If a census were taken of the individual specimens that have reached 

 Europe from foreign countries, probably more than one-half have been dis- 

 covered to be "new species." Most of these new species finally gravitate where 

 they belong, into the trash pile known as synonyms. Professor Fischer of 

 Berne, bwitzerland, has done good work in disposing of a great many of them 

 We shall help the subject along to the best of our ability in one of our 

 appendices. 



NAMES OF PHALLOIDS. 



Like all objects of natural history, phalloids have Latin names and in 

 addition to each is usually appended a personal name, primarily designed to 

 tickle the vanity of some individual. Under this system they have never 

 acquired any stable names, for each person who writes about them is chiefly 

 interested in getting up new names to which to append his own. By this means 

 the names of phalloids (like all fungi) have been shuffled about like a shuttle- 

 cock. There are only forty-nine phalloids that are at all well known, and 

 fifty-eight more or less vague and often inaccurate accounts and forms. These 

 one hundred and seven species have two hundred and ninety-nine different 

 names. One of them alone. Phallus indusiatus, has twenty-four different names. 

 It is customary in "scientific" monographs to rake up all these various com- 

 binations, tabulate them, usually in chronological order, append with great 

 minutiae the various promoters of these names, and when finished the result 

 is so largely personal it resembles the society notes in a daily newspaper. We 

 present in an appendix (page 77) an alphabetical list of the names which in 

 our opinion have no value, to the number of 192, and in our Index (page 06) 

 the names we have adopted, to the number of 107. Every writer should, 

 of course, use a nomenclature that expresses his views of how the various 

 species are most naturally grouped into genera. And, where changes are 

 advisable in an author's arrangement, it is at best unfortunate, if he is using 

 a system of writing his own name after such changes, as it may give the 

 impression that this is perhaps the strongest reason for the change. We have 

 made but very few changes and have found it necessary to discover but one 

 new genus. 



THE STATE OF PHALLOID KNOWLEDGE. 



The phalloids of Europe (and there are but six species in Europe) are, 

 with perhaps one exception, well known. The same can be said to-day of those 

 of the United States, though, owing to the vague manner in which several of 

 them were exploited, it is only in recent years that any clear, definite idea 

 has been obtained of them. Taking into account those that occur in both 

 countries, this includes fourteen species and forms. The first foreign paper 

 in which the phalloids were well presented was only ten years ago, an account 

 of the species of Java, by Penzig. In this paper sixteen species and forms 

 were considered, and at least fourteen were well illustrated. Then there ap- 

 peared a paper on the phalloids of Brazil, by Moeller, in which nine species 

 were well illustrated. Recent writers, and this includes both Penzig and 

 Moeller, have had the benefit of photography, the best method of illustrating 

 a phalloid. Previously the illustrations were mostly made up from dried 

 specimens or copied from sketches, which gives results, sometimes very good, 

 but often more or less doubtful, sometimes very vague and amusing, and in 

 a few instances they seem to be pure fakes. 2 



There have been a number of compilations similar to this pamphlet, in 

 which the literature has been raked over, and the supposed species arranged 

 with their names more or less shuffled around. This, however, is the first 

 in which all the pictures have been brought together. The first crude attempt 

 was by Ventenat, in presenting cne of the first foreign species. 



2 We know two or three in Europe that in our belief come under this head, and one in America. 



7 



