in the two modern catalogues. ===== SBS 1457+540w. See SBS 1457+540 just above. ===== SBS 1457+540e. See SBS 1457+540 just above. ===== NGC 5846A. Wolfgang has found that this was apparently seen by both Herschels, though neither included it in their lists of nebulae. Here, from an email from Wolfgang, is his note: [I]t is possible that WH saw NGC 5846A = MCG 0-38-26, the compact companion 40" south of NGC 5846 (Virgo) in his sweep 532 of 24 Feb. 1786. He speaks of "a third small one preceeding". The other two are NGC 5845 (1353 [CH's running number in her reduction of WH's observations], III 511) and NGC 5846 (1354, I 128). It is not clear to which of them the "preceding" relates, but there is no other nebula. The following NGC 5850 (1355, II 543) was seen separately. What persuades me is the fact that JH has visited the Virgo field in his trial sweep of 29/30 May 1821, using a copy of the 20ft reflector. Under the [guidance] of WH and CH, he was [taught] to sweep (James South was present too). JH saw a "nebula with 2 nuclei" which undoubtedly is NGC 5846/A. He also saw NGC 5850 in the same FoV (NGC 5845 was missed due to the sweep path). Steve noticed that Bigourdan saw this as well -- it is Bigourdan 075 in CR 105, 1116, 1887. See CGCG 097-087 above for more on several objects in Bigourdan's first list that did not make it into the NGC. Finally, the galaxy was also picked up at least three times by the Birr Castle observers, first by C.E. Burton on 25 April 1868, then twice by Dreyer on 3 May 1877 and 26 April 1878. The second night, however, he called it a star. In May of 1877, he also has this note: "About 4' npp 4045 [NGC 5846] is an eF, vS, dif neb." The next year, he added "... 4' npp the B one [NGC 5846] we looked for an object seen last year. Some dif neby was suspected." There is nothing in Dreyer's approximate place but two or three faint stars. Perhaps one of these is Dreyer's object. Of all the nebulae found telescopically before the NGC was published, and not included in it, this one may have been seen by more observers -- including Dreyer himself! -- than any other. ===== CGCG 222-041. Steve noticed this entry in WH's observing log (CH's fair copy in the Herschel Archives) in Sweep 718 on 18 March 1787: "A vS patch vF. 54 ([phi]) Bootis f 4[minutes] 30[seconds] s 0[deg] 24[arcmin] RA 15 36 16 PD 49 24." CH's reduced position for 1800 precesses to 15 43 25, +39 57.6 for J2000. If the modern position and proper motion for phi Boo is used, the reduced position becomes 15 42 19, +39 58.1 for J2000. CH must have been using an incorrect RA for phi Boo as her reduced RA is well off the position using the modern values. In any event, the object turns out to be CGCG 222-041 at 15 42 15.5, +39 59 02 (J2000), which fits WH's description perfectly. So why did WH not include it in his catalogues of nebulae and star clusters? Good question! ===== KUG 1625+410. See NGC 6160 comp s, just below. ===== NGC 6160 comp(anion) s(outh) and KUG 1625+410 are two galaxies found by Johnstone Stoney on 26 April 1849. His observation of NGC 6160 reads in full, "Another vF and S about 6' s and another vF about 10' p, many sts f & nf, one or two sp." This identifies the two "novae" very well. I suspect that Dreyer did not include them in either the GC supplement or NGC for want of a confirming observation. These are two more that Yann noticed during his run through LdR's 1880 monograph. ===== NGC 6173 comp(anion) far nw and CGCG 224-007. Here are two more galaxies in Abell 2197 (not Abell 2199 as I had it before; thanks to Owen Brazell for the correction) that were seen by Johnstone Stoney (both), and his brother Bindon (CGCG 224-007). The full story is given in the extensive note for NGC 6174 (which see), itself a third object found by the Stoneys near NGC 6173 that DID make it into the NGC. I suspect that the other two did not because of the confusion in the field arising from the Stoney's observations. Dreyer himself acknowledges this in his NGC note for NGC 6174: "Second of 3, forming a rectangular triangle, the 2 others being assumed to be h1962 [N6173] and h1963 [N6175], but the identity of the group is doubtful." Dreyer is incorrect, of course, in calling N6175 a part of the triangle -- it is 11 arcminutes south of the triangle. Only N6173 and two of the three "novae" are there. One of those received the number N6174, while the confusion prevented the other, CGCG 224-007 (which I awkwardly called "N6173 near nw" in the past) from being even considered for inclusion in the NGC. Finally, the "N6173 far nw" galaxy comes from Johnstone's first 1849 observation of the field. He noted, "About 15 arcmin following and 3 arcmin north of this [N6173] there is a new neb, vF, gbM." As I've already commented (see the NGC 6174 note), the "following" should actually be "preceding". When that change is made, the galaxy that Johnstone saw is obvious on the sky. Steve suggested that my NGC 6174 identifications and note needed some work, so I've done that (thanks, Steve!). In the process, I've put the Stoney's two unnumbered galaxies into these "notngc" files. ===== CGCG 224-007. See NGC 6173 comp far nw, just above. ===== ESO 334-PN001 was discovered by Joseph Turner on 1 October 1874 with the GMT. ===== IC 4665 is another of the Galactic clusters rediscovered by Solon Bailey on Harvard patrol camera plates. It was apparently first noticed by de Cheseaux in his unpublished 1746 list of nebulae and clusters brought to light by Bigourdan. Unfortunately, the sign on de Cheseaux's declination is wrong, though his description "Above the shoulder, [beta] Ophiuchi, a cluster of stars ..." places it north of the equator where it is actually found. In spite of having only a dozen bright stars, the cluster is so obvious that it is unmistakeable in a low-power field. For example, not knowing of its existence, I -- as a teen-aged amateur astronomer in Kansas City, Missouri in the late 1950s -- stumbled across it using a 6-inch F7 reflector with a wide-field eyepiece. ===== Holden 18. Among the 25 new nebulae and clusters that Edward Holden found in 1881 and 1882 at Washburn Observatory are three objects not included in the NGC. One of these (Holden 19) is Barnard 92, a spectacularly dense dark nebula. The two others, this one and Holden 20 (which see, below), are clusters. This one is described by Holden from one observation on 6 May 1881 as a "Cl. 15' large. Coarse cluster of 30-40 stars; several 8 mag." Wolfgang suggests in his book that this could be NGC 6416. However, as he points out, Holden's position is more than a degree to the southeast, and the cluster has only two or three stars as bright as V = 8.5. Another candidate is an apparent cluster at 17 49.5, -32 44, much closer to Holden's position. This is about the right size at 14' x 12', and has the right number of stars -- but the brightest ones are even fainter at V = 9.5. Given that Holden's magnitude estimates could be uncertain by a magnitude or more, and that his positions are occasionally well off (e.g. Holden 20, below) either object could be the one he saw. However this problem might be worked out, it is clear that there is no obvious candidate for Holden's "cluster" in the area. Dreyer was correct in omitting this from the NGC -- but we do have to ask how he came to that conclusion! ===== NGC 6438se = NGC 6438A is another of Pietro Baracchi's discoveries with the GMT, this on on 3 October 1885. ===== Holden 20 = Trumpler 33 is the second star cluster found by Holden in 1881 and listed in his short 1882 paper of new nebulae and clusters. He describes it as a "Coarse cluster detached from the Milky Way. It contains a reddish star." Wolfgang has this as Trumpler 33 in his 2010 book, a suggestion that I independently confirmed in April 2017 as I worked my way through Holden's list. Holden's position is roughly 15 arcminutes off, but his description of the "reddish star" fits very well. The star is HD 169274, a K5III variable subgiant with a B-V color index of 1.97; it would indeed appear "reddish" at the eyepiece. So, I have little doubt that Wolfgang has chosen the right object. This leaves unanswered the question of why Dreyer chose to not include the cluster in the NGC. ===== IC 4725 = M 25 (and its core) is one of the best-known objects missing from the NGC. Not only was this discovered in 1745 or 1746 by de Cheseaux, it was observed by Messier and WH, and probably many others as well. Dreyer makes no comment as to why he omitted it. Perhaps he thought it so well known that it needed no entry. This was certainly the case for the Large Magellanic Cloud, the Pleiades (M 45), and the Coma Berenices cluster (the SMC is included as NGC 292 = GC 165). He was probably following JH's lead in the GC -- aside from the SMC, none of these objects appear there, either. ===== IC 4836 was found by Joseph Turner on 3 August 1883 with the GMT. It was later picked up by Delisle Stewart on a Harvard plate taken at Arequipa in Peru on 13 August 1901. ===== NGC 6812 comp(anion) nw. This was found by Pietro Baracchi with the GMT on 8 November 1885. ===== IC 4943 was discovered by Pietro Baracchi on 5 October 1885 in Abell S0851 with the GMT. He found four others the same night in the same cluster: NGC 6861D, ESO 233- G035, 'Baracchi "C"', and NGC 6868 comp(anion). This IC object was rediscovered by Lewis Swift on 8 July 1897. ===== Baracchi "C" = 2MASX J20062917-4819434. See IC 4943 just above. ===== NGC 6861D. See IC 4943 just above. ===== ESO 233- G035. See IC 4943 just above. ===== NGC 6868 comp(anion) = 2MASX J20095889-4821262. See IC 4943 just above. ===== IC 4996 and its core. Wolfgang noticed that WH saw this on 20 Sept 1786, making the place 20 04 46, 53 03 (1786; NPD, not Dec) not including a clock correction of -26 seconds which WH nevertheless noted. The next object in the sweep, 34 Cygni (= P Cygni, the well-known prototype of a class of supergiant stars with line profiles showing both absorption and emission) has an accurate position given in the WH's notes. From this, WH worked out a position correction of +4min 34sec for the RA. Applying this to the cluster gives an approximate position for it that is nevertheless pretty close to the modern position. WH's description clinches the identification with the IC object: "Clustering stars the place taken is pretty much condenced [sic], and contains 3 pS stars close together." The three stars "close together" are indeed there, and I've noted them as the "core" of the cluster, though they are a bit eccentric being displaced toward the northern edge of the cluster. It would be interesting to find which -- if any -- of these stars actually belongs to the cluster -- assuming it is a real cluster, of course. Because WH chose to not include the "clustering stars" in his catalogues, it was left to F.A. Bellamy to rediscover it on a 13-inch plate taken at Oxford in 1903 (see MNRAS 64, 662, 1904). See the note on IC 4996 for more on Bellamy's observation. So why did WH not include the cluster in his catalogues? Another good question! ===== IC 4970. Steve recently looked into the observations made with the Great Melbourne Telescope in the 1870s and 1880s. He found that the observers found many new nebulae, but published details on very few of them. Here is one of those nebulae, in an excerpt from Steve's email of late August 2018: The Seventeenth Report of the Observatory published in 1882 mentions, "a new nebula about 1' N of H. 4549 [sic. GC 4549 = NGC 6872] was observed and sketched." This clearly refers to IC 4970. I assume [Joseph] Turner made this observation, probably in the latter half of 1881. These Reports apparently did not cross Dreyer's desk. If they had, the NGC would have had several more entries than it does. See ESO 322- G102 above for Steve's full email with background on the GMT and other nebulae discovered with it. ----- Later work by Steve showed that Joseph Turner did indeed discover this galaxy near NGC 6872 on 27 August 1881. It was seen four years later on 3 September 1885 by Pietro Baracchi with the same telescope, and was picked up by Delisle Stewart on a Harvard plate taken at Arequipa on 21 September 1900. ===== IC 4982n and IC 4982s were both seen by Pietro Baracchi on 3 September 1885 with the GMT. Like IC 4970, these were rediscovered by Delisle Stewart on the same Harvard plate taken on 21 September 1900. ===== IC 4985. Like IC 4970 and IC 4982 (both of which see, above), Pietro Baracchi found this with the GMT on 3 September 1885. It got its IC number after being rediscovered on the same Harvard Arequipa plate as the other two IC objects, all found by Delisle Stewart. ===== NGC 7223 comp(anions) nw and w. Steve has found the companion to the northwest in R.J. Mitchell's two observations of NGC 7223, the first on 21 August 1857 when Mitchell noted "... a patch or * np (probably imperfectly seen) ..." For that same observation, he added, "I susp vF neby p." His second observation on 20 September 1857 is a bit more descriptive, "... np is a vS, E patch to which the neby reaches." He makes no mention then of the "vF neby p", but gives us a sketch of the field showing the two brighter nebulae in their correct relative positions with respect to the stars. Guessing, I would think that Dreyer did not include these in the NGC because he believed them to be part of the brighter galaxy. The northwestern object is certainly a separate object, and the western object (with a faint star superposed just northwest of an even fainter nucleus) looks like an interacting companion in the SDSS image. But it is close enough to the NGC 7223 itself that it could just be a distorted arm of the big galaxy. ===== NGC 7223 comp(anion) w(est). See NGC 7223 comp nw just above. ===== NGC 7436B and NGC 7436 comp(anion) sse. Steve sent me an email in March 2015 alerting me to the history of the brighter of these objects and suggesting that it deserves a place here. Indeed it does. I discuss this in the "ngcnotes.all" file, but here is the meat of the story (repeated with some clarifications so it will read nicely) from the note for NGC 7436: The "F * att p" NGC 7436 noted in the NGC is actually another galaxy. It was first seen on 12 October 1855 when R.J. Mitchell noted it as "... a * or nebulous knot closely p [NGC 7436]; ..." On 18 September 1857, he wrote, "... closely p is a * or sharply defined nebulous patch, ..." Finally, on 29 September 1875, Dreyer observed the group and wrote, "The object p in the diagram from 1857 is a F *. Night bad." So it was that the companion to NGC 7436 did not receive an NGC number. Had the night been better, we might have had another NGC entry. The other companion was seen only by Dreyer in September 1875. He writes, "... a most eF, but not vS neb was often seen about 1' s of 4871 [NGC 7436] and I am pretty sure of its existence." There is indeed a faint galaxy where Dreyer saw it. Again, I suspect that because Dreyer called this night a "bad" one, he did not feel comfortable adding this nebula to the NGC. This is another of the objects that Yann dug out of LdR's 1880 monograph. ===== NGC 7436 comp(anion) sse. See NGC 7436B just above. ===== NGC 7556 comp(anion) se. NGC 7556 has at least six fainter, mostly compact, companions. One, about an arcminute to the southeast, was "suspected" on 4 November 1850 by Bindon Stoney while he was observing with LdR's 72-inch Birr Castle telescope. The brightest of the companions is indeed in that location, so I have added it to the "notngc" list. The word "suspected" in Stoney's description probably accounts for this galaxy's absence from the NGC. This is another of the additional objects that Yann has found in LdR's monograph. Interestingly, the galaxy has a boxy shape, best seen on the DSS2 R and B images. This reminds me of the so-called "box/peanut bulge" galaxies (NGC 128 is a prototypical example), but this one is lacking the obvious disk possessed by most of the lenticular galaxies with these bulges. ===== LBN 537. Steve has seen this in WH's Sweep 773 on 3 November 1787. WH has it simply as "Some crowded stars with vF suspected nebulosity" 8min 38sec preceding, 2d 15arcmin south of 4 Cas. This is a relatively well-known HII region, and it shows best on the red DSS images, but is considerably fainter on the blue and infrared images. As WH also noted, there is a cluster associated with the HII region. I suspect that the word "suspected" put WH off including this in his list of new nebulae. Steve has a visual observation of it with his 18-inch reflector on 23 August 2003: Easily visible at 113x as a fairly faint, circular, 3' glow surrounding a mag 11 star. At 257x the central star has a very close mag 13.5-14 companion and several faint stars are superimposed on the glow. The nebula is a little easier to view with an H-Beta filter which cuts the glow from the central star, though the nebulosity seems a bit smaller. ===== MCG -07-47-031 is the brightest galaxy in Abell S1111, discovered by Pietro Baracchi on 2 November 1885 with the GMT. He also found the second-brightest galaxy in the cluster, MCG -07-47-032, on the same night. ===== MCG -07-47-032. See MCG -07-47-031 just above. ===== GC 4941. This is an asterism of three stars found by d'A on 17 October 1855, and observed three more times by him in December of that same year. Here is what JH had to say about it in the GC: D'Arr. Not included by M. D'Arrest in his final list; but there are four observations of it recorded in his "Resultate," all agreeing well. In the GC Supplement, Dreyer writes: No Nebula, only a few stars close together. Compare Schoenfeld, I., 115; Auwers, p. 77. Not in Observationes Havnienses. This is clearly why he did not include it in the NGC. ===== NGC 7674A. Steve has noticed that Samuel Hunter probably saw this during his 30 September 1862 observation of NGC 7674 and 7675. Hunter has this to say: "Two neb p and f, p one is D ns, n component may be only a * enveloped in the neby; f neb is lE." While Hunter has this as "n[orth]s[outh]" and the orientation is more east-west, all else is correct in his observation. There seems to be little doubt that he did in fact see the fainter companion to NGC 7674, and that Dreyer did not include it in the NGC because of Hunter's qualification about its possible stellar nature. ====