by Milton Wainwright Department of Molecular Biology & Biotechnology, University of Sheffield, S10 2TN, UK Abstract potato plants which were resistant to Darwin’s Contribution to Mycology Although nearly every aspect the light blight caused by the fungus of Darwin’s work has been Fungi and evolutionary theory Phytopthora infestans (Dearce, 2008). scrutinised, his occasional Fungi are rarely mentioned in Torbitt selected the small number of studies of microorganisms and the history of the development of plants which survived in a field infested in particular fungi have been evolutionary science. Darwin (1868) with the blight fungus and used these to overlooked. Darwin however, took however, in his The Variation of Animals hopefully produce blight-resistant seed an interest in the Victorian debate and Plants under Domestication (Dearce, 2008). Darwin provided money over spontaneous generation comments that when infected by to support this important work and and in the role of Phytophthora fungi, plants often assume some of the lobbied civil servants on Torbitt’s behalf infestans in causing potato blight. characteristics of allied species. This in order to secure further funding. Darwin was also interested in the observation was, in fact, first made Did Darwin suffer from a fungal possibility that his long-standing by the German naturalist, S. Reisseck infection? stomach complaint was caused by (Masters, 1860), who mused: It is a well known fact that Darwin a fungus. Considerable hyperbole Suppose, the conditions originally suffered throughout most his life from surrounds Darwin’s work. However, caused by the fungus to become constant a debilitating stomach complaint, but while he was a first rate naturalist, in the course of time, the plant would, did Darwin’s long standing complaint Darwin, by his own admission, if found growing wild, be considered a result from a fungal infection? Ever did not originate the ideas of distinct species, or even belonging to a the experimenter, Darwin (1863) used evolution or natural selection. new genus. his single lens microscope to examine By using Darwin’s own words I The Reverend M.J. Berkeley, a leading a sample of his vomit and was able to hope to show that the numerous light of Victorian mycology, thought that inform Hooker that he found what “I myths which have grown up fungi might be used to good effect to suppose are vegetable cells in the limpid around Darwin diminish, rather solve the “species problem” which was to fluid which I throw up.” than elevate, the great man’s occupy the minds of so many naturalists Having observed such cells or contribution to biology. of this era (Berkeley and Broome, 1850): “animalcules” Darwin sought the KEYWORDS: Darwin, Darwin myth, The extremely close external advice of one of the leading medical fungi, history of biology, history of resemblance of objects belonging to very practitioners of the day, Sir John Goodsir. evolution different genera (of fungi) would make As early as 1842, Goodsir had shown a nice subject for amplification to those that an animalcule was present in the who would adopt the notion prevalent vomit of people suffering from gastric with some of the transformation of illness. He named the organism Sarcina Introduction species. and claimed that it was the cause of Although practically every aspect Berkeley’s words clearly show that the numerous stomach complaints. He then of Charles Darwin’s life and work has transmutation of species was already prescribed hyposulfites in order to kill been scrutinised in minute detail, being discussed as early as 1850 and, as the organism in vivo; this he claimed the possibility that he worked on we shall see below, considerably earlier. produced a cure. Goodsir, was arguably microorganisms has been largely From Fuegian food to potato blight therefore the first person to demonstrate ignored. However, considering Darwin’s Darwin’s first contribution to the presence of a microbe in an internal wide interest in natural history, it mycology came when, while voyaging infection, suggest it caused the disease in seems inconceivable that he would have on the Beagle, he noted that fungi were a question, and then provide a cure; all this ignored the opportunity to contribute major component of the diet of Fuegians. some thirty years before Pasteur took an to the surge in interest in bacteria and He observed that Cyttaria darwinii a interest in microorganisms (Wainwright, fungi during the mid-Victorian era. globular, bright-yellow fungus, grew in 2003). A great deal was known about As we shall see, Darwin did in fact vast numbers on trees and was collected Sarcina goodsir, as it became known, by seize this opportunity and became by women and children and eaten the 1860s when Darwin sent Goodsir a involved in some interesting work uncooked, as their staple diet. Darwin sample of his vomit for analysis. Some on microbes, including fungi. While sent a specimen of this fungus back to authorities regarded it as an alga, while researching Darwin’s contribution to England, where it was identified by the others were certain that Sarcina was a mycology I soon became aware that a Revered Berkeley (Darwin, 1860a). fungus, even possibly a morphological false impression of Darwin has emerged Much later in life, Darwin took a keen form of common mold such as and that the many myths that have interest in studies on the fungal blight Penicillium (Wainwright, 2003); it is now surrounded him have denied us a true which had so devastated the potato known to belong to the bacteria. Goodsir appreciation of his achievements. So crop and caused famine throughout eventually tested Darwin’s sample here, as well as considering Darwin’s Europe during the 1840s. Between for Sarcina but doubtless to Darwin’s contributions to mycology, I will use February 1876 and March 1882, Darwin disappointment, failed to find the the great naturalist’s own words to shed exchanged some ninety letters with a organism. Goodsir’s letter (1863) states: some light on Darwin’s true contribution certain James Torbitt concerning support I will most certainly examine a slide or to the development of the theory of for one of Torbitt’s commercial projects a small quantity of fluid with flocculent natural selection. aimed at developing and distributing Continued on page 14. FUNGI Volume 4:1 Winter 2011 13 and tenacious matter sent in a tube or inhabit the air around us, Tyndall contained bacteria in living movement. small phial. The spherical bodies are set up a large number of open tubes On the first of February, 1871, Darwin probably the eels of Torula and spores containing extracts of vegetables and wrote a letter to Hooker and again of Penicillium. If Sarcina be present it somewhat exotic meats, like venison and expresses his interest in the experiments will be at once detected by its square pheasant (Wainwright, 1985). These, that were then ongoing on spontaneous form and peculiar segmentation. Sarcina he found soon became contaminated generation when he mentioned B.T and Torula often occur together. Mr with airborne bacteria and fungi and Lownes’ observations that boiling does (William) Jenner prescribes hydrosulphite presumably would also infect humans not kill certain moulds (Darwin, 1871). of soda. Your medical advisor may try and animals. Tyndall also observed This he thought was curious because it creosote. One drop taken at bedtime and numerous examples of microbial contradicted Pasteur, who claimed that afterwards, two drops in the forenoon and antagonism, the ability of a microbe to his boiled extracts remained sterile and two at bedtime. inhibit the growth of another. Although would do so indefinitely. he noted that species of Penicillium Darwin, fungi and spontaneous Darwin Destroys His own Myth generation could kill bacteria, he misinterpreted As early as 1866, Darwin (1866a) his observations and so missed the Two thousand and nine, the entered the ongoing argument over opportunity to discover antibiotics bicentennial of Charles Darwin’s spontaneous generation by stating in a (Wainwright, 2003). birth and the sesquicentennial of the letter to J.V. Carus that: Tyndall sent Darwin one of his closed publication of On the Origin of Species “As for myself I cannot believe in tubes which Darwin left exposed to the saw a remarkable out-pouring of non- spontaneous generation.” air. In a letter dated 20 October 1875, scholarly hyperbole and misinformation During the 1870s, Darwin also Darwin (1875) related the news to about this Victorian naturalist. As a corresponded with John Tyndall who Tyndall that: result, myths about Darwin’s role in the was then very much involved with the The tube of boiled infusion, dated development of the theory of evolution spontaneous generation controversy. October the 16th, was clear on the by natural selection continue to be In order to show that microbes 19th, but on the 20th it was muddy and uncritically disseminated in biographies,

FUNGI (ISSN 1941-4943) is published five times per year (four seasonal issues plus a special issue) by FUNGI, P.O. Box 8, 1925 Hwy. 175, Richfield, Wisconsin 53076-0008, USA. Subscriptions are $38 per year for USA residents; $40 for residents of Canada and Mexico; $50 for all others. Checks should be made out to FUNGI. For credit card orders please see our Web site: www.fungimag.com PUBLISHER’S NOTES: Although many wild mushrooms are quite palatable, some are deadly “I don’t want to miss a single issue!” poisonous. It is advisable to avoid eating any wild organisms, including fungi, unless absolutely certain of identification. And although some mushroom Send me a full, one-year subscription to FUNGI. species are edible for many people, those same species may cause allergic reactions or illness in I want to receive big, colorful issues! others. When in doubt, throw it out. FUNGI wants 5 to ensure that all to have any wild mushroom (4 seasonal issues + annual special issue) checked by an expert before eating them. It should o $38 USA o $40 Canada or Mexico o $50 for all other Intl. addresses be understood that the Publisher and all Editors are not responsible for any consequences of ingesting Name______wild mushrooms. Furthermore, the Publisher and all Editors are not engaged, herein, in the rendering Address______of any medical advice or services. All readers should verify all information and data before administering City______State ______Zip ______any drug, therapy, or treatment discussed herein. Neither the Editors nor the Publisher accepts any Country______Email ______responsibility for the accuracy of the information or consequences from the use or misuse of the Place CREDIT CARD orders at the FUNGI website, information contained herein. Unauthorized reproduction of published content of FUNGI is www.fungimag.com strictly forbidden, and permission for reproduction or drop your check in the mail today! Make check out to “FUNGI” and send it to: must be obtained by application in writing to the FUNGI P.O. Box 8 1925 Hwy. 175 Richfield, Wisconsin 53076-0008 USA Publisher. FUNGI If you give us your email address, we’ll send you subscription reimders, announcements, COPYRIGHT 2011 by . and notices of information placed on the website. Your email address will NOT be traded or sold, All rights reserved. FUNGI and will not be shared with anyone not directly affiliated with . Printed in the U.S.A.

14 FUNGI Volume 4:1 Winter 2011 documentaries and through the Myth: Darwin originated the theory enclosed. If you think it proper that I general media. During my studies on of natural selection should send it (and of this there can hardly Darwin’s interest in fungi, it became It is remarkable, considering the be any question), and if you think it full increasingly obvious to me that many evidence, that the myth that Darwin and ample enough, please alter the date of the ideas commonly attributed to originated natural selection has persisted to the date on which you post it, and let Darwin were in fact originated by for so long. Nearly every book and that be soon. The case in the Gardeners’ other Victorian naturalists and even documentary on Darwin propagates Chronicle seems a little stronger than pioneers of transmutation (later to be this myth, despite the fact that both in Matthew’s book, for the passages are called evolution) who worked in the Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace therein scattered in three places; but it eighteenth century; other writers have (who is sometimes referred to as the would be mere hair-splitting to notice that. also recently noticed aspects of what we co-discoverer of natural selection) If you object to my letter, please return might call the “Darwin Myth” (Caton, categorically stated that at least two other it, but I do not expect that you will but I 2007). Here, I will use Darwin’s own Victorian naturalists came up with the thought that you would not object to run words to refute this mythology. idea before them. your eye over it. Myth: Darwin invented “evolution” On April 10, 1860, Charles Darwin In the above letter, Darwin also asked This is the easiest of the many Darwin (1860b) wrote to a letter to Charles Lyell Hooker to send the following statement to myths to refute. It was doing the rounds in which he mentions a depressing fact. the Gardeners’ Chronicle : as early as the late 1800s, as is shown by He had been informed that he had been I have been much interested by Mr the following quote which appeared in beaten to the theory of natural selection Patrick Matthew’s communication in the Grant Allen’s book of essays on science, and there was simply no way of avoiding number of your paper dated April 7. I called Falling in Love (Allen, 1891): the fact. The startling news came from a freely acknowledge that Mr Matthew has Everybody is aware, in a dim and Scottish tree expert, or arboriculturist, anticipated by many years the explanation nebulous semi-conscious fashion, that called Patrick Matthew. which I have offered of the origin of species, evolution was all invented by the late Matthew was born in Dundee in under the name of natural selection. Mr Darwin. 1790, into a wealthy family and died in I think that no one will feel surprised By the time Darwin wrote his 1874. Although he attended Edinburgh that neither I, nor apparently any other famous book in 1859, evolution, or University, Matthew appears never to naturalist had heard of Mr Matthew’s transmutation, was a well established have graduated, but returned to his views, considering how briefly they are idea and was already under attack family’s estate in Errol, Scotland, where given, and that they appeared in the by theists, as well as scientists like he devoted the rest of his life to growing appendix to a work on Naval Timber and Sedgwick and Lyell. The appearance of trees. It was here that he wrote his theory Arboriculture. I can do no more than offer the Vestiges of the Natural History of of natural selection, which was published my apologies to Mr Matthew for my entire Creation did much advance the cause of in 1831 (Matthew, 1831); that is, at a ignorance of his publication. If another evolution. Anonymously published in time when Darwin, still a creationist and edition of my work is called for, I will insert 1844 by Robert Chambers (Chambers, opposed to the theory of transmutation, to the forgoing effect. 1844), this book took much of the was just about to begin his famous voyage Here then, we have Darwin admitting sting out of attacks on Darwin’s later on the Beagle. that he was beaten to the theory of books on evolution (Secord, 2001). The letter that Lyell received from natural selection by Patrick Matthew. In Although Darwin was highly critical Darwin was factual, rather than emotional a subsequent letter, written in the same of Chambers’ book, both Wallace and (Darwin, 1860b): month to the, American naturalist Asa Thomas Henry Huxley were admirers. Now for a curious thing. In last Gray, April 25, 1860 (Darwin, 1860d,), he Chambers was not, of course, the first Saturday’s Gardeners’ Chronicle, a states: to advocate evolution; the seventeenth Mr Patrick Matthews (Darwin here Have you noticed how completely I have century contributions of Darwin’s incorrectly spells Matthew’s name) been anticipated by Mr P. Matthew, in grandfather Erasmus Darwin, and most publishes long extracts from his work Gardeners’ Chronicle? famously Lamarck preceded him. It is on “Naval Timber & Arboriculture” In a letter Darwin (1861) subsequently remarkable that the view that Darwin published in 1831, in which he briefly, but wrote to Quatrefages de Bréau on originated the idea of evolution has completely anticipates the theory of Nat. April 25, 1861, he yet again admits that entered popular culture in the form of Selection—I have ordered the book, as Matthew has beaten him, but continues a mantra. Darwin is, of course, more some few passages are rather obscure, but to insert the same caveats, namely the properly associated with advocating a it is, certainly I think, a complete but not contribution was small, it appeared in an mechanism by which evolution mainly developed anticipation!... Anyhow one may obscure book, and no one noticed it: operates, namely natural selection. be excused in not having discovered the …an obscure writer on forest trees in However, as we shall see, Darwin fact in a work on “Naval Timber.” 1830, in Scotland, most expressly and himself refuted what is perhaps the Then, in a letter to J.D Hooker, dated clearly anticipated my views–though he most central of all Darwin myths, April 13, 1860, Darwin (1860c) wrote the put his case so briefly that no single person namely that he originated the theory of following: ever noticed the scattered passage in his natural selection. A myth, as we shall Questions of priority so often lead to book. see, Darwin refuted in no uncertain odious quarrels that I should esteem Darwin seems to becoming somewhat terms. it a great favour if you would read the Continued on page 16. FUNGI Volume 4:1 Winter 2011 15 desperate here, since (as we shall see varying degrees of individuality and the The first of the above mentioned later) he neglects to mention that two continuity of ideas or habits forming an reviews appeared in the Edinburgh reviews of Matthew’s book had in fact abiding memory, thus combining all the Literary Journal (Anon., 1831a). appeared soon after its publication, both best essential features of the theories put Whoever wrote this review certainly mentioning Matthew’s reference to the forward by Lamarck, Darwin and Mr did not spare the vitriol but instead species problem; Darwin’s claim, that Butler himself. mercilessly attacked Matthew’s ideas no single person ever noticed Matthew’s And (Wallace,1900): and style. Passing reference is given to work, is therefore obviously untrue. These and many other passages, show Matthew’s ideas on natural selection, as Clearly, the fact that Darwin admitted how fully and clearly Mr Matthew follows: that he lacked priority, on what is usually apprehended the theory of natural The very great interest of the question considered to be his theory, has not just selection, as well as the existence of more regarding species, variety and habit has come to light, nor was it hidden away in obscure laws of evolution, many years in perhaps led him a little too wide. Darwin’s letters. On the contrary, it has advance of Mr Darwin, and myself and The next review, appearing in been in the public domain for nearly a in giving almost the whole of what Mr Gardeners’ Magazine of 1832 (Anon., hundred and fifty years, yet it continues Matthew has written on the subject Mr 1832) emphasized that Matthew’s book to be ignored. Butler will have helped to call attention was important to the welfare of Britain Darwin eventually included reference to one of the most original thinkers of the and to “her extension of her dominions;” to Matthew’s work in the “Historical first half of the 19th century. it then discusses the all important Sketch” which he included in later Although Wallace does not state what Appendix which contained Matthew’s editions (such as the sixth edition, in he means by the “existence of more ideas on natural selection, as follows: 1872) of the Origin of Species. After obscure laws of evolution” in Matthew’s An appendix of 29 pages concludes the commenting that Matthew had the same work, I assume he is referring to book…one of the subjects discussed in this views as Wallace and himself Darwin Matthew’s mix of natural selection and Appendix is the puzzling one, of the origin states that: catastrophism. of species and varieties; and if the author Unfortunately the view was given by Since both Darwin and Wallace has hereon originated no original views Mr Matthew, very briefly in scattered openly accepted that Patrick Matthew (and of this we are far from certain), he passages in an Appendix to a work on originated the idea of natural selection has certainly exhibited his own in an a different subject, so that it remained we need not discuss his ideas in detail. original manner. unnoticed until Mr Matthew himself Despite the fact that Darwin (1866b) Clearly anyone, including Darwin, who drew attention to it in the Gardeners’ stated that Matthew’s ideas on natural was interested in the “species question” Chronicle” on April 7, 1860. The selection were “precisely” the same as would have read this and wondered what differences of Mr Matthew’s view from his own and Wallace’s, some recent this somewhat elusive quote meant. mine are not of much importance, he scholars have claimed that the two The final anonymous review (Anon., seems to consider that the world was ideas were different (Wells, 1973). If 1831b), which appeared in the United nearly depopulated at successive periods, this is the case, then one must conclude Service Journal, commended Matthew’s and then restocked… that neither Darwin nor Wallace could description of naval architecture Although Darwin admits that he does have understood the concept of natural and then states, “But we disclaim not understand much of what Matthew, selection! participation in his rumination on the writes, he concedes that: “He (Matthew) As has already been mentioned, law of nature……” The authors of these saw clearly the full force of the principle Darwin claimed that neither he, nor two reviews were obviously well aware of natural selection.” anyone else knew of Matthew’s work. that the book had something significant What about Alfred Russel Wallace, This is clearly conjecture on Darwin’s to say including reference to the the man generally viewed as the co- part and flies in the face of the fact development of species, i.e. evolution. discoverer of natural selection; what did that Matthew’s book was reviewed. These two reviews also give lie to the, he think about Matthew’s contribution? Matthew’s book was also well-advertised. frequently expressed, view that Matthew In a book review on Butler’s Evolution For example, an advert for Naval buried his ideas in an obscure, little Old and New Wallace (1879) made the Timbers, published in the advertising known book. following comments (my emphasis in section of the London Literary Gazette Although they never met, Darwin and bold): and Journal of Belle Lettres of 1831 Matthew entered into some friendly We come next to Mr Patrick Matthew, states the book refers to the “the subject correspondence, beginning on the 13th who in 1831 put forth his views on the of species and variety.” Clearly, such an of June, 1862, (Darwin, 1862) when, in developmental theory in a work on advert might have drawn Fitzroy’s or response to the suggestion by Matthew arboriculture: and we think that most Darwin’s attention to Matthew’s book, that they might meet, Darwin replied naturalists will be amazed at the range although, as Darwin, in 1831, was not that he would like to meet “the first and accuracy of his system, and will interested in the species problem, any enunciator of the theory of Natural give him the highest credit as the first to such interest would probably have had Selection” (yet another admission, by see the important principles of human to await his return from his voyages Darwin, of Matthew’s priority), but that and “natural selection,” conformity to on the Beagle, when he began filling he had to decline the offer because of his conditions and reversion to ancestral his notebooks with already published poor health. In 1871, the two scientists types; and also the unity of life, the examples of work on transmutation. had further correspondence in which 16 FUNGI Volume 4:1 Winter 2011 Matthew complained that he had always John Tyndall (1874) referred to Wells’ Since Wells was born in Charleston, been unable to devote much time on contribution during his inaugural of Scottish parentage, it is perhaps to the question of evolution because address of 1874, when he stated: surprising that American writers have of his long-standing commitment to In 1813, Dr Wells founder of our failed to emphasise that one of their own politics. Darwin’s wife Emma also was present theory of dew, read before the beat Darwin to natural selection; perhaps aware of Matthew’s priority over her Royal Society a paper in which, to use the fact that he was a staunch loyalist in husband, since she wrote to Matthew the words of Mr Darwin, “he distinctly the American Revolution has counted (because her husband was ill) saying recognises the principle of natural against him (Duyckinck, 1855). (Darwin (E.), 1863) “Darwin is more selection; and this is the first recognition The Beagle myth faithful to your own original child that has been indicated.” One of most enduring myths is than you yourself;” this presumably Tyndall then goes on to add his that Darwin developed his ideas of refers to something Matthew said endorsement of Wells as follows: transmutation while on the Beagle. which Mrs. Darwin thought might The thoroughness and skill with which However, Darwin destroyed this myth weaken the theory of natural selection. Wells pursued his work, and the obvious in no uncertain terms in the following It is noteworthy that one of the main independence of his character, rendered quote given to Huxley (1893a): purposes of Captain Fitzroy’s command him long ago a favourite with me, and it When I was on board the Beagle, I of the Beagle voyage was to study the gives me the liveliest of pleasure to alight believed in the permanence of species, but arboriculture of the countries visited upon the additional testimony to his as far as I can remember vague doubts with a view to discovering where in the penetration. occasionally flitted across my mind. On world British warships and merchant The reference to Darwin’s comments my return home in the autumn of 1836, I vessels might take on board wood for on Wells’ priority is given in letter to immediately began to prepare my journal repairs (Cook, 1839). It is possible Hooker he wrote in October, 1865 for publication, and then saw how many therefore that Captain Fitzroy may have (Darwin, 1865) in which he says: facts indicated the common descent of taken a copy of Matthew’s Naval Timbers Talking of the Origin, a Yankee has species, so that in July,1837, I opened a and Arboriculture with him on the called my attention to a paper attached note-book to record any facts which might Beagle; if this was the case then Darwin to Dr Wells famous Essay on Dew, which appear to bear on the question. But I did would have had ample time to learn of he was read in 1813 to the Royal Society, not become convinced that species were Matthew’s views on natural selection. As but not printed, in which he applies most mutable until I think two or three years has been already mentioned, Matthew’s distinctly the principle of N. Selection had elapsed book was well advertised during 1830 to the races of man. So poor old Patrick The above quote by Darwin shows and 1831 in, for example, the Edinburgh Matthew is not the first, and he cannot that it was not until after he returned Literary Journal, London Literary Gazette or ought not any longer put on his Title from his voyages on the Beagle, and and The Magazine of Natural History, pages the “Discoverer of the principal of began studying the available literature so Fitzroy had plenty of opportunity to natural selection.” on transmutation, that he became to be become aware of the book before the The last sentence relates to Matthew’s convinced that species could change or Beagle left England on Dec 27, 1831. habit of putting this statement, claiming were mutable. But is it Matthew’s theory? ownership of natural selection, in his What then of the generally held view An obvious problem facing anyone books and on his calling cards. It is that Darwin observed that each island attempting to correct the record on noteworthy that Darwin, in expressing of the archipelago had its own species priority in science is that the person his obvious satisfaction in debunking of tortoise and finch and that this one is championing as the discoverer Matthew’s claim to be the originator of observation lead him to begin to think of of a scientific principle may likewise the theory of natural selection, assigns think of transmutation and even natural have been beaten to the idea. Although priority to Wells, and in so doing, once selection? In fact, it was John Gould, I have given prominence to the work again, admits that he, and Wallace, (and not Darwin) who first noticed the of Patrick Matthew in this essay, I have clearly had no priority on the theory. In difference in the beaks of the finches, as not at any point claimed that Matthew his Historical Sketch (published in later the following quote points out (Anon, was the first to enunciate the theory of editions of the Origin of Species), Darwin 1838a): natural selection. I have avoided this somewhat tempered his praise of Wells Gould believed that the whole of these pitfall simply because at least three by stating that: birds to be undescribed, and remarked other scientists, Hutton, Edward Blyth He applies it (natural selection) that their principal peculiarity consisted and William Charles Wells came up only to the races of man and to certain in the bill presenting several distinct with versions of natural selection before characters alone. modifications of form. Matthew (and therefore also Darwin By criticising Wells’ priority in this Darwin also cannot be credited with and Wallace). William Charles Wells’ way Darwin is, of course unwittingly, the original observation that Galapagos contribution is particularly interesting re-asserting Matthew’s priority over him tortoises varied on each individual because Darwin admitted his priority. on natural selection. Wells, by the way, island, Darwin (1864) himself states: Wells’ version of natural selection died in 1817, some four years after he By far the most remarkable feature appeared in 1813, some eighteen years published his theory of natural selection, of the Archipelago is that the different before Matthew’s work. The famous so he never had the opportunity to islands, to a considerable extent, are Victorian scientist and evolutionist, develop, or promote his ideas. Continued on page 18. FUNGI Volume 4:1 Winter 2011 17 inhabited by a different set of beings. My from another naturalist, Alfred Russel initially, Darwin (1858c) recognized attention was first called to this fact by Wallace; Wallace had come up with that the course of action he, Lyell and the vice Governor Mr Lawson, declaring his own version of natural selection. Hooker were following was, underhand, that the tortoises differed from different Wallace forwarded a letter giving his and far from gentlemanly: islands and that he could certainly tell ideas to Darwin, who was obviously Wallace might say “you did not intend from which island any one was brought. shocked to find that another naturalist publishing an abstract of your own views Darwin was a Lamarckian was elaborating the theory of natural till you received my communication, is A persistent myth about Darwin selection. Darwin (1858a) wrote to Lyell it fair to take advantage of my having was that he was opposed to the and said: freely, though unasked communicated possibility that acquired characteristics I never saw a more striking my ideas, and this prevents me could be inherited. This idea, whose coincidence. If Wallace had my MS forestalling you”……..It seems hard on chief proponent was Lamarck, is sketch written out in 1842 he could not me that I should be compelled to lose my often regarded as being anathema to have made a better short abstract. priority of many years study but I cannot Darwin’s ideas and Lamarck’s views This letter placed Darwin in a feel at all sure that this alters the justice are, in consequence, generally ridiculed predicament. He had been working on of the case. so as to emphasise the difference transmutation for some twenty years Although Darwin frequently refers to between Darwin’s ideas and the view and had always intended writing his big his priority, in reality he had no priority that acquired characteristics can be synthesis of his findings on the subject. whatsoever on any of his transmutation inherited. However, as Alfred Russel Now he would have to pass Wallace’s ideas, simply because he had not placed Wallace (1908a) points out in the next letter on to a publisher and lose what he them in the public domain. In Victorian quote, Darwin was always open to the had always believed was his priority on times, as is still the case, priority on a possibility that Lamarck was right, and natural selection. scientific idea was gained only when that acquired characteristics could be In another letter to Lyell, Darwin an idea was published, either in the inherited: pointed out that Wallace did not get form of a book or a scientific paper; Darwin always believed in the his ideas from anything he (Darwin) Darwin had offered his work to neither inheritance of acquired characteristics, had written to him, and is clear that of theses allocators of priority, and so such as the results of use or disuse of any attempt to deny Wallace his, 1858, relinquished any priority he thought he organs, and the effects of climate food etc. priority of the idea would be paltry, i.e., might have had; his notebook sketches A less than gentlemanly affair less than gentlemanly (Darwin, 1858b): and the private letter to Asa Gray From the time he returned from I would far rather burn my whole book simply did not, in the academic sense his voyages on the Beagle until 1858 than that he or any man should think I of the word, constitute any form of Darwin had been scouring the Victorian had behaved in a paltry spirit. Do not priority. The correct, and gentlemanly, literature for anything he could find believe Wallace originated his views from thing for Darwin to have done was to concerning the “species problem.” In anything I wrote to him. forward Wallace’s paper to an editor of a addition, he wrote countless letters to In order to circumvent this obvious scientific journal and thereby relinquish naturalists around the world asking dilemma, Darwin appealed to two of his the priority he had forfeited by not for their advice on specific points influential contacts, Sir Charles Lyell publishing his ideas. In the end however, concerning natural history. In this and Joseph Hooker. In fact, the problem the “ungentlemanly arrangement” way, we see Darwin, not as original should have been simply solved by was made and the theory of evolution thinker but as someone determined Darwin forwarding Wallace’s letter for by natural selection became, because to synthesize other people’s ideas in a publication without any reference to his of simple alphabetical order of the coherent theory of transmutation. This own work. Lyell and Hooker however, two names, Darwin’s theory and not synthesis, of course, came to fruition decided to pursue a different course of Wallace’s. (As we have seen, however, in his masterpiece On the Origin of action and solve the problem, which neither had priority on the idea.) For Species. Darwin was extremely well they and Darwin had in fact created, by a while, the Victorians referred to the placed to develop such a synthesis; not doing this simple act. Instead they Darwin-Wallace theory of natural he was rich enough not to have to arranged for a joint presentation (not a selection, but this was soon simplified work, and so could devote his time joint paper) of Darwin’s and Wallace’s to give Darwin sole billing. (There has fully to his transmutation work (at work to the Linnaean Society of London. been a recent trend to reinstate the dual least when he was not incapacitated The presentations included a sketch of recognition, again ignoring Matthew’s by illness); even the considerable cost Darwin’s transmutation synthesis and a and Well’s undoubted priority on the of postage involved would have been a letter, detailing his ideas, which he had idea.) problem for a man of lesser means. In sent the American naturalist, Asa Gray Darwin (1858d) accepted the above addition, Darwin was a well known and and of course, Wallace’s famous letter. mentioned arrangement and thanked his respected naturalist and had influential This arrangement has almost universally two influential colleagues for arranging and knowledgeable contacts around been regarded as “a gentlemanly this coup d’état as follows: the world. Darwin worked on this agreement,” although Wallace (at the I had however, quite resigned myself evolutionary synthesis for some twenty time residing in Ternate, now Indonesia) and had written half a letter to Wallace years from around 1838 until 1858, was not party to it. to give up all priority to him and should when he received a devastating letter It is clear however, that, at least certainly not have changed my mind had 18 FUNGI Volume 4:1 Winter 2011 it not been for Lyell’s and yours quite (p.118): References extraordinary kindness. The affinities of all beings of the same In the event, Wallace gained greatly class have sometimes been represented Allen, G.G.B.1891. Falling in Love. from this arrangement which he had by a great tree. I believe this simile London, Smith. not been party to, far more in fact than largely speaks the truth. Anonymous. 1831a. Literary criticism. he lost by unknowingly relinquishing, Darwin was also by no means the first Edinburgh literary Journal 2: 1-3. what should have been, his priority over to recognise the conflict between living Anonymous. 1831b. On naval timbers. Darwin (perhaps this is what he hoped things, which Spencer later styled, “the United Service Journal, part 2: 458. would happen and why he sent the letter survival of the fittest.” Here for example Anonymous. 1832. Matthew’s naval to Darwin in the first place).Wallace is an anonymous expression of the idea timbers. Gardeners’ Magazine, p.703. became part of the English scientific given in 1838 (Anon, 1838b): Anonymous. 1838a. London and scene (although because of his beliefs A continued war seems to be going Edinburgh Philosophical Magazine 2: in land reform, phrenology, paranormal on among the inferior creatures of the 215. phenomena and the afterlife, he never animal kingdom, the strongest praying Anonymous. 1838b. The Saturday became part of the establishment). upon the weak, the sluggish submitting Magazine p.104. Until his death, Wallace remained a to the power of the swift, and those with Berkeley, M.J. and C.E. Broome. 1850. true admirer and disciple of Darwin obtuse instincts to others possessed of On British fungi. Annals and Magazine (Wallace, 1908b). more cunning. of Natural History 5: 458. Myth: Darwin was the first to In conclusion, we have seen that both Burnett, J. (Lord Monboddo). 1773. suggest that Man was a single species Darwin and Wallace admitted that they Origin and Progress of Language, Vol.1. and originated from the same line as did not originate the idea of natural Edinburgh, Bell. apes selection; this fact was also endorsed Caton, H. 2007. Getting our history This myth can again be easily by John Tyndall as well as “Darwin’s right: Six errors about Darwin and his refuted. A number of philosophers and bulldog,” Thomas Henry Huxley, who influence. Evolutionary Psychology 5: naturalists before Darwin suggested that stated that natural selection “had 52-69. the races of Man were a single species; been foreshadowed by Wells, 1813, Chambers, R. 1844. The Vestiges of the examples from the 1700s include De and more fully stated by Matthew, Natural History of Creation, London, Maillet, Erasmus Darwin and Lord the speculations of the latter writer Churchill. Monboddo. Robert Chambers came to remained unknown to naturalists Cook, S.E. 1839. The arboriculture of the same conclusion in his Vestiges of the until after the publication of On the the voyages of Captains King and Fitzroy. Natural History of Creation, as did the Origin of Species” (Huxley,1893b). This Gardener’s Magazine and Register of naturalist and explorer, Alexander von obviously diminishes Darwin’s novelty, Rural and Domestic Improvements, Humboldt at around the same time. Von and suggestions that he was a genius p.692. Humboldt (1845) concluded that: and the greatest thinker of all time. Darwin, C.R. 1858a. Letter to Lyell, C., All the races of men are forms of The view that Darwin was essentially a 18, June, 1858, Darwin Correspondence a singe species, which are capable of synthesizer of ideas which were already Project, 2285. fruitful union and propagation, they are in the public domain was also expressed Darwin, C.R. 1858b. Letter to Lyell, C., not different species of one genus. by Alfred Russel Wallace (1908b) as 25, June, 1858, Darwin Correspondence While similarly, in 1773, James follows: Project, 2294. Burnett (Lord Monboddo) claimed Mr Darwin has created a new science Darwin, C.R. 1858c. Letter to Lyell, C., that Man arose from the same stock and a new philosophy; and I believe that 26, June 1858, Darwin Correspondence as the Orang outan and that “learned never has such a complete illustration Project, 2295. by accident to bend their thumbs in of a new branch of human knowledge Darwin, C.R. 1858d. Letter to opposition to their fingers” (Burnet, been due to the labours of a single man. Hooker, J.D., 13, July 1858. Darwin 1773), and also that: Never have such vast masses of widely Correspondence Project, 2306. If nothing else were to convince me that scattered and hitherto quite unconnected Darwin, C.R. 1860a. A Naturalist’s the Orang Outang belongs to our species, facts been combined into a system and Voyage Around the World, London his use of sticks as weapons would alone brought to bear upon the establishment Murray, 1860 (1913 edition, p.377). be sufficient. of such a grand and new and simple Darwin, C.R. 1860b. Letter to Lyell, C., Miscellaneous myths philosophy. April, 10, 1860, Darwin Correspondence Other Darwin myths which have been The impact of Darwin’s two Project, 754. refuted include the view that he was first remarkably influential books, Darwin, C.R. 1860c. Letter to to suggest the “tree of life metaphor,” On the Origin of Species and The Hooker, J.D. 13, April, 1860, Darwin the way that evolving species branch; Descent of Man cannot however, be Correspondence Project, 2758. recent research has shown that Lamarck underestimated. As a first rate Victorian Darwin, C.R. 1860d. Letter to Gray, A., sketched a similar tree as early as 1809 naturalist, it is not surprising that in the 25, April, 1860, Darwin Correspondence (Wheelis, 2007). Darwin admitted course of his work Darwin occasionally Project, 2767. that he did not originate this idea in came across examples of the importance Darwin,C.R.1861.Letter to Quatrefages the following comment given in the of fungi. We mycologists can therefore de Breau, 25, April,1861, Darwin first edition of On the Origin of Species proudly claim him as one of our own. Continued on page 20. FUNGI Volume 4:1 Winter 2011 19 Correspondence Project, 3127. Darwin to Matthew, 21, Nov., 1863. 309-19. Darwin, C.R. 1862. Letter to Darwin Correspondence Project, 4344. Von Humboldt, A. 1845. Kosmos 1845, Matthew, P., 12, June, 1862, Darwin Dearce, M. 2008. Correspondence Vol. 1, p.387. London, Balliere. Correspondence Project, 3600. of Charles Darwin on James Torbitt’s Wainwright, M. 1985. Re-examination Darwin, C.R. 1863. Letter to project to breed blight-resistant of John Tyndall’s studies on microbial Hooker, J.D., 25, Aug., 1863, Darwin potatoes. Archives of Natural History 35: antagonism Transactions of the British Correspondence Project, 4274. 208-22. Mycological Society 85: 562-69. Darwin, C.R. 1864. Journal of Duyckink, E.A. 1855. William Wainwright, M. 2003. An alternative Researches, New York, Harper 2: 166- Charles Wells. Cyclopaedia of American history of microbiology. Advances in 167. Literature, New York, Scribner, Vol.1, Applied Microbiology 52: 333-56. Darwin, C.R. 1865. Letter to Hooker, pp.464-65. Wallace, A.R. 1879. Review of Butler’s 22, Oct.1865, Darwin Correspondence Goodsir, J. 1863. Letter to Darwin, 21, Evolution Old and New. Nature 20:142. Project, 4921. Aug.1863, Darwin Correspondence, 4272. Wallace, A.R. 1900. Human Progress Darwin, C.R. 1866a. Letter to Huxley, T.H. 1893a. Darwiniana. Past and Future. In: Studies Scientific Carus, J.V., 21, Nov., 1866, Darwin London, Macmillan, Vol.2, p.275. and Social, Macmillan, London,Vol.2, Correspondence Project, 5282. Huxley, T.H. 1893b. ibid, Vol.2, pp.279- pp.493-509. Darwin, C.R, 1866b. On the Origin of 80. Wallace, A.R. 1908a. My Life, London, Species, London, Murray. Masters. 1860. On the relation Chapman Hall, p.237. Darwin, C.R. 1868. The Variation between the abnormal and normal Wallace, A.R.1908b. ibid, p.197. of Animals and Plants Under formations in plants. Proceedings Royal Wells, K.D. 1973. The historical Domestication Vol.2 London, Murray, Institute Great Britain 3(1855-62): 223- context of natural selection: the case of pp.284-85. 27. Patrick Matthew. Journal of the History of Darwin, C.R. 1871. Letter to Mathew, P. 1831. On Naval Timbers Biology.6: 225-58. Hooker, J.D., 1, Feb., 1871, Darwin and Arboriculture, London, Longmans. Wheelis. M. 2007. Darwin not first to Correspondence Project, 7471. Secord, J.A. 2001. A Victorian sketch tree of life. Science 315: 597. Darwin, C.R. 1875. Letter to Sensation, Chicago, Chicago University [Further information on Professor Tyndall, J., 20, Oct., 1875, Darwin Press. Wainwright’s work on Darwin can Correspondence Project,10207. Tyndall, J. 1874. The Belfast address be found by searching Google for Darwin, E. 1863. Letter from Emma to the British Association. Nature 10: “wainwrightscience.”]

Fungi Fungi Spring issue Summer Issue will feature: will be our special annual issue Bioluminescent Mushrooms on Psilocybe and will feature: Science and taxonomy of the Telluride Mushroom genus in North America Festival Preview Latest research - Much more!

20 FUNGI Volume 4:1 Winter 2011