Produced by WebRover, Peter Vachuska, Chuck Greif and the
Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net
THE ESCULENT FUNGUSES OF ENGLAND.
A TREATISE
ON THE
ESCULENT FUNGUSES
OF
ENGLAND,
CONTAINING
AN ACCOUNT OF THEIR CLASSICAL HISTORY, USES, CHARACTERS,
DEVELOPMENT, STRUCTURE, NUTRITIOUS PROPERTIES,
MODES OF COOKING AND PRESERVING, ETC.
BY
CHARLES DAVID BADHAM, M.D.
EDITED BY FREDERICK CURREY, M.A., F.R.S., F.L.S.
Πολλὰ μὲν ἔσθλά μεμιγμένα πολλὰ δὲ λυγρά.—HOMER.
[Illustration]
LONDON:
LOVELL REEVE & CO., HENRIETTA STREET, COVENT GARDEN.
1863.
PRINTED BY
JOHN EDWARD TAYLOR, LITTLE QUEEN STREET,
LINCOLN’S INN FIELDS.
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION.
My lamented friend Dr. Badham having died since the first publication of
this work, my advice was asked upon the subject of the preparation of a
new edition. It was wished that the text of the work should be altered as
little as possible, and that the price of the book should be materially
lessened. The latter object could not be effected without reducing the
number of the Plates; but it appeared to me that some plates relating to
details of structure might very well be omitted, as well as the figures
of a few Italian species which, although interesting in themselves, are
quite unnecessary in a book on British Esculent Fungi. With the exception
of the omission of the description of these latter species, and the
addition of the description of two other species hereafter referred to,
the alterations in the text are too trifling to require notice. With
regard to the Figures in this edition, most of them are those of the
former plates, somewhat reduced; a few have been taken from the plates of
Mr. Berkeley’s ‘Outlines of British Fungology,’ and a few from original
and other sources.
By a re-arrangement of the whole, the reduction in the number of the
Plates has been effected, and, at the same time, figures of all the Fungi
represented in the first edition have been given, as well as of two other
species not there noticed. I should observe, however, that by a mistake
of the artist an extra figure of the Horse Mushroom has been inserted in
Plate IV. instead of one of the Common Mushroom.
The two species above alluded to which were not figured in the first
edition, are _Tuber æstivum_ and _Helvella esculenta_. The former must
have been inadvertently omitted by Dr. Badham, as it has long been known
as abundant in certain parts of England. _Helvella esculenta_, although
alluded to by Dr. Badham, was not at that time known to be a British
species. It has since been observed near Weybridge in Surrey, where
it occurs almost every spring. The plant figured in Pl. XV. fig. 6 of
the first edition under the name of _Lycoperdon plumbeum_, is not that
species, but _Lycoperdon pyriforme_; it will be found at Pl. VIII. fig.
5. Dr. Badham states that all puff-balls are esculent, but, judging from
the smell of _Lycoperdon pyriforme_, I should much doubt whether it would
make an agreeable dish. _Lycoperdon plumbeum_ is now better known as
_Bovista plumbea_, and _Lycoperdon Bovista_ as _Lycoperdon giganteum_.
There is some confusion about the synonymy of the plants described by Dr.
Badham as _Agaricus prunulus_ and _Ag. exquisitus_. It is unnecessary
to discuss the matter here, and I have thought it not desirable under
the circumstances to alter Dr. Badham’s nomenclature. They appear to
be described in Mr. Berkeley’s work as _Ag. gambosus_, Fr., and _Ag.
arvensis_, Schœff.
Dr. Badham’s observations on the spores of Fungi must be read in
connection with the note added by him at the conclusion of the work;
and to those who are interested in that part of the subject I should
recommend the perusal of the seventh chapter of Mr. Berkeley’s ‘Outlines
of British Fungology,’ and Tulasne’s recent work, ‘Selecta Fungorum
Carpologia.’
Mr. Cooke, in his ‘Plain and Easy Account of British Fungi,’ recently
published, mentions some species as esculent which are not noticed in
this work. I have however no experience of their qualities, and must
refer the reader to Mr. Cooke’s book for further information. He mentions
Mr. Berkeley as an authority for considering _Agaricus rubescens_ as
suspicious; but, from long experience, I can vouch for its being not only
wholesome, but, as Dr. Badham says, “a very delicate fungus.”
F. C.
PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION.
TO THE RIGHT REVEREND THE LORD BISHOP OF NORWICH.
MY LORD,
I had two reasons for desiring that this humble performance should
appear under the sanction of your Lordship’s name. Nothing could be more
favourable to a Treatise on any department of Natural History, than the
approval of one who has been so eminently successful in his cultivation
of the same field.
But it is with much greater confidence that I dedicate a work, whose
chief object it is to furnish the labouring classes with wholesome
nourishment and profitable occupation, to a high functionary of that
kingdom, which is distinguished from all others by recognizing the claims
and furthering the interests of the poor.
I have the honour to be, my Lord,
With great respect, your Lordship’s
Obliged and humble Servant,
C. D. BADHAM.
CONTENTS.
Page
ETYMOLOGIES 1
THE RANGE OF FUNGUS GROWTHS 7
OF THEIR GENERAL FORMS, COLOURS, AND TEXTURE 10
ODOURS AND TASTES 13
EXPANSIVE POWER OF GROWTH 14
REPRODUCTIVE POWER 16
MOTION 16
PHOSPHORESCENCE 18
DIMENSIONS 18
CHEMICAL COMPOSITION 20
USES 21
MEDICAL USES 25
FUNGUSES CONSIDERED AS AN ARTICLE OF DIET 27
MODES OF DISTINGUISHING 40
CONDITIONS NECESSARY TO THEIR PRODUCTION 47
FAIRY RINGS 52
ON THE GROWTH OF FUNGUSES 53
ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SPORES, OR QUASI-SEEDS[1] 58
OF THE ANNULUS, THE VELUM, AND THE VOLVA 66
OF THE STALK, AND OF THE PILEUS 68
OF THE GILLS, TUBES, PLAITS, AND SPINES 69
METHODICAL DISTRIBUTION OF BRITISH ESCULENT FUNGUSES 72
DESCRIPTION OF SPECIES:—
_Agaricus acris minor_ 120
_Agaricus alutaceus_ 117
_Agaricus atramentarius_ 111
_Agaricus campestris_ 94
_Agaricus castaneus_ 143
_Agaricus comatus_ 112
_Agaricus deliciosus_ 102
_Agaricus Dryophilus_ 107
_Agaricus emeticus_ 118
_Agaricus exquisitus_ 100
_Agaricus fusipes_ 141
_Agaricus heterophyllus_ 113
_Agaricus melleus_ 139
_Agaricus nebularis_ 108
_Agaricus Orcella_ 129
_Agaricus oreades_ 106
_Agaricus ostreatus_ 121
_Agaricus personatus_ 105
_Agaricus piperatus_ 144
_Agaricus procerus_ 88
_Agaricus prunulus_ 85
_Agaricus ruber_ 115
_Agaricus rubescens_ 123
_Agaricus sanguineus_ 120
_Agaricus semiglobatus_ 108
_Agaricus ulmarius_ 140
_Agaricus vaginatus_ 142
_Agaricus violaceus_ 143
_Agaricus virescens_ 116
_Agaricus virgineus_ 145
_Boletus edulis_ 90
_Boletus luridus_ 104
_Boletus scaber_ 103
_Cantharellus cibarius_ 110
_Clavaria coralloides_ 135
_Fistulina hepatica_ 127
_Helvella crispa_ 130
_Helvella lacunosa_ 131
_Helvella esculenta_ 131
_Hydnum repandum_ 126
_Lycoperdon Bovista_ 138
_Lycoperdon plumbeum_ 136
_Morchella esculenta_ 123
_Morchella semilibera_ 124
_Peziza acetabulum_ 133
_Polyporus frondosus_ 133
_Tuber æstivum_ 145
_Verpa digitaliformis_ 132
CONCLUSION 146
DESCRIPTION OF PLATES.
PLATE I.
Fig. 1. Agaricus prunulus.
” 2. Agaricus personatus.
PLATE II.
Agaricus procerus.
PLATE III.
Fig. 1, 2. Boletus edulis.
” 3, 4. Agaricus heterophyllus.
PLATE IV.
Fig. 1. Polyporus frondosus.
” 2. Agaricus nebularis.
” 3, 4, 5. Agaricus exquisitus.
PLATE V.
Fig. 1. Helvella lacunosa.
” 2. Clavaria amethystina.
” 3. Clavaria coralloides.
” 4. Agaricus deliciosus.
” 5. Clavaria cinerea.
” 6. Clavaria rugosa.
PLATE VI.
Fig. 1, 2. Boletus scaber.
” 3, 4, 5. Boletus luridus.
PLATE VII.
Fig. 1, 2, 3. Agaricus comatus.
” 4. Agaricus oreades.
” 5. Agaricus Dryophilus.
PLATE VIII.
Fig. 1. Cantharellus cibarius.
” 2. Tuber æstivum.
” 3, 4. Hydnum repandum.
” 5. Lycoperdon pyriforme.
PLATE IX.
Fig. 1, 2. Agaricus atramentarius.
” 3. Agaricus melleus.
PLATE X.
Agaricus ostreatus.
PLATE XI.
Fig. 1, 2. Agaricus Orcella.
” 3, 4, 5. Agaricus rubescens.
PLATE XII.
Fig. 1, 2. Fistulina hepatica.
” 3, 4, 5. Helvella esculenta.
” 6. Morchella esculenta.
INTRODUCTORY NOTICE.
No country is perhaps richer in esculent Funguses than our own; we have
upwards of thirty species abounding in our woods. No markets might
therefore be better supplied than the English, and yet England is the
only country in Europe where this important and savoury food is, from
ignorance or prejudice, left to perish ungathered.
In France, Germany, and Italy, Funguses not only constitute for weeks
together the sole diet of thousands, but the residue, either fresh,
dried, or variously preserved in oil, vinegar, or brine, is sold by the
poor, and forms a valuable source of income to many who have no other
produce to bring into the market. Well, then, may we style them, with
M. Roques, “_the manna of the poor_.” To call attention to an article
of commerce elsewhere so lucrative, with us so wholly neglected, is the
object of the present work, to which the best possible introduction will
be a brief reference to the state of the fungus market abroad.
The following brief summary was drawn up by Professor Sanguinetti, the
Official Inspector (“_Ispettore dei Funghi_”) at Rome; let it speak
for itself:—“For forty days during the autumn, and for about half
that period every spring, large quantities of Funguses, picked in the
immediate vicinity of Rome, from Frascati, Rocca di Papa, Albano, beyond
Monte Mario towards Ostia and the neighbourhood of the sites of Veii
and Gabii, are brought in at the different gates. In the year 1837, the
Government instituted the so-called _Congregazione Speciale di Sanità_,
which, among other duties, was more particularly required to take into
serious consideration the commerce of Funguses, from the unrestricted
sale of which during some years past, cases of poisoning had not
unfrequently occurred. The following decisions were arrived at by this
body:—
“1st. That for the future an ‘Inspector of Funguses,’ versed
in botany, should be appointed to attend the market in place
of the peasant, whose supposed practical knowledge had been
hitherto held as sufficient guarantee for the public safety.
“2nd. That all the Funguses brought into Rome by the different
gates should be registered, under the surveillance of the
principal officer, in whose presence also the baskets were to
be sealed up, and the whole for that day’s consumption sent
under escort to a central depôt.
“3rd. That a certain spot should be fixed upon for the
Fungus market, and that nobody, under penalty of fine and
imprisonment, should hawk them about the streets.
“4th. That at seven o’clock A.M. precisely, the Inspector
should pay his daily visit and examine the whole, the contents
of the baskets being previously emptied on the ground by the
proprietors, who were then to receive, if the Funguses were
approved of, a printed permission of sale from the police, and
to pay for it an impost of one baioccho (a halfpenny) on every
ten pounds.
“5th. That quantities under ten pounds should not be taxed.
“6th. That the stale funguses of the preceding day, as well
as those that were mouldy, bruised, filled with maggots,
or dangerous (_muffi_, _guasti_, _verminosi_, _velenosi_),
together with any specimen of the common mushroom (_Ag.
campestris_) detected in any of the baskets, should be sent
under escort and thrown into the Tiber.
“7th. That the Inspector should be empowered to fine or
imprison all those refractory to the above regulations; and,
finally, that he should furnish a weekly report to the Tribunal
of Provisions (_Il Tribunale delle Grascie_) of the proceeds of
the sale.
“As all fresh Funguses for sale in quantities _exceeding_ ten pounds
are weighed, in order to be taxed, we are enabled to arrive at an exact
estimate of the number of pounds thus disposed of. The return of _taxed_
Mushrooms in the city of Rome during the last ten years, gives a yearly
average of between _sixty and eighty thousand pounds_ weight; and if we
double this amount, as we may safely do, in order to include such smaller
_untaxed_ supplies as are disposed of as bribes, fees, and presents, and
reckon the whole at the rate of six baiocchi, or threepence per pound (a
fair average), this will make the commercial value of fresh Funguses very
apparent, showing it here to be little less than £2000 a year.”
But the fresh Funguses form only a small part of the whole consumption,
to which must be added the dried, the pickled, and the preserved; which
sell at a much higher price than the first.[2] Supposing, however, that
with these additions the supply of all kinds only reached a sum the
double of that given above, even this would furnish us with an annual
average of nearly _four thousand pounds sterling_; and this in a single
city, and that, too, by no means the most populous one in Italy![3]
What, then, must be the net receipts of all the market-places of all the
Italian States? For as in these the proportion of the price of esculent
Funguses to butchers’ meat is as two to three, it is plain that prejudice
has deprived the poor of this country, not only of many thousand pounds
of the former but also of as much of the latter, as might have been
purchased by exchange, and of the countless sums which might have been
earned in gathering them.[4]
ON THE ESCULENT FUNGUSES OF ENGLAND.
“Quos ipsa volentia rura
Sponte tulere sua carpsit.”—_Virgil._
“He culls from woods, and heights, and fields,
Those untaxed boons which nature yields.”
ETYMOLOGIES.
By the word μύκης, ητος or ου, ὁ, whereof the usually received root,
μῦκος (_mucus_), is probably factitious, the Greeks used familiarly to
designate certain, but indefinite species of funguses, which they were
in the habit of employing at table. This term, in its origin at once
trivial and restricted to at most a few varieties, has become in our days
classical and generic; Mycology, its direct derivative, including, in the
language of modern botany, several great sections of plants (many amongst
the number of microscopic minuteness), which have apparently as little to
do with the original import of μύκης as smut, bunt, mould, or dry-rot,
have to do with our table mushrooms. A like indefiniteness formerly
characterized the Latin word _fungus_, though it be now used in as
catholic a sense as that of μύκης; this, in the classic times of Rome,
seems to have been confined (without any precise limitation, however) to
certain sorts which might be eaten, and to others which it was not safe
to eat. The
“Fungos colligit albos,”[5]
which occurs in Ovid’s ‘Fasti,’ alludes to the former; the
“Sunt tibi boleti, fungos ego sumo suillos,”
of Martial, points to an inferior kind, but still esculent; whilst the
word not unfrequently designated, if not actual toadstools, at least very
equivocal mushrooms; of which character were those “ancipites fungi”
presented by Veiento to his poor clients. Some melancholy etymologists,
upon whom good mushrooms are really thrown away, would beget fungus
out of _funus_, but Voss[6] judiciously rejects so harsh and forced a
derivation, mentioning together with it others that are still more so.
The word _Boletus_, which now stands for a large genus of the section
_Pileati_, was used in ancient Rome to designate that particular mushroom
which had the honour, under Agrippina’s orders and Locusta’s cookery, of
poisoning Claudius; in memory of which event it is now called _Amanita
Cæsarea_, the Cæsar’s mushroom. It occurs frequently both in the poets
and prose writers of those days, and was in high esteem, as we collect
from Pliny, who, though no mushroom-fancier himself, calls this “Boletus
optimi cibi.” Nero, in playful allusion to his uncle’s death, of which
it was the occasion, designates it the ‘food of gods,’ βρῶμα θεῶν; and
Martial celebrates it in many a convivial epigram; in one, for instance,
where he asks his hard-hearted patron, “what possible pleasure it can be
for his guests to sit at his table, and see him devour boletuses;” in
another, “gold and silver and dresses may be trusted to a messenger, but
not a boletus, (_subaudi_) because he will eat it on the way.” This is
the only ancient mushroom which we at once recognize by the description
of it; “it originates,” says Pliny, “in a volva, or purse, in which it
lies at first concealed as in an egg; breaking through this, it rises
upwards on its stalk; the colour of its cap is red; it takes a week
to pass through the various stages of its growth and declension.” The
_suillus_—probably the same as the modern _porcino_ (a word of analogous
import), which was, and is, eaten by men as well as pigs, and not always
by these[7]—was, according to Pliny, the fungus which most readily lent
itself to poisoning by mistake; a remark so far consonant to modern
experience, that it is liable, without some attention, to be confounded
with the _Boletus luridus_, _B. cyanescens_, and others, which in their
general shape and external hue resemble it, though it is not by any means
certain that any of these species, with which it may be confounded, are
themselves poisonous.[8] The word _tuber_, though it occasionally (as in
Juvenal) meant the _truffle_, seems to have been used with considerable
latitude. Thus the _tubers_ said to spring up after those _optatos
imbres_, those “long-wished-for showers of spring,” were, probably, not
truffles, but puff-balls, which, at the season of warm rains grow with
incredible rapidity, forming an esteemed article of luxury, not only in
Italy, but also in India; whereas the truffle never makes its appearance
in the markets at such times, nor comes up so immediately after rain.
_Tuber_, like our ancient “_fusseball_,” seems a common appellation both
for truffles and puff-balls. What the ancients understood by _hydnum_
is as little precise or discriminate as the last word; for Theophrastus
declares it to have a light bark, λειόφλοιον εἶναι, in which case it is
a puff-ball, while the plant called ὑδνοφίλον, which is said to indicate
the whereabouts of _hydna_ in its neighbourhood, can only refer to the
truffle. The truffle, however, which is now so much prized throughout
Europe, seems not to have been known to the ancients, at least it is
not described by them.[9] That which the Greeks called _misy_, and the
Romans the Libyan truffle,[10] was white and of very delicious flavour,
whilst by _hydnum_ (when this word really meant truffle) they usually
designated a particular kind bearing a smooth red rind, and abounding
in certain districts of Italy; but having no chance against the black,
nodulated _tuber tuberum_, the truffle _par excellence_, found in such
abundance in the vicinities of Rome, Florence, Siena, etc., and, above
all, amongst the Nursian hills of Umbria, over against Spoleto, whence it
is largely exported throughout and beyond Italy. Under the name _Peziza_,
the ancients appear at times to describe, unconsciously, a _Scleroderma_
or species of puff-ball after it has evacuated its seed, when it presents
a flattened surface, and so far looks like a _Peziza_, with which, in
fact, it has no connection. By _Amanita_, Galen intended some kind of
esculent fungus, but we know not which; this word has now come to have
a more extensive import, and to designate, besides one or two species
that are good, many of the most dangerous character. Whatever the ancient
_Amanita_ may have been, it was formerly in high repute; Galen declares
that, next to the _Boletus_, it is ἀβλαβέστατον to eat—in which good
report of it he is abundantly borne out by the concurrent testimony of
Nicander. What Dioscorides meant by ἀγαρικὸν is another uncertainty, to
resolve which we have not sufficient data; one thing seems plain, that
it could not have been our officinal _Agaric_, for that grows upon the
_Larch_, whereas his _Agaricon_ grew upon the _Cedar_. Julius Scaliger
amuses himself at the expense of Athenæus for saying that _Agaricus_
is so called from the country of Agaria, whence he would make out that
it originally came; whereas there never was such a country, his Agaria
being, like our Poiatia, only another synonym for Fancy’s fairyland.[11]
The words _champignon_ and _mushroom_ have both a French origin, though,
like the corresponding derivatives from the Greek and Latin, they
too have come to signify things different from what they originally
designated; _champignon_, for example, of which _champ_ would seem to be
the root, is _generic_ in France. The ‘Traités sur les Champignons’ of
Bulliard, Persoon, Paulet, Cordier, and Roques, are treatises of funguses
_in genere_; whilst in England we restrict the word _champignon_ to one
small Agaric, which, as it grows in the so-called “fairy-rings,” is
hence named _Ag. oreades_. Again, there can be no doubt that our word
_mushroom_ (which, as contradistinguished from _toadstool_, is so far
generic) comes from the French _mouceron_ (originally spelt _mousseron_),
and belongs of right to that most dainty of funguses, the _A. prunulus_,
which grows amidst tender herbage and _moss_ (whence its name), and
which is justly considered, over almost the whole continent of Europe,
as the _ne plus ultra_ of culinary _friandise_. It abounds in various
parts of England, being everywhere trodden underfoot, or reaped down,
or dug up as a nuisance, while the rings which it so sedulously forms
are as sedulously destroyed. The very odour which it exhales under these
injuries, which the French call “un parfum exquis aromatisé,”[12] and the
Italians, “un odore gratissimo,”[13] is in England occasionally cited
to its disadvantage in confirmation of its supposed noxious qualities.
Thus, while we use the word _mushroom_, which is the proper appellation
of _this_ species, for another (very good, no doubt, but wholly unlike it
in its botanical characters, flavour, and appearance), this neglected,
and ignorantly neglected, species, finds itself deprived of its rightful
name, and proscribed as a toadstool. The origin of this last word,
_toadstool_, which makes them seats or thrones for toads, does not quite
satisfy me, I confess, though there be doughty authorities for it in
Johnson’s Dictionary and in Spenser’s ‘Faery Queen’!
“The grisly todestool grown there mought I see,
And loathed paddocks lording on the same;”
and, though an anonymous Italian authority declares that, in Germany,
they have actually been seen sitting on their stools,[14] still, even in
Germany, it must be admitted that they do not use them as frequently as
we might expect, had they been created for this end. In that most grisly
and ghastly waxwork exhibition at Florence, representing a charnel-house
filled with the recent victims to a raging plague, in every stage of
decomposition, the toad and his stool are not forgotten; but the artist,
who had here to deal with matter, and to consult what it would bear,
has not put his toads upon these brittle stools, lest, giving way, both
should come to the ground; he has been content to convert them into
toad-umbrellas, and to spread them as an awning over their heads.[15]
THE RANGE OF FUNGUS GROWTHS.
The family of Funguses, in the comprehensive sense in which we now
employ the term, is immense. Merely catalogued and described, there are
sufficient to fill an octavo volume of nearly 400 pages of close print,
of British species alone; altogether, there cannot be less than 5000
recognized species at present known, and each year adds new ones to the
list. The reader’s surprise at this will somewhat diminish, when he
considers, that not only the toadstools which beset his walks, whether
growing upon the ground or at the roots of trees, belong to this class,
but that the immense hordes of parasites which feed at his expense, and
foul, like the Harpies, whatever they may not actually consume, belong to
it also.
For the single mushroom that we eat, how many hundreds there be that
retaliate and prey upon us in return! To enumerate but a few, and these
of the microscopic kinds (on the other side are some which the arms
can scarcely embrace): the _Mucor mucedo_, that spawns upon our dried
preserves; the _Ascophora mucedo_, that makes our bread mouldy (“mucidæ
frustra farinæ”[16]); the _Uredo segetum_, that burns Ceres out of her
own cornfields; the _Uredo rubigo_, whose rust is still more destructive;
and the _Puccinia graminis_, whose voracity sets corn-laws and farmers
at defiance, are all funguses! So is the grey _Monilia_, that rots, and
then fattens upon, our fruits; and the _Mucor herbariorum_, that destroys
the careful gleanings of the painstaking botanist. When our beer becomes
mothery, the mother of that mischief is a fungus. If pickles acquire a
bad taste, if ketchup turns ropy and putrifies, funguses have a finger
in it all! Their reign stops not here; they prey upon each other; they
even select their victims! There is the _Myrothecium viride_, which will
only grow upon dry Agarics, preferring chiefly, for this purpose, the
_Agaricus adustus_; the _Mucor[17] chrysospermus_, which attacks the
flesh of a particular _Boletus_; the _Sclerotium cornutum_, which visits
some other moist mushrooms in decay. There are some _Xylomas_ that will
spot the leaves of the Maple, and some those of the Willow, exclusively.
The naked seeds of some are found burrowing between the opposite surface
of leaves; some love the neighbourhood of burnt stubble and charred wood;
some visit the sculptor in his studio, growing up amidst the heaps of
moistened marble dust that have caked and consolidated under his saw.
The _Racodium_ of the low cellar[18] festoons its ceiling, shags its
walls, and wraps its thick coat round our wine-casks,[19] keeping our
oldest wine in closest bond; while the _Geastrum_, aspiring occasionally
to leave this earth, has been found suspended, like Mahomet’s coffin,
between it and the stars, on the very highest pinnacle of St. Paul’s.[20]
The close cavities of nuts occasionally afford concealment to some
species; others, like leeches, stick to the bulbs of plants, and suck
them dry; these (the architect’s and ship-builder’s bane) pick timber to
pieces, as men pick oakum; nor do they confine their selective ravages to
plants alone, they attach themselves to animal structures, and destroy
animal life; the _Onygena equina_ has a particular fancy for the hoofs of
horses and for the horns of cattle, sticking to these alone; the belly
of a tropical fly[21] is liable, in autumn, to break out into vegetable
tufts of fungous growth, and the caterpillar to carry about on his body
a _Cordyceps_ larger than himself. The disease called Muscadine, which
destroys so many silkworms, is also a fungus (_Botrytis Bassiana_), which
in a very short time completely fills the worm with filaments very unlike
those it is in the habit of secreting.[22] The vegetating wasp,[23] too,
of which everybody has heard, is only another mysterious blending of
vegetable with insect life. Lastly, and to take breath, funguses visit
the wards of our hospitals, and grow out of the products of surgical
disease.[24] Where, then, are they not to be found? do they not abound,
like Pharaoh’s plagues, everywhere? is not their name legion, and their
province ubiquity?[25]
OF THEIR GENERAL FORMS, COLOURS, TEXTURE, TASTES, SMELLS, ETC.
What geometry shall define their ever-varying shapes? who but a Venetian
painter do justice to their colours?[26] or what modifications of
‘soft’ and ‘hard’ convey an adequate knowledge of all their various
crases and consistencies? As to shapes, some are simple threads, like
the _Byssus_, and never get beyond this; some shoot out into branches,
like seaweed; some puff themselves out into puff-balls; some thrust their
heads into mitres;[27] these assume the shape of a cup,[28] and those of
a wine-funnel;[29] some, like _A. mammosus_, have a teat; others, like
the _A. clypeolarius_, are umbonated at their centre; these are stilted
upon a high leg,[30] and those have not a leg to stand on; some are
shell-shaped, many bell-shaped, and some hang upon their stalks like a
lawyer’s wig;[31] some assume the form of the horse’s hoof, others of a
goat’s beard: in _Clathrus cancellatus_ you look into the fungus through
a thick red trellis which surrounds it. Some exhibit a nest in which they
rear their young,[32] and, not to speak of those vague shapes,
“If shapes they can be called, that shape have none
Determinate,”
of such tree parasites as are fain to mould themselves at the will of
their entertainer (the fate of parasites, whether under oak or mahogany),
mention may be made of two, of which the forms are at once singular and
constant; one exactly like an ear, and given for some good reason to
Judas (_Auricula Judæ_), clings to several trees, and trembles when you
touch it; the other, which lolls out from the bark of chestnut-trees
(_Lingua di Castagna_), is so like a tongue in shape and general
appearance,[33] that in the days of enchanted trees you would not have
cut it off to pickle or to eat on any account, lest the knight to whom it
belonged should afterwards come to claim it of you. The above are amongst
the most remarkable of the many Protean forms assumed by funguses; as
to their colours, we find in one genus only species which correspond
to every hue! The _Agaricus Cæsareus_, the _A. muscarius_, the _A.
sanguineus_, assume the imperial purple, the _A. violaceus_ a beautiful
violet, the _A. sulphureus_ a bright yellow, the _A. adustus_ a dingy
black, the _A. exquisitus_, and many others, a milk-white; whilst the
_A. virescens_ takes that which, in this class of plants, is the rarest
of all to meet with, a pale-green colour. The upper surface of some is
zoned with concentric circles of different hues; sometimes it is spotted,
at other times of a uniform tint. The bonnets of some shine as if they
were sprinkled with _mica_;[34] these have a rich velvety, those a smooth
kid-like covering stretched over them. Some _pilei_ are imbricated with
brown scales, some flocked with white shreds of membrane, and some are
stained with various-coloured milks secreted from within. The consistence
of funguses is very different according to their sort, and the epithets
of woody, corky, leathery, spongy, fleshy, gelatinous, pulpy, or mucous,
will all find fitting application to some of them. Occasionally a fungus
is secreted soft, but hardens by degrees into a compact and woody
texture.
ODOURS AND TASTES.
Both one and the other are far more numerous in this class of plants than
in any other with which we are acquainted. As to odours, though these be
generally most powerful in the fresh condition of the fungus, they are
sometimes increased by drying it, during which process too some species,
inodorous before, acquire an odour, and not always a pleasant one. Some
yield an insupportable stench; the _Phallus impudicus_ and _Clathrus
cancellatus_ are of this kind. A botanist had by mistake taken one of
the former into his bedroom; he was soon awakened by an intolerable
fœtor, and was glad to open his window and get rid of it, as he hoped,
and the _Phallus_ together. Here he was disappointed; “sublatâ causâ non
tollitur effectus,” the fœtor remaining nearly the same for some hours
afterwards. A lady, a friend of mine, who was drawing one in a room, was
obliged to take it into the open air to complete her sketch. As to the
_Clathrus_, I have found ten minutes in a room with it nine too many:
it becomes insupportably offensive in a short time, and its infective
stench has given rise to a superstition entertained of it throughout
the Landes, viz. that it is capable of producing cancer—in consequence
of which superstition the inhabitants, who call it Cancrou, or Cancer,
cover it carefully over, lest by accident some one should chance to touch
it, and become infected with that horrible disease in consequence.[35]
Batsch has described an Agaric[36] of so powerful and peculiar a smell,
that before he could finish his picture (for he was drawing it) a violent
headache made him desist, “vehementi afficiebar capitis dolore.” Of the
others, some are graveolent in a savoury or in an unsavoury sense. This
smells strong of onions,[37] that of cinnamon,[38] from which it takes
its name; the _A. ostreatus_ (_auct. nost._) most powerfully of Tarragon;
_A. odoratus_, and the _Cantharellus_, like apricots and ratafia
(Purton); _Boletus salicinus_, “like the bloom of May” (Abbott); the _A.
sanguineus_, when dry, savours of a stale poultice; _A. piperatus_, of
the _Triglia_, or red mullet; the _Hydna_ generally give out a smell of
tallow; moulds have their own smells, which are mouldy and musty; some
exhale the smell of putrid meat, many the odour of fresh meal; the spawn
of _A. prunulus_ and of the puff-balls (_Lycoperdons_) exhale an odour
similar to the perfect plants; but the _Pietra funghaia_, filled with
the spores of its own _Polyporus_, is without smell. When fresh, there
is scarcely any perceptible odour in _Boletus edulis_ or _B. luridus_,
nor yet in the _A. Cæsareus_ when recently gathered. A word about their
tastes will suffice: with so many smells, they must needs have flavours
to correspond, and so they have; sapid, sweet, sour, peppery, rich,
rank, acrid, nauseous, bitter, styptic, might be all found in an English
“gradus” (though at present, I am sorry to say, without any lines from
poets in whose writings they occur), after the word ‘Fungus.’ In a few,
generally of an unsafe character, there is little or no taste in the
mouth while they are being masticated, but shortly after deglutition, the
fauces become dry, and a sense of more or less constriction is apt to
supervene, which frequently continues for some time afterwards.
EXPANSIVE POWER OF GROWTH.
Soft and yielding as vegetable structures appear to the touch, the
expansive force of their growth is almost beyond calculation. The effects
of this power, of which the experience of every one will furnish him
with some instances, are perhaps nowhere more strikingly exemplified
than amidst the ruins of its own creation. Coeval with many old brick
fabrics of earlier times, perhaps embedded in the very mortar which holds
them together, it may lurk there for centuries in quiescence, till once
arousing its energies, it continues to exert them in ceaseless activity
ever after. It has at Rome planted its pink Valerians on her highest
towers, and its wild fig-tree in the breaches of her walls; nor are the
granite obelisks of her piazzas, nor the classic groups in marble on her
Quirinal mount, entirely exempt from its encroachments. A conspiracy of
plants, _one hundred strong_, have long ago planned the destruction of
the Coliseum; their undermining process advances each year, and neither
iron nor new brickwork can arrest it long. That old Roman cement, which
the barbarians gave up as impracticable, and the pickaxe of the Barberini
had but begun to disintegrate, will, ere the lapse of another century,
be effectually pulled to pieces by the rending arm of vegetation. Here,
as erst in Juvenal’s time, the _mala ficus_ finds no walls too strong
to rive asunder, no tower beyond the reach of its scaling, no monument
too sacred for it to touch. In the class of plants immediately under
consideration, while the expansive effort of growth is equal to what
it is in other cases, its effects are far more startling from their
suddenness. M. Bulliard (to cite one or two instances out of a great
many) relates, that on placing a _Phallus impudicus_ within a glass
vessel, the plant expanded so rapidly as to shiver its sides with an
explosive detonation as loud as that of a pistol. Dr. Carpenter, in
his ‘Elements of Physiology,’ mentions that “in the neighbourhood of
Basingstoke a paving-stone, measuring twenty-one inches square, and
weighing eighty-three pounds, was completely raised an inch and a half
out of its bed by a mass of toadstools, of from six to seven inches
in diameter, and that nearly the whole pavement of the town suffered
displacement from the same cause.” A friend has seen a crop of puff-balls
raise large flagstones considerably above the plane of their original
level; and I have myself recently witnessed an extensive displacement
of the pegs of a wooden pavement which had been driven nine inches into
the ground, but were heaved up irregularly, in several places, by small
bouquets of Agarics, growing from below.
REPRODUCTIVE POWER.
Funguses have a remarkable power of re-forming such parts of their
substance as have been accidentally or otherwise removed. Vittadini found
that when the tubes of a _Boletus_ were cut out from a growing plant,
they were after a time reproduced. Where deep holes have been eaten into
these plants by snails, such holes, on the _Boletus_ attaining to its
full growth, are partially refilled. If the tender _Polyporus_ be cut
across, the wound immediately sets about healing by the first intention,
leaving not even a cicatrice to mark the original seat of the injury. The
_Lycoperdons_ (_Bovista_), which are often accidentally wounded by the
scythe, have the same faculty of repairing the injury, remodelling afresh
the parts that may have been excised from them.[39]
MOTION.
In a recent work on ‘Insect Life,’ I have discoursed somewhat at large
on the insufficiency of any kind of movements as proofs of sensation,
quoting, amidst other evidences to this effect, certain remarkable
movements in plants. Some of the present family exhibit the phenomena
of insensitive motion in a remarkable manner, and might have been added
to the list already cited in that publication. Mr. Robson has given us
a very interesting account of the movements he observed in the scarlet
_Clathrus_, which is here transcribed in his own words. It is interesting
to notice how an unbiassed observer uses the very terms to designate the
movements of a plant which would have been minutely descriptive of those
of an insect:—“At first I was much surprised to see a part of the fibres,
that had got through a rupture in the top of the _Clathrus_, moving like
the legs of a fly when laid on his back. I then touched it with the
point of a pin, and was still more surprised when I saw it present the
appearance of a little bundle of worms entangled together, the fibres
being all alive. I next took the little bundle of fibres quite out, and
the animal motion was then so strong as to turn the head halfway round,
first one way and then another, and two or three times it got out of the
focus. Almost every fibre had a different motion; some of them twined
round one another, and then untwined again, whilst others were bending,
extending, coiling, waving, etc. The fibres had many little balls
adhering to their sides, which I take to be the seeds, and I observed
many of them to be disengaged at every motion of the fibres; the seeds
appeared like gunpowder finely granulated.” Instances from other authors
abound. “An _Helvella inflata_, on being touched by me once, threw up
its seeds in the form of a smoke, which arose with an elastic bound,
glittering in the sunshine like particles of silver.”[40] “The _Vibrissea
truncorum_, taken from water and exposed to the rays of the sun, though
at first smooth, is soon covered with white geniculated filaments, which
start from the _hymenium_, and have an oscillating motion.”[41] The
_Pilobolus_, of which so accurate an account has been given us by the
great Florentine mycologist,[42] casts, as its name imports, its seeds
into the air; these also escape with a strong projectile force from the
upper surface of Pezizas, the anfractuosities of the Morel, and from the
gills of Agarics.[43]
PHOSPHORESCENCE.
Several kinds of funguses, and the spawn of the truffle, emit a
phosphorescent light; of the first, the _Agaricus olearius_, not uncommon
in Italy, is sometimes seen at night, feebly shining amidst the darkness
of the olive grove. The coal-mines near Dresden have long been celebrated
for the production of funguses which emit a light similar to a pale
moonlight. Mr. Drummond describes an Australian fungus with similar
properties; and another very interesting one, an Agaric, is noticed by
Mr. Gardner, in his ‘Travels in Brazil.’[44]
DIMENSIONS.
Most funguses do not present great anomalies in their size, but retain
nearly the same dimensions throughout the whole course of their being;
some few species, however, seem to have a faculty of almost indefinite
expansion. The usual size of a puff-ball, as we all know, is not much
larger than an egg, but some puff-balls attain to the dimensions of
the human head,[45] or exceed it. Mr. Berkeley quotes the case of a
_Polyporus squamosus_, which in three weeks grew to seven feet five
inches in periphery, and weighed thirty-four pounds; also of a _Polyporus
fraxineus_, which in a few years measured forty-two inches across.
Clusius[46] tells us of a fungus in Pannonia, of such immense size, that
after satisfying the cravings of a large mycophilous household, enough
of it remained to fill a chariot; this must have been the _Polyporus
frondosus_, to which _Polyporus_ John Bapt. Porta[47] also alludes as
that called _gallinace_[48] by the Neapolitans, which is so big, he says,
that you can scarcely make your hands meet round it, “brachiis diductis
vix homo complecti possit;” he had known it attain twelve pounds weight
in a few days.[49] Bolton, in 1787, found an _Agaricus muscarius_,
which, “after the removal of a considerable portion of its stalk, weighed
nearly two pounds;” Withering, an _A. Georgii_, “which weighed fourteen
pounds,” and Mr. Stackhouse another of the same species in Cornwall,
“which was eighteen inches across, and had a stem as thick as a man’s
wrist;” and I lately picked in the park at Buckhurst, a _Boletus edulis_
which measured twenty-eight inches round its pileus, and eight round
the stem, and a few days later a _B. pachypus_, the girth of which was
thirty-two inches.
CHEMICAL COMPOSITION.
Of all vegetable productions these are the most highly azotized, that
is, animalized in their composition—a fact not only evinced by the
strong cadaverous smell which some of them give out in decay, and by
the savoury animalized meat which others afford at table, but on the
evidence of chemistry also. Thus Dr. Marcet has proved that, like
animals, they absorb a large quantity of oxygen, and disengage in return,
from their surface, a large quantity of carbonic acid; all however do
not exhale carbonic acid, but, in lieu of it, some give out hydrogen,
and others azotic gas. They yield, moreover, to chemical analysis the
several components of which animal structures are made up; many of them,
in addition to sugar, gum, resin, a peculiar acid called fungic acid,
and a variety of salts, furnish considerable quantities of _albumen_,
_adipocire_, and _osmazome_, which last is that principle that gives its
peculiar flavour to meat gravy. The _Polyporus sulphureus_ is frequently
covered with little crystals of the binoxalate of potash;[50] the
_Agaricus piperatus_ yields the acetate of potash,[51] and it is probable
that other funguses of which we have as yet no recorded analysis will,
on the institution of such, be found to contain some new and unexpected
ingredient peculiar to themselves. When these several substances have
been duly extracted from funguses, there is left behind for a common base
the solid structure of the plant itself; this, which is called _fungine_,
is white, flabby, insipid in its taste, but highly nutritious in its
properties. If nitric acid be poured upon it, an immediate disengagement
of azotic gas takes place, and several new substances are the result:
a bitter principle, a reddish resinoid matter, hydrocyanic and oxalic
acids, and two remarkable fatty substances, whereof one resembles tallow,
the other wax. If dilute sulphuric acid be poured upon this fungine, no
change ensues; but if muriatic acid be substituted, the result is a jelly.
USES.
The uses to which funguses have been put are various, and, had the
properties of these plants been as extensively investigated as those
which belong to the phanerogamic classes, they would probably by
this time have proved still more numerous: some, as the _Polyporus
sulphureus_, furnish a useful colour for dyeing;[52] the _Agaricus
atramentarius_ makes ink; divers Lycoperdons, of which other mention will
be made presently when we come to speak of such species as are esculent,
have also been employed for stupefying bees, for stanching blood, and for
making tinder; their employment in the first of these capacities, seems
to have escaped the observation of the accurate author of ‘Les Jardins,’
who has mentioned the others:—
“Ce puissant Agaric, qui du sang épanché
Arrête les ruisseaux, et dont le sein fidèle
Du caillou pétillant recueille l’étincelle.”
The ‘caillou,’ alas, like the poet who struck this spark out of it, is
now obsolete; but _amadou_ is still in vogue, being employed for many
household purposes; in addition to which, a medical practitioner of
Covent Garden has of late been in the habit of using extensive sheets
of it to cover over and protect the backs of those bedridden invalids
whose cruel sufferings make such large demands upon our sympathy,—for
the alleviation of which so little is to be done!—as it is more elastic
than chamois leather, it is less liable to crumple up when lain upon, and
on this account has been preferred to it by several of our metropolitan
surgeons of eminence; some employ it also as a gentle compress over
varicose veins, where it supports the distended vessels without pressing
too tightly upon the limb. Gleditsch relates, that the poorer inhabitants
of Franconia stitch it together, and make dresses of it; and also that
the Laplanders burn it in the neighbourhood of their dwellings, to secure
their reindeer from the attacks of gadflies, which are repelled by the
smoke; thus “good at need,” it really deserves the epithet of ‘puissant,’
given to it by Delille.[53]
The _Polyporus squamosus_ makes a razor-strop far superior to any of
those at present patented, and sold, with high-sounding epithets, far
beyond their deserts. To prepare the _Polyporus_ for this purpose, it
must be cut from the ash-tree in autumn, when its juices have been dried
and its substance has become consolidated; it is then to be flattened
out for twenty-four hours in a press, after which it should be carefully
rubbed with pumice, sliced longitudinally, and every slip that is free
from the erosions of insects be then glued upon a wooden stretcher.
Cesalpinus knew all this! and the barbers in his time knew it too;[54]
and it is not a little remarkable that so useful an invention should, in
an age of puffing, advertisement, and improvement, like our own, have
been entirely lost sight of. Imperato employed and recommends it as an
excellent detergent, with which to brush and comb out the scurf from the
hair.